gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31
st, 2010 at 6:06pm:
adelcrow wrote on Aug 31
st, 2010 at 5:59pm:
I can see why people do support the death penalty but I personally think that a true life sentence in solitary is a far greater punishment and deterrent than the death penalty.
Death is quick and final, there is no more suffering for the perpetrators of the crimes.
The occasional report lets us know Martin Bryant has suffered far more in the years since his horrendous crimes than if he had got the death penalty.
I get a lot of satisfaction knowing that little turd is going through a living nightmare every day of his sad little life.
But the problem with a 'life sentence' is that it's 'rarely' an actual LIFE sentence...
Look at the Skaf Brothers.....despite the heinous nature of their crimes..their sentences were REDUCED from 55 years, down to 17 and 23 years, respectively...
So a 'life sentence' can be as low as 15 or 20 years.....which means a criminal(aged 20), sentenced to 'life in prison'..may be released at age 35.......
What stops at 35 yr old from comitting the very same crime he/she comitted at age 20????
If judges aren't likely to pursue extended (or multiple life sentences) then it's not likely they're going to pursue the death penalty (were it ever implemented).
There needs to be an entire overhaul of the way we treat certain crimes in this country - it all seems so disproportionate at the moment. It seems that often, people are put in prison when it doesn't serve the wider community to do so, while those who should be in their for a sustained period (permanent even) are awarded the chance to get out.
As an aside, wouldn't it also be great if we put more energy into mental health services in this country as well. I'm of the opinion that doing so could potentially go some way to preventing much of what we are currently seeing.