Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Boston Marathon Bomber Sentenced To Death
Is such a sentence kinder than one of life in maximum security?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
I mentioned three notorious murderers of the top of my head.
There are certainly many more who have killed themselves in the penal system.
The super-max prisons in the USA are designed to keep felons alive, and very little else.
The death penalty, or natural life without parole in a super-max?
Both very horrible indeed!
There are certainly many more who have killed themselves in the penal system.
The super-max prisons in the USA are designed to keep felons alive, and very little else.
The death penalty, or natural life without parole in a super-max?
Both very horrible indeed!
//However it's staring us all in the face that we are all from the same concious singularity and we will all end up back together//
Sounds a bit 'conspirituallatrial' but I am with you. Sandyroes idea of 'kindness' is far from my idea of kindness.
Ive been in prison with the ''worst' of them but seen the best of compassion and kindness in what society views as the scum of the earth. Ive known murderers who have had more compassion in them than anyone whove Ive known in 'normal' life on the outside.
Hard to explain if youve never bee there.
Sounds a bit 'conspirituallatrial' but I am with you. Sandyroes idea of 'kindness' is far from my idea of kindness.
Ive been in prison with the ''worst' of them but seen the best of compassion and kindness in what society views as the scum of the earth. Ive known murderers who have had more compassion in them than anyone whove Ive known in 'normal' life on the outside.
Hard to explain if youve never bee there.
Am eye for an eye I presume. However that is the path opposite from true enlightenment. I think he should be made an example of. Punished for the rest of his life but at the same time helping in the world and at the same time having the chance to appreciate his own life. I can think of many ways to do this. However my opinions hold no significance apart from in my own eyes.
I'm sure there are several considerations that came up during the jury's debate… not the least of which is that, although Tsarnev's death will be considered among many Jihadists as martyrdom the opposite is that the intervening years in prison (had he not received the death sentence) would inspire many of the same terrorists as an opportunity to hatch plans for attack.
Nothing has been in the news (I'm in the U.S., BTW) about where he would have been incarcerated, but the trial wasn't a Federal charge, but a State of Massachusetts murder charge, meaning that he would have likely been jailed locally, greatly increasing the opportunities for attack.
Numerous studies have shown that it's actually much more expensive to execute a convict than to put him/her to death. The appeals will be endless and the State is paying his defense and the extra guarding alone will be enormous costs. In addition he would have to be maintained in a solitary confinement wing of any prison, due to his notoriety.
The death penalty is clearly explained at the time of the deliberation for the penalty phase of the trial. Having sat as a jury member in a capital case, the basics of death penalties is not retribution, but justice… and there's a huge difference. I realize our European friends won't agree, but in some more heinous cases, justice is more clearly served by imposing the death penalty.
BTW, family members were allowed to present their opinions and it seems most were in favor of the death penalty, primarily due to the death of a child during the bombing… except that the parents of the child were against the death penalty a seen here: "... Now Bill and Denise Richards, parents of 8-year-old Martin Richards, the youngest victim killed in the Boston Marathon bombing, have added their voices and called on federal prosecutors to drop the death penalty in exchange for termination of all appeals in the case…"
Nothing has been in the news (I'm in the U.S., BTW) about where he would have been incarcerated, but the trial wasn't a Federal charge, but a State of Massachusetts murder charge, meaning that he would have likely been jailed locally, greatly increasing the opportunities for attack.
Numerous studies have shown that it's actually much more expensive to execute a convict than to put him/her to death. The appeals will be endless and the State is paying his defense and the extra guarding alone will be enormous costs. In addition he would have to be maintained in a solitary confinement wing of any prison, due to his notoriety.
The death penalty is clearly explained at the time of the deliberation for the penalty phase of the trial. Having sat as a jury member in a capital case, the basics of death penalties is not retribution, but justice… and there's a huge difference. I realize our European friends won't agree, but in some more heinous cases, justice is more clearly served by imposing the death penalty.
BTW, family members were allowed to present their opinions and it seems most were in favor of the death penalty, primarily due to the death of a child during the bombing… except that the parents of the child were against the death penalty a seen here: "... Now Bill and Denise Richards, parents of 8-year-old Martin Richards, the youngest victim killed in the Boston Marathon bombing, have added their voices and called on federal prosecutors to drop the death penalty in exchange for termination of all appeals in the case…"
Yeah !
death sentence as a deterrent
that means by definition that it stops other people from doing it [ clearly it works to stop the same man from doing it again but so would imprisonment ] - because they see the giulty man being executed and think oops I dont want that to happen to me
it works so well
that is why there is no such thing as people who bomb places and kill themselves as well ( = suicide bombers )
oops sorry - something wrong with that argument .....
death sentence as a deterrent
that means by definition that it stops other people from doing it [ clearly it works to stop the same man from doing it again but so would imprisonment ] - because they see the giulty man being executed and think oops I dont want that to happen to me
it works so well
that is why there is no such thing as people who bomb places and kill themselves as well ( = suicide bombers )
oops sorry - something wrong with that argument .....
-- answer removed --
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.