Bradley HankinsOh I know, shocking to be heard from a conservative blog yea? Well, just because I am against killing criminals doesn’t mean I am against punishing these guys. Matter of fact, the criminals sometimes seem to have better living conditions that us average Americans do. Needless to say, they have free housing, free food, free health care, free recreation, and free education - and it’s all at the expense of you, the taxpayer’s, money. So why am I against the death penalty? Well, get this. For one, once the criminals are convicted and sentanced to death, they get to wait on death row. That row usually takes quite a while to reach to that person, and even by then that prisoner could of educate themselves, and found a loop hole in the system to get them out of being executed, and just life in prison, and even a possibilty of parol. Well, that just throws away that plan of execution.
Also, the main use for execution these days in the United States is lethal injection. The electric chair has been outlawed, even though it is loved, because people have called that is is to inhumane. Well, in that case, I say lethal injection is to “inhumane” too. Seriously, these guys are strapped to a table, and injected with a knock out medicine, and then injected with another chemical that will make the human suffocate. Really nice right? No, just a waste of humans.
So, what do I think the United States should due instead of the death penalty? Well, hard labor.
Personally, I think that the whole jail system is over done - meaning that there is to much “pleasure” and not enough :punishment”. For all of you who have seen the movie “Cool Hand Luke”, you now will have a general idea of what my plan would be.
Basically, for six out of the seven days (Mon.-Sat.) all criminals will wake up one our before dawn. Then they will get dressed, and line up for a good old fashion breakfast: grits and water. At dawn these guys should already, or be relativly close to their destination for the day. Once they arrive, they will start to work. They won’t neccesarily be out cutting grass the hard way, but doing any chores from cleaning up interstates, cutting grass (as mentioned), etc. Anything that is really heard, really energy draining, and something that the public can see. At noon, the prisoners will be seved lunch: something along the lines that is cheap, not so good, yet good enough to give these guys the power to stay up right and work for the rest of the day. At dusk, the prisoners will be taken back to jail, where they will be sprayed down with fire hoses as a shower, and the fed supper, and then an hour later, lights out. Then repeat the process.
We won’t work them to death, that’s why every Sunday will be a free day in a way. Basically, churhc services for different religious practices will be held, and the rest of the day will be for rest, some kind of sport, weight lifting, music playing, etc. Once dusk hits though, lights out, and the week will continue.
These guys of course will be a “chain gang”, and will wear clothes that describe the crimes they are in jail for. This is were the fact that they are in public will come in. I see it as this, doing hard labor in the public will be quite the embarassment for the prisoners, but for the civilians thinking about comitting crimes, they will see that prison is no joke, and to go there would mean time in hard labor, and no one wants to do that.
Of course, it will be good for those who are actually innocent, and can give time for them to show the courts that they are indeed inocent. There is no need to kill a man for a crime in which he did not commit. So there’s one for that side too.
With hard labor, public humiliation, and not all this wonderful “free” stuff, crime will drop, and this country will be a better place.
| 2.8 (1 person) |
(4 out of 5)
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 12:17 am
I actually like this idea. People in prison have been getting a free ride for way too long. They should work at least as long as it takes to pay for their expenses: room, food, water etc… It may also help to rehabilitate people which was the original purpose of jail. If we give them a schedule and a job, they could learn how to be a productive member of society. We just have to make sure to keep the prisoners in groups based on what their crime. 80 years of hard labor is a lot more of a punishment then a 15 minute intravenous injection.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Exactly. Plus, even Barack Obama should support this, as according to The Bobo he wants to train criminals for work related skills.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 1:38 am
I agree that the death penalty is wrong. Those that support it should look into how many innocent people have been executed. Perhaps they should put themselves in the position of someone falsely accused of a capital offence.
However, I’m not sure that prison life is actually the free ride you make it out to be. It has been shown that harsher penalties don’t act as a deterrant to crime; no one expects to be caught.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
They get free shelter, free food, free recreation. And yet I hardly see them working for it.
This particular way is more of a public humiliation. If the public sees the penalties for doing crime - hard labor - then they will have second thoughts about it. Seeing people wait on death row for a decade or more isn’t going to stop crime, plus these people are just sitting there wasting our tax money. They are basically like a second government system, except they really do nothing.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
I disagree. I’m all for giving a person a second chance, but some people just can’t be rehabilitated, and some have committed crimes so awful that the world would be better off without them.
“But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die; Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer”
That quote is directly from the King James Bible, book of Numbers 35:20-21.
I don’t agree with the way our death row system works, however. There’s no reason that a person who is condemned to die for a crime should ever have to wait longer than a year for the sentence to be carried out. I’m thinking that a year should give ample time for appeals, etc. The waiting itself is inhumane, if you ask me. It could drive a person crazy.
Those sentenced to time in prison should definitely work. And your proposed idea is fantastic. Why should they get a free ride for committing a crime?!?
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Unfortunately, a year is not enough. The courts in the US are very inefficient. There have been cases where people have been in jail for over twenty years before they become exonerated.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I understand that some people do deserve to die because of what they did, but it’s the waiting period that gets me. If one is convicted and sentenced to death, then why wait so long? And I agree, if it takes longer than a year, then that is too long.
But there is that problem of if the person is really innocent. I would have to say the only way once could be sent to death if there is just so much evidence, that there would be no possible way for that person to be innocent of the crimes. Then, and only then, I would say death penalty would be applicable.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Well - I’m sorry, but I am pro-death penalty, especially for those most heinous crimes. How about a combination for ya? Since our justice system is SO inefficient and can’t seem to get these guys executed in a timely manner - how about putting those who are on death row on those chain gangs you mentioned (BTW - Cool Hand Luke is an awesome movie).
However, I think what you have suggested is still too good for them. I suggest a chain gang, living conditions, and food quality similar to what Sheriff Arpaio has going on in Arizona. If they are going to be on death row for 20 years or more - it needs to be as uncomfortable as possible that by the time it is their time - they will actually be thankful!
Screw those equal rights libs - these heinous murders weren’t thinking of their victims’ right to live! These guys are in jail - they forfeited their rights.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
What I was trying to say was that many men have been in jail for over twenty years and then found Innocent. In fact, recently a few that were actually executed have been found to have been innocent. To me, one life unfairly taken is one to many. That’s why I can’t support the death penalty. I think 99.9% of the people deserve it, but that .1% is what I worry about.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
As far as I know; prisoners used to do productive work; making license plates etc. The reason little work is now done in prisons is that is no longer profitable; it actually costs tax payers more to continue those industries. Subsequently a great problem for prisoners is boredom and this leads to incresed levels of violence and drug abuse.
It’s also been contended that increased brutalisation of prisoners only makes them less likely to commit violent crimes when released: e.g. you go in as a fine defaulter and come out as a murderer. There are no easy answers here.
on Aug 9th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
I can see were people do deserve death for the crimes they did, but as Uriel said, there’s that small percent that the person is actually innocent, and to kill one innocent is to much.
I would the have to say to add to my plan mentioned in the post, that if a person is found without any doubt at all, like if there are witnesses, video tape, a confession, etc., and there is 100% no doubt that the guy could be innocent, then execution could be done, but I think that only murder should be punished by execution.
Liam, I’m not much talking about industrial work, I’m talking cleaning work. Like I said, Cool Hand Luke is probably the closest example I can think of. These people should be cutting grass, picking up trash, renovating torn parts of the city. I don’t see how that would cost more that these people sitting in comfortable jails, and receiving free food, housing, etc. without working for it. I mean, they are being punished right?
And about the “go in as a fine defaulter and come out as a murderer”, how bout we use a famous rule that is used in America’s past time - Baseball - and that would be three strikes your out of here. One released, you get two more chances to clean yourself up. After the third time you will be stuck in jail for a very long time, preferably life. And, as mentioned above, if someone commits murder, unless there is doubt that the person is innocent, then execution will occur.
I personally think that public humiliation, a three strike your out rule, and a quick execution for those who kill will slow crime down quite a bit.
on Aug 10th, 2008 at 12:29 am
I agree that the taking of one innocent life is too many. I’m not sure if anyone can ever be proved 100% guilty; there have been many cases where additional evidence has been found years after a conviction that cast doubt on guilt, or proved innocence, sometimes after the accused had been executed.
I used to work with the sister of Ronald Ryan, the last man hanged in Australia. Evidence was found years after his death that exonerated him. The jury system may be the best thing we have but it’s ceratinly fallible.
Bradley; think of the logistics involved in putting millions of prisoners into work like that. Just the price of transporting them with rising fuel costs would be huge. Then you have to provide tools (even brooms cost money) and adequate supervision. Escapes would inevitably take place, and millions of man hours would be spent re capturing criminals.
I have no sympathy with violent criminals and I don’t want to share the streets with them. That said; I’m not sure that many people are keen to be in prison. Violence and the threat of pack rape is enough to make me very law abiding.
on Aug 11th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
Of course people can be seen 100% guilty. If there is video evidence, or even witnesses, a lot of them, and credible. If their is a confession (by the way, those are used to make penalties softer, which makes no sense. If one confesses then they should be sent to jail the longest!).
Also, about the escape thing. These criminals will not just be let out to work. They will be apart of a nice chain gang. Also, (like I said Cool Hand Luke is the best description I can think of), the officers who are in charge of these prisoners will carry with them guns, real guns, guns that if one tried to escape that no one will ever worry about them escaping again.
It’s not that I want these people sharing the streets with you, they shouldn’t be. But public humiliation is what I’m trying to get at. If one shows off what he did wrong, and people see what he is doing to pay for such crimes, they will think twice about it or they too will share the same fate.
And remember the three strikes your out rule!
on Aug 13th, 2008 at 7:11 am
Unfortunately, only very stupid criminals allow themselves to be caught on camera. Even forensic evidence can be flawed, as can be witness testimony; people make mistakes. Public humiliation might be challenged as unconstitutional; it could be seen as ‘cruel and unusual punishment’. The result; criminals work the legal system and walk away scott free.
As far as I know, the US currently has a very conservative government. Why aren’t they doing something like this now? Because it’s not feasible and the costs would have to be born by taxpayers like you and I. I pay enough tax as it is.
on Aug 13th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I believe it is just more because of the political correctness thing. I see no problem in it, and if I was ever put in jail I would believe that I should be punish for what I did wrong, not sit for a couple of weeks, months, or years.