Death penalty?

Will

Is it right to kill someone for a heinous offence? Does it not spit in the face of the law itself?

It's always confused me and I'm thankful Ireland doesn't use the death penalty. You committed a horrible act so we the government in return are going to do something equally as horrible and barbaric to you, take your life... in the name of justice.

Here's a quote from a man who was sentenced to death a few years back named Napoleon Beazley. He shot a businessman named John Luttig so he could steal his mercedes benz, he also shot at his wife but she survived. Napoleon had two other lads with him and both are serving life as they testified against Napoleon.

The act I committed to put me here was not just heinous, it was senseless. But the person that committed that act is no longer here - I am.

I'm not going to struggle physically against any restraints. I'm not going to shout, use profanity or make idle threats. Understand though that I'm not only upset, but I'm saddened by what is happening here tonight. I'm not only saddened, but disappointed that a system that is supposed to protect and uphold what is just and right can be so much like me when I made the same shameful mistake.

If someone tried to dispose of everyone here for participating in this killing, I'd scream a resounding, "No." I'd tell them to give them all the gift that they would not give me...and that's to give them all a second chance.

I'm sorry that I am here. I'm sorry that you're all here. I'm sorry that John Luttig died. And I'm sorry that it was something in me that caused all of this to happen to begin with.

Tonight we tell the world that there are no second chances in the eyes of justice...Tonight, we tell our children that in some instances, in some cases, killing is right.

This conflict hurts us all, there are no SIDES. The people who support this proceeding think this is justice. The people that think that I should live think that is justice. As difficult as it may seem, this is a clash of ideals, with both parties committed to what they feel is right. But who's wrong if in the end we're all victims?

In my heart, I have to believe that there is a peaceful compromise to our ideals. I don't mind if there are none for me, as long as there are for those who are yet to come. There are a lot of men like me on death row - good men - who fell to the same misguided emotions, but may not have recovered as I have.

Give those men a chance to do what's right. Give them a chance to undo their wrongs. A lot of them want to fix the mess they started, but don't know how. The problem is not in that people aren't willing to help them find out, but in the system telling them it won't matter anyway. No one wins tonight. No one gets closure. No one walks away victorious.

What further adds to this is he wasn't even 18, well close enough 4 months or so off being legally an adult. He was executed.

His last words, show remorse, sadness and acknowledgment that what he did was wrong. I know this doesn't excuse him from seeing jail time, but facing death? My idea about it all was that it was reserved for the most evil people and acts, this lad doesn't seem to be. He pleaded guilty from the get go, was a kid legally yet was still killed by lethal injection.

In my eyes it p¡sses in the face of modern society and morals...

minidazzler

Not sure

I think it should be here and used, but not for something like straight up murder of one person. That can be justifiable as doing something retarded, life in prison for that.

But someone who harms children, or anyone who is not in a position to defend themselves or commits a calculated killing.

Kill the bastards. Why should they live? I can't think of a good reason.

Otis Driftwood

Not sure

My personal opinion always has been and always will be that the punishment should fit the crime.The guy in the above case,while not a monster like say Josef Fritzel or Fred West,still took one persons life and tried to take anothers.

Irregardless of motive or whether it was pre-meditated,he still murdered someone.

Do 2 wrongs make a right or did executing him bring back his victim?
No.

However Id be pretty sure that if a family member or friend of mine was murdered that I would want to see their killer suffer the same fate.

Obviously every single case is different.

Example
A woman suffers systematic abuse for years at the hands of a spouse or partner,one day she snaps and kills him,should she be excecuted?
IMO no because she is unlikely to be a repeat offender.The killing was the end result of years of suffering.

Example
Should a serial killer be executed?
IMO yes.They are repeat offenders,without motive and would likely kill again if given the opportunity.

Example
Sadamm Hussain.Not too many batted an eyelid upon his execution because most would be in agreement that he deserved it because of the suffering he inflicted upon probably millions of people,both directly and indirectly.

Of course the above are pretty open and close examples and every instance would be different and thats where the problem arises.I do realise that Im coming across as being somewhat hypocritical in saying that its ok for some but not for others but Im struggling to come up with the words to articulate it.

All I can say is that Im glad that I will never be in the position that I have to make these types of decisions.

Dothehustle

No

a eye for a eye we'll all go blind
lock them up and leave them their.
give out proper jail sentence
if they are killed how are we different from them

mike65

Birmingham 6, Guildford 4

Not a football result.

KevArno

No

To be honest I find justifying a death penalty impossible for me to comprehend. I don't think that as a society we can in good conscience take a persons life, regardless of the crime committed.
I for one was not rejoicing at Saddam Hussains hanging. I was quite sickened by it to be honest. Not just the act of the hanging, but also because after so long, so much pain caused by the man, it was just over. I took no joy in seeing the terror on his face, and I dont think it helped people to move on.

I would love to see Josef Fritzel die. However I know that it is emotion causing that reaction. When I think about how I would rather society as a whole treat their criminals, a short fall and a quick stop is not how I see it playing out to our advantage in the long term.

What I think we need is more consistent sentencing. And harsher punishments for some of the horrific "manslaughter" cases we see in the courts.

It is impossible to think rationally sometimes about these things. But especially so when you have been touched by crimes such as murder. And that is why I think that the wishes of the victims family should not really be considered, rather the benefit to society.

Otis Driftwood

Not sure

Weigh up the costs of housing them for the rest of their lives Vs a quick lethal injection.

€270,000 a year

minidazzler

Not sure

KevArno wrote: »

To be honest I find justifying a death penalty impossible for me to comprehend. I don't think that as a society we can in good conscience take a persons life, regardless of the crime committed.
I for one was not rejoicing at Saddam Hussains hanging. I was quite sickened by it to be honest. Not just the act of the hanging, but also because after so long, so much pain caused by the man, it was just over. I took no joy in seeing the terror on his face, and I dont think it helped people to move on.

Sadaam was not in our society, they have a radically different culture over there and I am quite sure it will have helped some people feel better knowing he can't hurt anyone again.

Has a crime ever been commited against a member of your family which makes you want vengence? Want the death of the person who did it?

It has happened in my family, and I would love to see the bastards that did it strung up by his finger nails. Even if something happened to someone in your family, you mightn't understand it, but it would give you an idea of what some people involved feel.

I have always been for the death Penalty, but that brought it home as something I want to see put into action. I do think people commit crimes which we as a society are justified in killing them for.

Prison does feck all to be honest and just costs a helluva lot of money.

Daftendirekt

No

nedtheshed wrote: »

Weigh up the costs of housing them for the rest of their lives Vs a quick lethal injection.

€270,000 a year

If the act of taking a person's life (even by humane means) is to become an acceptable criminal punishment, it needs to be justified by more than its value as a cost-saving measure.

As for me, I'm opposed to it. I don't think an eye-for-an-eye justice system is a good idea, and I'm uncomfortable with the idea of granting the State the power to take lives.

However, there might be something to be said for it in extreme cases where the suspect's guilt is beyond doubt. It could be seen as being more of a deterrent than imprisonment, and an even more humane penalty than being deprived of your freedom for 50+ years.

We need to draw the line somewhere though, and personally I'd draw it before the death penalty.

dlofnep

No

mike65 wrote: »

Birmingham 6, Guildford 4

Not a football result.

Exactly. There is always the chance that someone innocent could be killed. If we had a 100% probability of someone being guilty of a crime, then - I would say - go for it, in serious cases. But we are never 100% certain, so to implement the death penalty is wrong.

There is also the moral question of - is not not hypocritical to kill someone for killing?

amacachi

There's no reason for a death penalty sentence to be handed out but as I've said elsewhere my problem with not having it as an option is that it seems to lead to other sentences being reduced in proportion. For example why should a single murder get the same sentence as a multiple-time murderer? Bring that down and Manslaughter comes down as well, so does rape, assault and any crimes not against a person have to be lower again. That's my only reason for wishing it was still around, but if judges were fair and handed out proper sentences then fair enough.

cHaTbOx

No

Nobody can justify taking someones life . You are judging what to do with another persons life when it shouldn't be your decision and that is why there is a hatred for the person who you are deeming worthy of life or death .

Although, just because you can't justify it doesn't mean you wouldn't kill someone who has done these acts . You just want them dead while getting away with it , when the truth is you will never get away with it . You will still have the anger that says you were right , but your heart and soul will lose something and you won't get that back , so they have caused more destruction.

Of course some people deserve to have as much pain as they have caused ,but bad things happen in life and if we let revenge and bitterness consume us we would not live our lives to he full and It would be more than one life ruined . Would death bring an end to your heart ache ? How would you feel when it doesn't solve the problem?

Also , if the death penalty was in place , what crimes could you deem worthy of death ? There are crimes done by bad people and crimes done by good people . In life there are mistakes and if there was a death penalty there would be no chance to rectify them .

The fact it costs so much to house prisoners is crazy , it is a mini break.
I think if going to jail meant hard work and no fun not many people would end up there ,or want to go for a stretch as long as the more heinous crimes.

In summary, life's not fair and we shouldn't get to pick and choose who lives or dies .

Daftendirekt

No

minidazzler wrote: »

Has a crime ever been commited against a member of your family which makes you want vengence? Want the death of the person who did it?

It has happened in my family, and I would love to see the bastards that did it strung up by his finger nails. Even if something happened to someone in your family, you mightn't understand it, but it would give you an idea of what some people involved feel.

While I haven't had a crime committed against myself or my family that would warrant such an extreme penalty, I think this highlights a good reason to oppose it.

Many people (though not all) support it from a position of strong emotion and so don't consider whether it really is a good idea in itself or not. But if we're to have any semblance of 'justice' in the system, we need to approach the issue rationally to find the best balance between firmness and fairness, so that criminals are adequately punished, but also that the punishment matches the crime without stooping to the level of the criminal.

KevArno

No

minidazzler wrote: »

Sadaam was not in our society, they have a radically different culture over there and I am quite sure it will have helped some people feel better knowing he can't hurt anyone again.

Has a crime ever been commited against a member of your family which makes you want vengence? Want the death of the person who did it?

It has happened in my family, and I would love to see the bastards that did it strung up by his finger nails. Even if something happened to someone in your family, you mightn't understand it, but it would give you an idea of what some people involved feel.

I have always been for the death Penalty, but that brought it home as something I want to see put into action. I do think people commit crimes which we as a society are justified in killing them for.

Prison does feck all to be honest and just costs a helluva lot of money.

I agree that prison does feck all. But that doesn't have to be a given. I think it probably requires major reform, on a scale so beyond my understanding that I can't possibly begin to suggest answers. But I do think a system that works can be developed.

I'm sorry to hear that something as horrible as this has touched you personally, it is pretty much impossible for me to understand the emotions you feel when something like that happens. But I can't help but think that this shows exactly why family and friends of victims should not dictate the punishment. Emotion will rule, and injustices will result.

By the way, I don't think the financial cost of a prison system should ever dictate the correct form of punishment.

OldGoat

Not sure

Death penalty? Barbaric. Not in my name.

deadhead13

Not sure

Ireland had a referendum on the abolition of the death penalty in 2001, it was passed by a majority I think of around 2 to 1. I would be totally against its reintroduction and I agree it is barbaric. On practical level, to bring it back would mean another referendum and Ireland leaving the EU. Lisbon III anyone?

cocoa

No

So many people talk about punishment and all I'm hearing is revenge. IMO, the number one and maybe even only priority should be prevention of future crimes, not revenge, not making the victims or their friends and family feel better or submitting to their wishes.

I realise that this is a difficult task and far from straightforward, but that's no reason why it shouldn't be the ideal of a civilised society. If a crime has been committed, then there is something wrong in the criminal's life, whether it is depression, lack of motivation, lack of morals, lack of respect or any other deficiency or proficiency you might care to name, society has failed them and in some sense, they too are a victim and so the aim should be to improve this person and avoid a repeat offence while preserving their life.

I acknowledge however that we can't know it all and that maybe, in some cases there is no help to be had and an ending is kinder than a life of imprisonment, but that's a damn big maybe...

philologos

Not sure

Eek! I misread the poll :pac:

Should have voted yes.

Will

No

yeah think i shoulda phrased it better >.<

deadhead13

Not sure

Same here, that should have been yes.

The Big Red Button

cHaTbOx wrote: »

Nobody can justify taking someones life . You are judging what to do with another persons life when it shouldn't be your decision ...
In summary, life's not fair and we shouldn't get to pick and choose who lives or dies .

But the murderers who commit these crimes do get to pick and choose who lives and dies? Without the slightest fear of their own lives being taken in return?

And when I say "their lives being taken" - I don't necessarily mean the death penalty. I would be all for life sentences - if life actually meant "life".

Personally, I could not be in favour of a death penalty. If nothing else, it allows the perpetrator to get off FAR too easily. However I would be in favour of life sentences where the killer doesn't have such a ridiculously easy time of it as they seem to have in Irish jails. If things were done right, it sure as hell shouldn't cost €270,000 to keep a prisoner in jail for a year.

Dr_Phil

Will wrote: »

Is it right to kill someone for a heinous offence

Yes, absolutely.

Will wrote: »

Does it not spit in the face of the law itself?

Not at all.

I would suggest to get those "enlightened, modern and european" citizens to share responsibility for possible future crimes that might be commited by the individual and obviously costs of further (as comfortable as can get - God we are modern society!) existence of the sentenced.

cooperguy

No

nedtheshed wrote: »

Weigh up the costs of housing them for the rest of their lives Vs a quick lethal injection.

€270,000 a year

It actually costs more to put somebody to death than to jail them for life believe it or not. This is in America but that is the best comparison we have. There is numerous appeals which take up a huge amount of time by the top solicitors and judges and the 24/7 double security on death row aswell.

Im too lazy to find the links but you can google it!

humberklog

Not sure

It's a brutal utensil. Not for me.

tbh

I'm going to say this once and once only. Everyone in this forum is entitled to their opinions. The first mention of "PC Brigade" or whatever the opposite is will result in bannage. You are welcome to express yourself, whatever side you are on. You will NOT be allowed to disparage anyone for their opinions.

cHaTbOx

No

chatterpillar wrote: »

But the murderers who commit these crimes do get to pick and choose who lives and dies? Without the slightest fear of their own lives being taken in return?

I know it's not right . But what makes a murder different , Is it because it is just? Nothing in life is truly just.

But I agree with you in that life should mean life in premeditated circumstances , not death , that is the easy way out , but extremely boring and mind numbing labour.

I think people forget that death is not the worst thing in life .

tbh

the thing is, we measure ourselves as a society by our principles. Our principles tell us that the taking of a life is wrong, be it murder or execution. The state has to hold the moral high ground, and taking a life solves nothing. Indeed, the whole emphasis of our legal system is on rehabilitation, not on punishment. I do think that there are certain crimes that deserve life imprisonment, but never execution.

Bottle_of_Smoke

I like it for some reasons. One is that it gives some closure to the family of the victim. Problem here is the victim's family might actually want them to rot in jail rather than get a quick death.

Cost saving is another one. It's outrageous that more money should be spent on killers and paedos than the poor. The problem is that in a democratic country with all the appeals and obvious need for increased security during these appeals it might end up costing more than putting them away for life.

If they perhaps took their organs for people who need them and used the brain for research it might outweigh this cost but still damn expensive.

The birmingham 6 cases also bring up a major problem. They had an appeal turned down before they were eventually released. They would have been executed and we'd now assume them to be the people who committed one of the very worst massacres of the troubles.

OldGoat

Not sure

Jakkass wrote: »

Eek! I misread the poll :pac:

Should have voted yes.

Stupidy me did the same thing. Sorry to skew your results Will.

r3nu4l

No

minidazzler wrote: »

I think it should be here and used, but not for something like straight up murder of one person. That can be justifiable as doing something retarded, life in prison for that.

But someone who harms children, or anyone who is not in a position to defend themselves or commits a calculated killing.

Kill the bastards. Why should they live? I can't think of a good reason.

What if they are innocent? That's good enough for me!
Innocent people go to jail all the time.
Today, DNA evidence is seen as a 'safeguard' against that but if a man falls on a street and reaches out to grab me, he may get my DNA under his fingernails. If he's murdered six hours later and my DNA is under his nails, I'm a suspect. With the right prosecutor, a lack of witnesses and a poor defence, that could send me to jail...or for a lethal injection. No thanks!

mike65 wrote: »

Birmingham 6, Guildford 4

Not a football result.

Only this year an Englishman was also released from an English jail because the real killer was finally caught. The man served 20+ years.
The death penalty would have killed that man for no reason.

My own cousin was murdered in 2005, I'd love to see his killers put away for the rest of their lives. I'd resent paying for their incarceration through taxes but I'd hate to see them suffer the death penalty only to find later on that actually, they didn't do it, or they took the fall for the guy that ordered the killing or whatever...

So, no to the death penalty for me, too many problems with it.

Morlar

Not sure

Jakkass wrote: »

Eek! I misread the poll :pac:

Should have voted yes.

It's not worded very well. I voted No we should not do away with it so Yes we should have it. Even on our statute books but rarely used for things like child murder or murdering a Gardai.

Bren1609

The Poll should have been worded "Are you in favour of the death penalty"

This is some pretty profound stuff on the Texas Dept Criminal Justice website

Gives info on the offender, summary of the crime and their last words. I remember the first time I seen the website I couldnt get over some of the the needless crimes they committed to end up on death row. One fella walks in an off licence to buy a six pack, realises he has no money and gets into an argument with the owner, shoots him dead and leaves. WTF!?!

Handsome Bob

No

No I'm not in favour of the death penalty. I'm not a religious man, and I have no issues with religion, but I do think that the reason why the US have it is because a significant portion of their population is religious. Why is this relevant? Simply because I believe, that they believe, that by giving someone the death penalty they are "fast tracking" people to Hell, where they will suffer in the worst way possible for eternity. But I'm not religious, so all I see the death penalty as is an easy way out for people. They aren't really paying for whatever they did wrong.

Personally, if someone murdered a loved one, knowing that they were rotting in a jail cell for the rest of their life (and where they could possibly learn what they did was wrong) would give me a lot more comfort than knowing that they suffered for a couple of minutes, where they then fell into a deep sleep (where they didn't learn anything).

philologos

Not sure

LZ5by5: Why do you think this usage differs amongst other populations who have faith? The reason why I am against it would be because it is fast-trackng people to Hell as you describe. I believe people should have a chance to reform and seek forgiveness.

CDfm

Not sure

I have mixed views on this really.

On balance some of the senseless murders in Ireland like the young plumber -an innocent casualty who was murdered in a Dublin suburb or the killers of the Limerick rugby player shot in a dryby shooting with no criminal affiliations and a victim of mistaken identity. Would I hang the killers - probably.

I also have misgivings of the quality of justice meted out by the courts. Take Joe Rooney and his conviction. He probably did it but I certainly didnt see enough evidence to hang him. So would deat penalty cases lead to higher standards of proof. Was there enough evidence to hang him?? Very dodgy.

Nedtheshed mentioned Spousal Abuse Syndrome. That doesnt sit well with me as its like leaving a rapist off if he alleges the victim wore a short skirt. I think there is a very low standard of proof used on this.

Notorious

Not sure

I would generally follow the "eye for an eye" train of thought.

It's a popular conception that the death penalty would act as a deterrant, but that only seems to be a myth. It's been shown that 9 of the 10 US states with the highest murder rates, are states that enforce the death penalty.

So in that case, does the death penalty only act as a tool for justice (revenge)?

CDfm

Not sure

Notorious wrote: »

I

So in that case, does the death penalty only act as a tool for justice (revenge)?

In some Middle Eastern Countries commuting the punishment is in the hands of the victims families.

Sentencing is about punishment.

Hail 2 Da Chimp

Not sure

Just flicked onto this and I was actually surprised with the results:
39 people think the death penalty should be done away with
30 people don't think it should be done away with -> I voted.

I was expecting it to be a landslide result in the other direction, guess thats what happened when you read AH too much!

OldGoat

Not sure

Hail 2 Da Chimp wrote: »

Just flicked onto this and I was actually surprised with the results:
39 people think the death penalty should be done away with
30 people don't think it should be done away with -> I voted.

I was expecting it to be a landslide result in the other direction, guess thats what happened when you read AH too much!

When you read the thread you'll find that a few of us voted without reading the poll correctly so the vote might not be as close as it seems.

Notorious

Not sure

CDfm wrote: »

Sentencing is about punishment.

Exactly. But is being killed for serious committing a crime suitable punishment?

I'd never heard of families being given the choice to hand out a punishment. I'd say that would be a bit biased, wouldn't it?

Seonad

Morlar wrote: »

child murder or murdering a Gardai.

How are these worse then any other murder?

I think the problem rears it's head when people are far too flippant about life. If we really, truely value those who are brutally murdered or similar hateful crimes-to value those lost to us is to value life itself so how can you think to condemn others to the same fate?
Someone has already asked whether its better to pay a considerable sum of money to keep these people imprisoned or the cheaper option-lethal injection...is this really how we want to think at this day and age?
No punishment will ever be enough so why degrade ourselves?

CDfm

Not sure

Notorious wrote: »

Exactly. But is being killed for serious committing a crime suitable punishment?

I have always had reservations -but as I have gotten older my views have changed. Especially as the killers seem to have no value on human life.

I'd never heard of families being given the choice to hand out a punishment. I'd say that would be a bit biased, wouldn't it?

In Sharia law in lots of Islamic Couintries you have blood money - check this out http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Pakistan-Sharia-Law-Court-Justice-Meted-Out-By-Militant-Group-Lashkar-e-Islam/Article/200903415248317?lpos=World_News_First_Home_Page_Feature_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15248317_Pakistan%3A_Sharia_Law_Court_Justice_Meted_Out_By_Militant_Group_Lashkar_e_Islam

jap gt

Not sure

i think any people that abuse children, like that bastard in the north last week, should be killed, why do we need scum like that, i also think the priest today that abused the six year old should be left in jail to rot, he got 3 years and one suspended for his age wtf like SCUM. also people that rob and beat old people i believe if they gave the death penalty to these people alot more people would think twice about robbing them.. :mad:

metrovelvet

tbh wrote: »

the thing is, we measure ourselves as a society by our principles. Our principles tell us that the taking of a life is wrong, be it murder or execution. The state has to hold the moral high ground, and taking a life solves nothing. Indeed, the whole emphasis of our legal system is on rehabilitation, not on punishment. I do think that there are certain crimes that deserve life imprisonment, but never execution.

Prison is not about rehabilitiation at all. Look at the recitivism rates. Its about a closer, more effective policing of those the police and the insidious nature of law have failed to control. It is about keeping the public safe and in some cases deterrancy [as in jailing people who havent paid a tv or dog licence].

994

nedtheshed wrote: »

Weigh up the costs of housing them for the rest of their lives Vs a quick lethal injection.

€270,000 a year

In the U.S., executions cost a fortune in appeals etc.

nedtheshed wrote: »

Example
A woman suffers systematic abuse for years at the hands of a spouse or partner,one day she snaps and kills him,should she be excecuted?
IMO no because she is unlikely to be a repeat offender.The killing was the end result of years of suffering.

So it's OK to kill if you promise not to do it again? And a man who killed an abusive wife probably wouldn't get the same clemency - in the US, women are almost never executed.

Example
Should a serial killer be executed?
IMO yes.They are repeat offenders,without motive and would likely kill again if given the opportunity.

But max. security prison would also

Example
Sadamm Hussain.Not too many batted an eyelid upon his execution because most would be in agreement that he deserved it because of the suffering he inflicted upon probably millions of people,both directly and indirectly.

The execution of a leader is a political rather than judicial decision so it's not really relevant.

CDfm

Not sure

994 wrote: »

And a man who killed an abusive wife probably wouldn't get the same clemency - in the US, women are almost never executed.

994 is a feminist and wants equal rights for women ... on Death Row

Greyfox

I can't unerstand why so many people are against the death penalty, the fact is people like Saddam Hussain, Ted Bundy, Josef Fritzel etc committed crimes so henious that they don't deserve the right to carry on living, their pieces of sh*t that should be treated like animals!

I don't believe the death penalty would make us a less civilised society, it's time to live in the real world and accept that some crimes are so unspeakably evil that they deserve the most severe sentence possible!

CDfm

Not sure

Greyfox wrote: »

I don't believe the death penalty would make us a less civilised society, it's time to live in the real world and accept that some crimes are so unspeakably evil that they deserve the most severe sentence possible!

Neither do I.

But then you have methods - dont you think lethal injection and electric chair are slow. The guillotine and hanging seemed more efficient,

Nebit

No

im opposed to the death penalty and always will be.
I always think of it as there being two victims.
There is always a reason for why someone ends up how they are. parenting or abuse as a child are the main culprits. so what do we do then, do we kill the parents for bringing the child up wrong ???
Its a silly idea IMO.

i think that sentencing someone to the confines of a cell much smaller than most of the peoples bedrooms on this forum, with no colour, a toilet and another person is torturous enough tbh
One sits and contemplates their crimes knowing what they have done, knowing that when they are released the world could have changed. Don't forget they are cut off from the outside world and this can in itself cause a fear of being released. Again this sounds like far than enough 'pay back' for ones crime dont you think???

Nebit

No

Jakkass wrote: »

Eek! I misread the poll :pac:

Should have voted yes.

lol i was thinking u must av misread it