Voluntary Execution ...

[joko]

someone on another post regarding the death penalty, mentioned this, giving the guilty person - whose been sentenced to life - a choice whether to take the death penalty instead life.
(in countries where its legal of course, not here)

just wondered what people thought of this...?

for people who are sentenced to life imprisonment, in america, should they be offered the choice to convert that to the death penalty ?

i know for many they would want to live, but i'm sure some wouldn't, and will likely commit suicide anyway.
and also the especially sick and tortured ones (if you grasp the distinction between sick in the head and evil) - you hear how some are at extreme odds with themselves - they know they are doing wrong and actually want to be caught and stopped - they don't want to be the way they are - but they themselves cannot stop it....maybe some of those types would welcome the 'escape'...?

for the record, i am against the death penalty - but my being against it doesn't alter the fact that in many states it is legal and happens ...

so would the introduction of this 'offer' help the system in anyway?
is there any benefit to this? - aside from the fact it would save the state money of course, that's a given.
would it stop the relative trauma for the guards of finding a hanged prisoner?
or some that may even instigate a fight, in order to be murdered...putting others in danger.

i suppose if its supposedly 'ok' in their eyes for the state to choose to kill people, why shouldn't they give the person the choice too...?

I am just curious here what people think, as its a notion that had never occurred to me before - i have no strong feelings on it, not sure what i think yet.

cheers

[2sp_]

Good question!

I don't think they should be given the choice at all. They should be punished and if that means living the rest of their natural lives suffering for their crimes, even better.

By dying, they are being released from their sentence.

[ChillDoubt]

My opinions remain the same as posted on here:

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/ChatterBank/Question1227062.html

[vetuste_ennemi]

There's a famous precedent for offering the guilty person a say in his own punishment, Joko. See Plato's Crito.

[joko]

VE - Plato's Crito seems to be about whether or not to receive THE punishment at all ... (by escaping he evades punishment altogether) ... not what the punishment will be ...

in my post i am not debating whether they may escape punishment, but rather whether they should be allowed to choose what is actually a somewhat worse punishment

[vetuste_ennemi]

NO, Joko, the Athenian legal system allowed the defense (in the case of a guilty verdict) to offer an alternative punishment to that sought by the prosecution. So the defense might suggest a fine or banishment as alternatives to more severe penalties (in Socrates' case death by poison). Socrates' poposed alternative "punishment" (as I recall) was to be housed as a pensioner of the state for his pioneering educational work among the young.

[jim360]

In circumstances like this someone who chooses to die shouldn't be allowed to. I'd hope that living in the knowledge of what you have done, maybe eventually the guilty would feel remorse. Not going to do that if he's dead, is he? And anyway I'd rather not grant too many wishes of a murderer if I could help it.

[LazyGun]

I am in favour of euthanasia for those who wish it for medical or health reasons; where they have an incurable,terminal illness and the consequent quality of life is such that they no longer wish to face it. It seem fine in those circumstances, subject to some checks and balances to ensure it was not abused.

For those sentenced to life though? Not so sure about that.I would not object, depending on the nature of the crime, and also depending on whether the victims/ family and friends of victims agreed with voluntary euthanasia by the prisoner.

Life sentences perform functions beyond merely separating such individuals from society; They have a punitive role and an exemplary role as well.....

[ll_billym]

The only two raw benefits I could see to me are (a) will it reduce crime, and (b) will it save money.

To (a), this will not reduce crime because it doesn't change the original sentence (life) at all, it just adds another option which can be taken or not. This option can only increase crime rates if it affects it at all.

To (b), from the scant research I have done, a humane and legal death penalty process is very expensive so the savings may not amount to much - it is hard to tell.

So I'm against it.

[wildwood]

When there is no possible doubt of the guilt, a fitting punishment for a murderer is 99 years of hard labour. But Society, being what it is, grants criminals leniency because they may not have been breast fed when a baby, or the milk on the corn flakes was cold.

[adrianben]

if you are sentenced to death in the USA you are likely to spend many years on 'death row' whilst your lawyers go for every appeal until you may finally take the walk to the end of the corridor ! Just shoot me today !