when someone gets a life sentence it's pretty safe to say your life is over. i don't understand how the ethical angle leans on the side of life imprisonment. so it's cool to take away essentially all of someone's rights, except life? to me this just seems like you are pushing aside the problem so you don't have to deal with it. are you honestly telling me you would prefer life in prison versus an execution? i cannot understand why anyone would want the former in this situation. the natural human instinct to survive is obviously going to make people NOT WANT TO DIE but if you think throwing someone in a box and forgetting about them is somehow better than cutting out the bullshit and just killing them, then i disagree strongly.

given how sentencing people to life in prison isn't going to go away anytime soon, please tell me how it is much more better than being dead.

because...you're alive. I'd always prefer life to execution. most prisoners do as well (to the degree that outside of Manson I can think of no one who wanted to have the death penalty. SOCRATES I guess).

saying life imprisonment is the END OF ALL THINGS is not necessarily true. most lifers read books, they have conversations, they write letters, they become religious, they do interviews. some of the most political men I've ever read about were sentenced to life in prison. prison is obviously awful but yeah prison life is better than no life (as it should be).

because...you're alive. I'd always prefer life to execution. most prisoners do as well (to the degree that outside of Manson I can think of no one who wanted to have the death penalty. SOCRATES I guess).

saying life imprisonment is the END OF ALL THINGS is not necessarily true. most lifers read books, they have conversations, they write letters, they become religious, they do interviews. some of the most political men I've ever read about were sentenced to life in prison. prison is obviously awful but yeah prison life is better than no life (as it should be).

being alive isn't really a valid reason in my opinion. i'm also for euthanasia, and i don't know your position on it, but if you are also for it you must understand some circumstances in life are not worth living for. also, why do they have suicide watches? do you know the statistics on prison suicides? i don't myself, but would be willing to bet the rate is many times higher than those outside prison. for this reason alone it makes sense to me to at least have it as an option, and as a secondary, for clear cut cases where there is zero doubt someone committed a crime (also multiple murder). in the event of a clear cut case, there should be zero difficulty obtaining an execution and should cost substantially less. i was suprised to hear how many cases try and go for the death penalty on such a bad case / evidence, and no one who has the slightest chance of being innocent should be considered for it.

you talk about how you can still DO THINGS but in all reality it amounts to almost nothing. how low do the standards of prison have to be in order for death to be more humane? you'll find a lot of different answers for this, and which is why i disagree with the ethics side of this.

being alive isn't really a valid reason in my opinion. i'm also for euthanasia, and i don't know your position on it, but if you are also for it you must understand some circumstances in life are not worth living for. also, why do they have suicide watches? do you know the statistics on prison suicides? i don't myself, but would be willing to bet the rate is many times higher than those outside prison. for this reason alone it makes sense to me to at least have it as an option, and as a secondary, for clear cut cases where there is zero doubt someone committed a crime (also multiple murder). in the event of a clear cut case, there should be zero difficulty obtaining an execution and should cost substantially less. i was suprised to hear how many cases try and go for the death penalty on such a bad case / evidence, and no one who has the slightest chance of being innocent should be considered for it.

you talk about how you can still DO THINGS but in all reality it amounts to almost nothing. how low do the standards of prison have to be in order for death to be more humane? you'll find a lot of different answers for this, and which is why i disagree with the ethics side of this.

I know suicides are higher in prisons but actually a lot of people say this is because of the type of person that goes into prison is prone to it, not because the prison itself. also I understand there are bad conditions, but life in prison is not one of those. like, what's your definition of DO THINGS? Tookie Williams was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize while on death row for a book he wrote in prison. you can still do quite a bit in prison, but only if you're not a general shithead so you have access to it (and most lifers tend to stop being ROWDY YOUTHS when they are pushing sixty).

the standards in prison are high enough that it's uh EASILY BETTER than death I'd say. it's all personal but as I said earlier, almost no one opts for the death penalty (they could do this). prison sucks; you have no freedom, there is prison violence and rape, and it's a generally shitty place. but for the vast majority of prisoners and people life in prison is far preferable to death! I'm kind of surprised you'd compare this to euthanasia, where a person is in constant pain. life in prison is of course a bit cruel, but it's always going to be somewhat cruel when you speak of punitive measures. it's far better than ending your life!

i agree that life in prison is preferrable to death. life is always preferrable to death - excluding cases when you know that nothing but unpleasantness lies before you, like with a terminal illness in it's closing stages (so i think euthanesia is the right thing to do in some cases)

in prison, you know it's gonna generally suck. the people you meet every day will be even worse than the ones outside and you'll probably get battered all the time, especially if you are trying to be at all decent. but i think amongst all of this there are moments which a person could enjoy, and things they could still do which they could be proud of. i'm not saying it'd be easy or that it happens all the time but i have read stories of lifers who have written books and stuff.

also, after an amount of time passes, prison life would stop being prison life and just turn into normal life. you would get adjusted to the everyday horrors and constraints of the place and carve out niches where you can enjoy yourself, i mean, it isn't hell. people who have been in for years and years and are known by the staff and the other inmates would probably be given some slack too, given special privileges or just left alone - i'm not basing that on anything, i'm just saying people in prisons are still people and not all of them are gonna be pure evil. actually i don't really know what i'm talking about but this is what i gather?

but i'm only really talking about i don't know, kids and young adults who get involved in drugs and end up killing people. maybe these people could find a measure of peace with life in prison eventually. this is really grey area stuff, because there are people i have read about or seen on the news who really sound nothing like human to me, and i just don't know how to deal with that.

i'd choose life in prison over death anyway, maybe i'd end up getting stabbed to death a week later but it's that or nothing i guess.

I know suicides are higher in prisons but actually a lot of people say this is because of the type of person that goes into prison is prone to it, not because the prison itself. also I understand there are bad conditions, but life in prison is not one of those. like, what's your definition of DO THINGS? Tookie Williams was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize while on death row for a book he wrote in prison. you can still do quite a bit in prison, but only if you're not a general shithead so you have access to it (and most lifers tend to stop being ROWDY YOUTHS when they are pushing sixty).

the standards in prison are high enough that it's uh EASILY BETTER than death I'd say. it's all personal but as I said earlier, almost no one opts for the death penalty (they could do this). prison sucks; you have no freedom, there is prison violence and rape, and it's a generally shitty place. but for the vast majority of prisoners and people life in prison is far preferable to death! I'm kind of surprised you'd compare this to euthanasia, where a person is in constant pain. life in prison is of course a bit cruel, but it's always going to be somewhat cruel when you speak of punitive measures. it's far better than ending your life!

there's really no use debating this any futher. i disagree that life in prison is better than death. i am not some RON PAUL GIVE ME GUNS OR GIVE ME DEATH freedom nut, but if the great majority of my freedoms are taken from me i really don't see the point in living. add to the fact most of the people in for life did a terrible crime, living with that kind of burden doesn't seem very pleasent either. if you think life in prison is better for you that is fine with me, but i don't like how you paint the death penalty black by saying it's unethical. you know, maybe the current state of the death penalty is shitty, but fundamentally i don't see how it's a bad idea as long as you are not bringing REVENGE into the equation.

the comparison to euthanasia is basic, in other words, they share the fact that your circumstances will never improve and you are in a bad situation. i obviously agree prison is better than constant pain, but those are the common links. if you could understand that, i'm saying you could make the connection that the death penalty isn't completely insane.

http://almost no one opts for the death penalty (they could do this).

are you telling me prisoners in for life can request the death penalty? maybe i am reading this wrong, but don't a lot of states outlaw the death penalty? (this applies to US only obviously)

there's really no use debating this any futher. i disagree that life in prison is better than death. i am not some RON PAUL GIVE ME GUNS OR GIVE ME DEATH freedom nut, but if the great majority of my freedoms are taken from me i really don't see the point in living. add to the fact most of the people in for life did a terrible crime, living with that kind of burden doesn't seem very pleasent either. if you think life in prison is better for you that is fine with me, but i don't like how you paint the death penalty black by saying it's unethical. you know, maybe the current state of the death penalty is shitty, but fundamentally i don't see how it's a bad idea as long as you are not bringing REVENGE into the equation.

the comparison to euthanasia is basic, in other words, they share the fact that your circumstances will never improve and you are in a bad situation. i obviously agree prison is better than constant pain, but those are the common links. if you could understand that, i'm saying you could make the connection that the death penalty isn't completely insane.

I see what you're saying but uh...we're talking about the sacrifice of the majority of your freedoms against sacrificing ALL OF THEM. when you're dead you aren't exactly free to do anything being that you can't.

also I don't think euthanizing a patient who is going to be in constant pain for the remainder of their incredibly brief life is the same as being in pain from life imprisonment. ignoring the punitive effect of life in prison (basically you have to be in SOME DEGREE OF DISCOMFORT or it's just a vacation), I just...I can't even see the comparison man! I've been to my share of prisons and they are bad but we're balancing that against death. the level of pain is not only in flux (older prisoners are almost always treated better by guards and other prisoners) but it's nowhere near the same as something like incredibly painful terminal cancer.

are you telling me prisoners in for life can request the death penalty? maybe i am reading this wrong, but don't a lot of states outlaw the death penalty? (this applies to US only obviously)

a lot of states do but let's face it most people can kill themselves rather easily even in prison. since the lethal injection has been called into question as far as humanity, if they were slightly committed they could do this relatively painlessly. also honestly I bet the courts have never dealt with a case like this but maybe they could make a transfer to a pro-death penalty state for someone who just does not want to live without freedom.

but this is not something that happens.

I see what you're saying but uh...we're talking about the sacrifice of the majority of your freedoms against sacrificing ALL OF THEM. when you're dead you aren't exactly free to do anything being that you can't.

much like i am not going to convince you death is better in some circumstances, you are not going to convince me. this is a clear difference of opinion and i am simply saying that ethics shouldn't apply here.

also I don't think euthanizing a patient who is going to be in constant pain for the remainder of their incredibly brief life is the same as being in pain from life imprisonment. ignoring the punitive effect of life in prison (basically you have to be in SOME DEGREE OF DISCOMFORT or it's just a vacation), I just...I can't even see the comparison man! I've been to my share of prisons and they are bad but we're balancing that against death. the level of pain is not only in flux (older prisoners are almost always treated better by guards and other prisoners) but it's nowhere near the same as something like incredibly painful terminal cancer.

my mind is at a blank right now but i recall before someone who was paralyzed from the neck down who tried their absolute hardest to get euthanized and in the end just ended up getting help from friends to kill themself because the government wouldn't agree with it. this isn't a case of pain, but freedom. once again, this is much worse than prison but everyone has a line. how many freedoms do i have to take away from you before you decide being dead is better? there is no right or wrong answer here.

a lot of states do but let's face it most people can kill themselves rather easily even in prison. since the lethal injection has been called into question as far as humanity, if they were slightly committed they could do this relatively painlessly. also honestly I bet the courts have never dealt with a case like this but maybe they could make a transfer to a pro-death penalty state for someone who just does not want to live without freedom.

but this is not something that happens.

so if people can kill themselves easily why even have euthanizing? because it isn't ideal. this also doesn't factor that many places entirely outlaw the death penalty.

it seems like i am part of a very small minority here, but if even a fraction of people believe what i do, i see no harm in letting that option be on that table.

welllll i think you do know the harm, in that the system will never be perfect and innocent people will get killed.

what's confusing me is this:

much like i am not going to convince you death is better in some circumstances, you are not going to convince me. this is a clear difference of opinion and i am simply saying that ethics shouldn't apply here.

like, I don't see it as a difference of opinion. how is dying not losing more freedoms? a man who cannot MOVE seems to be a bit of an extreme example since that loses almost every freedom and where a person can rightfully say they can't DO ANYTHING. I think you're drawing your line in the sand waaaaaay too high man and I'm sure a lot of people would agree so I guess that is opinion but it's one I can't quite follow at all!

welllll i think you do know the harm, in that the system will never be perfect and innocent people will get killed.

i already stated this should never be considered in a case where there is any doubt whatsoever if they did it. i specifically stated a double murder or worse case, in this event there is typically bound to be a lot of evidence and very little room for getting the wrong man. if there is not enough evidence to say without a doubt they are guilty, it would not be considered at all. at top top of my head a perfect case where death penalty shouldn't be used is the scott peterson case. the cases i refer to are clear cut where there is essentially no way the defendant couldn't have done it (or they plead guilty).

the current state of the death penalty i don't agree with in other words.

like, I don't see it as a difference of opinion. how is dying not losing more freedoms? a man who cannot MOVE seems to be a bit of an extreme example since that loses almost every freedom and where a person can rightfully say they can't DO ANYTHING. I think you're drawing your line in the sand waaaaaay too high man and I'm sure a lot of people would agree so I guess that is opinion but it's one I can't quite follow at all!

i never said dying had more freedoms. much like not being able to move, you can still see and communicate which is more freedoms than being dead. though many of us agree that is extremely horrible and giving someone the choice of dying is not a bad idea. it also really doesn't matter what the majority of people say when it comes to a decision that's only going to effect you. the analogy would make more sense to me if a free man committed suicide, but for someone who is going to spend the rest of their life in jail i see no reason why death is so much more worse. once again, if you want life in prison, this is perfectly fine with me, but i don't see why the option should be taken off the table entirely (add to the fact the whole SUICIDE WATCH thing).

But if you're dead you can't care about not having freedom because you can't (assuming there is nothing after death)