Originally posted by qts:
Well, I don't believe in the death penalty because it's pretty difficult to apologise to a dead man.
In this case I'd suggest that justice would have been far better served by putting him in a cell for life and not letting him out - at all.
That's not an option. Interestingly, my idea of putting them in a cell with just enough to live on (bread, water, working toilet, clean clothes and showers) would be considered cruel and unusual punishment. Prisons are -too- soft. All prisoners should be provided with the bare essentials, i.e. food, shelter, clothing, and hygiene options (clean clothes, bathing, exercise, medical attention). If you're sentenced to life w/o possibility of parole, that's ALL you get. You're never going back to society, so you don't need news and information from the outside. You're kept isolated from the other prisoners as much as possible (no social interaction.) You've given up these rights by committing your heinous crime. The prisoners that will eventually be released get the basics, plus education to a GED (if they don't have high school education), maybe a trade skill education, and periodicals of information (such as a newspaper or news magazine) on the outside. That's it. No TV, no movies, no entertainment at all.
Cruel and unusual punishment? No more so than the crimes they have committed on society. They didn't think of the rights of the people they hurt, so they forfeited their rights; after their conviction of course, still innocent until proven guilty.
