Death row prisoners are as likely to be falsely convicted as any other.
Euthanasia for prisoners
- Thread starter dutchfire
- Start date
Death row prisoners are as likely to be falsely convicted as any other.
holy king
Deity
that's what shoelaces are for.
seriously, most prisoners are not handicapped to a point where they cant off themselves. if they want to do it, they do it anyway.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
The prison authorities do make it extremely difficult for them though. Suicide watches are quickly instituted for those they think are at risk.
In prison as in real life, if you want to top yourself don't let anyone know or suspect. Thereby, making it so much less likely that you will, ironically.
In prison as in real life, if you want to top yourself don't let anyone know or suspect. Thereby, making it so much less likely that you will, ironically.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Goddamit, I'm such a flip flopper (I was half-kidding, and still am, but)
No euthanasia for any prisoners, except those convicted of wall-street levels of crime
I'm in Germany, but when talking about "our society" I was talking about western society in general. I didn't really want to go too far into specifics.
No offence, but if someone has been innocently in jail for years and is then released, I would consider most of the damage to have been done already. Should we really keep him in prison so that we don't have to feel bad about ourselves about having killed someone unjustly, while we have just let him suffered terribly instead?
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
No offence, but is your very best solution euthanasia?
holy king
Deity
Goddamit, I'm such a flip flopper (I was half-kidding, and still am, but)
No euthanasia for any prisoners, except those convicted of wall-street levels of crime
euthanasia for some, miniature plastic flags for the others!
strijder20
Wallowing in irony
I thought it was voluntary euthanasia? You can't really call it a punishment if they choose for it. Or do you think that they should be protected from themselves?
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
The line of reasoning went like this:
The OP suggests that euthanasia could be a win-win solution for the problem of life-term prisoners.
I suggest that euthanasia might not be the best solution to the problem.
Mr Dutchfire asks me if I have a better solution.
I reply that rehabilitation of criminals might be better than punishment.
The punishment I was referring to was the original life-term, not the proposed solution of euthanasia.
Sorry if this is a bit long-winded. I couldn't think of a better way of explaining.
The OP suggests that euthanasia could be a win-win solution for the problem of life-term prisoners.
I suggest that euthanasia might not be the best solution to the problem.
Mr Dutchfire asks me if I have a better solution.
I reply that rehabilitation of criminals might be better than punishment.
The punishment I was referring to was the original life-term, not the proposed solution of euthanasia.
Sorry if this is a bit long-winded. I couldn't think of a better way of explaining.
There is a man from Red Deer on death row in Montana. Back in 1982, he killed two men, and in a moment of not-quite-thinking-straight, he requested the death penalty. He'd refused an earlier plea bargain that his co-accused accepted (and his co-accused has been out of jail for years now). But Ronald Smith has been on death row for 30 years because he later changed his mind and started filing appeals. Latest word is that Montana has decided its execution method (lethal injection) is "cruel and unusual punishment" because they don't know for sure if the prisoner is actually unconscious before the lethal chemicals get pumped in.
I'm not defending the prisoner; what he did was reprehensible, although it can be said that he had less than adequate counsel.
What "euthanasia for prisoners" amounts to is a prisoner requesting the death penalty. And it's silly for death row inmates to do this because it's what will happen to them anyway.
If people suffering from the late stages of MS are not legally allowed to have a doctor-assisted suicide, why should prisoners be allowed?
In the SF novel Two to Conquer, Marion Zimmer Bradley had one of her characters be tried, convicted, and offered a choice of either mindwipe/reconditioning, or the alternative... which was permanent cryogenic freeze. There were quite a few prisoners either sentenced to this punishment or who chose it; the idea was that if they were later found to be innocent, they could be thawed, and allowed to live out their lives. They wouldn't age while in freeze. But if they were guilty, they would simply remain frozen. Sophisticated security measures were in place so nobody could escape or be removed from freeze unless it was authorized. This was considered humane because the prisoner would never be bored, never be angry and therefore do antisocial things like harm other prisoners/guards, and for that matter there didn't even need to be guards in the traditional sense.
For those serving a life/permanent sentence, it seems to me that this would be a solution worth trying. After all, how many Canadians actually want their taxes going toward keeping garbage like Paul Bernardo awake, conscious, and living his life?
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Ignore me while I ramble on incoherently about nothing at all:
I'm not happy about this sort of thing. I can't help feeling that, on the one hand, we are free agents responsible for our own actions, and on the other hand we are as society makes us. So either I get to reap the full consequences of all my actions, or society takes some responsibility for what I am, and endeavours to remedy this by rehabilitating me into a fully functioning member of society again.
I'm not happy about this sort of thing. I can't help feeling that, on the one hand, we are free agents responsible for our own actions, and on the other hand we are as society makes us. So either I get to reap the full consequences of all my actions, or society takes some responsibility for what I am, and endeavours to remedy this by rehabilitating me into a fully functioning member of society again.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Whatever my view of euthanasia (I lean against, althougn not as strongly as I'm against the other pro-life issue) it should absolutely not be legal for killers. If they are imprisoned, they are imprisoned, and they need to pay the price for the horrible crime they committed (Assuming they actually are in for murder as the OP says.)
And society has to pay the price as well? Everybody loses but at least you can feel good about being "tough on crime"? These are your tax dollars being wasted!
I do not foresee a punishment-less society any time soon. Your utopia might be just that, an utupia. I mean, I'd love to life in a society that doesn't need prisons, or armies, or hospitals, I just don't see it happening.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
In fact, it's a matter of intent as much as anything else. At the moment a large part of a sentence is supposed to be punishment, with rehabilitation courses for those convicted over a certain tariff (I forget what it is, 1 year possibly).
I wouldn't suggest that a non-punishment regime would differ very much. Just that the offender would be obliged to undergo rehabilitation under all circumstances. And those serious offenders unable to persuade the authorities that they had been genuinely rehabilitated would have to remain in prison for life.
I think this sort of thing will happen sooner or later anyway.
dirtyparrot
Upholding Brannigan's Law
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,841
Quite often the mentally ill are disproportionately represented in prison. So, I would be surprised if the rate of suicide wasn't higher in prison from that alone.
