Should inmates serving life without parole be allowed euthanasia if they request it? I wouldn't be opposed. What are your thoughts?

username checks out on this post.

I suppose I could be for euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide if the mental capacity to make this decision is verified.

It should be encouraged.

Absolutely. Although, I think they should suffer....we shouldnt have to pay for their incarceration.

I could be mistaken here, but most people serving life have seriously harmed or killed someone else.

They should have the option to die in the same manner as their victims.

lethalninja said:

---

Should inmates serving life without parole be allowed euthanasia if they request it? I wouldn't be opposed. What are your thoughts?

---

No. Life without parole is for serious offenders who need to live each and every day in misery.

No, if they want to kill themselves, find a way, get creative. You don't need someone else to do it for you.

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

No, if they want to kill themselves, find a way, get creative. You don't need someone else to do it for you.

---

This. Go kill a gang leader and society gets a twofer.

It's merciful for the offender, but it could save money for tax payers. I'd need to see the cost / benefit analysis, but I'm leaning towards letting them do it.

Whatever is the cheapest to the taxpayer.

No.

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

No, if they want to kill themselves, find a way, get creative. You don't need someone else to do it for you.

---

Yep, plenty of ways to die in prison. Just inform on a few of your fellow prisoners and you can be dead by the end of the week. Probably much cheaper than bringing in a Kevorkian to manage the process.

There is literally NOTHING preventing a prisoner serving a life sentence from either killing themselves or from getting themselves killed. NOTHING.

So, this proposal is completely unnecessary as there would be ZERO takers.

I think it depends on what the purpose of jail is for, tying back to the whole problem with the justice system today.

If jail is meant for rehabilitation, there should be no life without parole. The goal should be getting out and reintegrating into society.

For proven murderers where guilt is known 100%, it should just be the death penalty.

For everyone else, they should have to serve out their sentence as part of the rehabilitation process.

But I know these days jails are more about profit so rehabilitation isn't really a thing.

Pro-life means pro-life from conception to natural death.

jopatura said:

---

I think it depends on what the purpose of jail is for, tying back to the whole problem with the justice system today.

If jail is meant for rehabilitation, there should be no life without parole. The goal should be getting out and reintegrating into society.

For proven murderers where guilt is known 100%, it should just be the death penalty.

For everyone else, they should have to serve out their sentence as part of the rehabilitation process.

But I know these days jails are more about profit so rehabilitation isn't really a thing.

---

Say what?!?

Jail is for punishment / retribution. Its not a Betty Ford clinic for criminals.

If you find Jesus and an education whilst paying your debts, fine. But the idea that prison is for rehabilitation is about the most asinine thing I have read in the last 10 years.

NO. The convicted criminal should be allowed to choose to go to Lifer's Prison Island where there are no rules/food/security. You must survive if you so desire.

Yes, choot em all Lizbath!

TChaney said:

---

I could be mistaken here, but most people serving life have seriously harmed or killed someone else.

They should have the option to die in the same manner as their victims.

---

This.
Equity.

fka ftc said:

---

jopatura said:

---

I think it depends on what the purpose of jail is for, tying back to the whole problem with the justice system today.

If jail is meant for rehabilitation, there should be no life without parole. The goal should be getting out and reintegrating into society.

For proven murderers where guilt is known 100%, it should just be the death penalty.

For everyone else, they should have to serve out their sentence as part of the rehabilitation process.

But I know these days jails are more about profit so rehabilitation isn't really a thing.

---

Say what?!?

Jail is for punishment / retribution. Its not a Betty Ford clinic for criminals.

If you find Jesus and an education whilst paying your debts, fine. But the idea that prison is for rehabilitation is about the most asinine thing I have read in the last 10 years.

---

Then why do so many inmates prefer to go back to prison? It's absolutely preferred by some. Real life is the punishment to them.

Sorry, jail SHOULD be about punishment and retribution.

beerad12man said:

---

Whatever is the cheapest to the taxpayer.

---

I'm with bee-rad, as long as the money saved stays in the system to cover other costs. If we cut someone out for 10 years of their sentence, that money needs to stay to pay for others. And bring back chain gangs while we are at it. Work them so they are too tired to fight or ****.

Only if the victim or the victim's family gets to pick the method. No rules.

Go back to deterrence. If you go to prison you have to work hard labor that is beneficial to society, meals are minimal, no ac, no tv.

I think Asian youths should be left at home and not brought anywhere near dangerous criminals.

jopatura said:

---

I think it depends on what the purpose of jail is for, tying back to the whole problem with the justice system today.

If jail is meant for rehabilitation, there should be no life without parole. The goal should be getting out and reintegrating into society.

For proven murderers where guilt is known 100%, it should just be the death penalty.

For everyone else, they should have to serve out their sentence as part of the rehabilitation process.

But I know these days jails are more about profit so rehabilitation isn't really a thing.

---

Prisons should be geared toward rehabilitation, but there are certainly some who should never be released, no matter what happens.

Most prisoners will eventually be released. Many of them will re-offend and be sent back. For others, rehabilitation will make them more able to become a productive law-abiding citizen.

As one former prison warden said (something to the effect of) if you treat prisoners as gladiators, you get gladiators.

This reminds me of an incident in either the Netherlands or Belgium several years ago: a convicted child sex offender/murder was due for release after serving his sentence. He said that if he was released he would strike again, likely sexually abusing and killing another child victim. So he opted for euthanasia before release since the country forbade capital punishment. After a series of court hearings he got his wish on the basis of his mental illness and was euthanized.

Yes, kill'em and move on

No, suicide is a sin. Govt should not be involved in sin.

What about separation between church and state?

IndividualFreedom said:

---

NO. The convicted criminal should be allowed to choose to go to Lifer's Prison Island where there are no rules/food/security. You must survive if you so desire.

---

Sorry to GB up F16.

Gilligan said:

---

Go back to deterrence. If you go to prison you have to work hard labor that is beneficial to society, meals are minimal, no ac, no tv.

---

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/08/24/texas-prisons-air-conditioning/

2/3rds of Texas prisons have no AC. All the medium and maximum security prisons I was involved with building in the 90's had ventilation fans only.

No, because it would then be a death sentence. Life without Parole is worse than a death sentence. Prisoner will always be looking over their shoulder waiting to get shanked or raped. Why give them the easy way out.

Bryanisbest said:

---

No, suicide is a sin. Govt should not be involved in sin.

---

FJB says hi.