 
|
janebfc
|
How quick are people here to jump blindly to all kinds of conclusions about this. Firstly, most people are forgetting that your question as us if WE were sentenced to death....perhaps some people here should try to get their head round that bit of the concept first before assuming that anyone should be sentenced to death.
There have been a lot of miscarriages of justice - in the UK think of people who have been released years after being sentenced because they were wrongly imprisoned in the first place. You can't bring people back from the dead so there's a moral and ethical question people ought to ask themselves about whether the death penalty - is something that is right in the first place. Thankfully in the UK we abolished it but there are plenty of other countries that still exercise this sentencing option.
When is it right to sentence someone to death, and when is it not?
Of course this question has probably been prompted by the news that Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death for crimes against humanity. Even in the case of such a tyrant he did not act alone - he had people around him who supported him in his actions. Yes some will have done it out of fear, but for everyone of those there will have been someone who did it with the same intent as Saddam. Whilst I abhor his actions is it right that he carries this alone?
Of course, in an instance like this people's gut reactions will think I'm a bleeding heart liberal. But now imagine you're in a train carriage with two other people. One gets up and brutally stabbing the other before jumping off the still moving train. You're found bent over the body with blood on your hands. The CCTV wasn't working and all the evidence points at you. Do you still believe in the death penalty?
There've been cases where people have been sentenced to death despite having the mental age of a child and not knowing the difference between right and wrong - they're particularly tragic. And then there are the options themselves as to the way you die. Lethal injection etc. They say that some methods are quicker than others. The quickest, I understand, is meant to take almost immediate effect and yet in some US States where they offer this the doctor still does not declare the patient dead for 30 minutes, suggesting that it is not as quick as they claim. If it has to be then surely it should be by the quickest method possible. As if someone is to die a slow death then are we not committing an act of torture leading to death? Don't we become as bad as the person who's committed the crime? |
|
jazzman6812
|
Did your victim? |
|
tartanbeastie
 |
excellent. i'd choose death by porking my brains out with half dozen stunning women |
|
Catherine C
 |
No way, if you did something bad enough to be condemned to death, then in my opinion you have no right to choose. |
|
jerry
|
Absolutely!
I would choose to die of old age. |
|
Glenn
|
Stop whinging! Just put ur head between ur legs....and kiss ur a*se goodbye!! |
|
tacho
|
if your tacking about that MASS MURDERER Saddam Hussein why are you so interested in that ar*ehole for just be thankful he is going to be executed |
|
richard_beckham2001
|
no why should you? that's what the punishment is for. |
|
the-exile
 |
No, you should abide by the countries rules |
|
Za3roor
|
Yes. I had no choice of being born. At least give me a choice of the way I go..!! |
|
Hendo
|
No. The sentence carried out should be as abhorrent to the perpetrator as the crime was to the victims and their families.
Why give him(I presume you mean Saddam) the choice he didn't give his victims |
|
Ally
|
Suppose you should really. In a civillised country it's not like they would let you die an agonising death anyway. |
|
stacey r
 |
someone who is sentenced to death must have done something unspeakable, so why should they have any choice over anything? |
|
wozza.lad
|
Why should you have that priveledge,the victim was not given any choice. |
|
Gibson
 |
As far as I'm concerned you lose all your rights once you are convicted of a crime. |
|
Simply_Me
 |
probably you can request as long as you'l be sentenced to death...but in my country we do sentenced to death through injecting you that make you sleep first and then the killing chemicals...so there's no pains when you die, you just like you fall asleep and never wakes up... |
|
MotherBear1975
|
No. The method of execution should correspond with the crime for which the person is being punished. |
|
edison
 |
I believe if you are condemned to die then it should be as swift & humanely as possible without too much emphasis on how.no razz ma tazz |
|
Proud to be an AMERICAN
|
No - by committing the crime in the first place, you give up almost all your rights.
Also, too many people would choose old age! :) |
|
monkeymanelvis
|
I don't think in any nation barbaric and primitive enough to have a death penalty has enough freedom of choice to allow people to chose the manner of their own death.
If I did have to chose the manner of my own execution I would chose to be killed in an arena in front of a crowd by a gladiator style executioner with a hatchet. I think any sort of painless sterile execution is degrading to the sanctity of life and that if I was to die I would like to go out in an entertaining and vaguely natural manner. |
|
Pale Rider
|
no if a judge sentences you to execution the judge shoud also pick the method |
|
psychodad
|
Murderers Kiddie killers NO. they have lost all rights |
|
zebadee79
|
No I don't think you should.
Do we that are not on death row get to choose how we die? |
|
R C
|
No, only God has that choice. |
|
|
|
|
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
