Why don't we use non lethal method rather than death penalty?

As alternative to death penalty (I am against) ...It would be so much better to surgically render the convict unable to commit further crimes by surgical means such as rendering the criminal blind and/or amputate hands, render crippled etc. The idea would be not as a punishment (therefore cruelty is not a factor) nor would it be unusual compared to the crimes but appropriate measure to protect society, Also it could be voluntary by the convict ...he/she would go free having left only enough function to care for themselves and contribute to society able still to work in some capacity to pay their own way. How dangerous could a previous criminal (for example a sex offender/murderer) be if they were now legally blind (near blind) having one hand left with only a thumb and little finger, with legs surgically weakened (most muscles surgically removed). Also the remaining hand could be branded along with the convict's forehead not to mention having genitalia removed entirely. This person could still function enough to care for themselves but would be free (and no longer a financial burden on the prison system) Justice without the death penalty...my conscience is clear as a juror or citizen...victim's rights groups get a high level of satisfaction etc etc ...what do you think?

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    So, you're against killing people because "it's mean".

    But maiming people is just fine with you?

    You're messed up. Seriously, get help.

    It's a terrible idea.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 years ago

    Not bad - You got every liberal on the planet PO'd

    And in addition, You PO'd every conservative as well.

    The Liberals are horrified at the idea of crippling, maiming or blinding some anti-social misfit to keep him from repeating the crime.

    The conservatives are horrified because the ways the laws are written in this country, not only would said social misfit be eligible for every form of entitlement, but they could sue the daylights out of the government for doing it - and win!

    Good Job - you came up with a bad idea everyone can hate

    • Login to reply the answers
  • James
    Lv 7
    6 years ago

    Considering all criminals are anti-social, and as anti-social behavior is an emotional disorder, why don't we require, as a judgment by the court, the criminal receive therapy. Even MORE, the person(s) responsible for the creation of the emotional disorder be charged with an appropriate crime. I'm tired of hearing about little kids being bullied to suicide. And, the bully is excused for his expression of his freedom of speech. Some day, we are going to demand our kids have a right to live AND have a right to WANT to live.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Dave
    Lv 7
    6 years ago

    I think anyone who was blinded or maimed in any other cruel way would beg to die ? Your ideas sound like the most extreme forms of Islamic Sharia law where they do things like this.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 years ago

    What the hell? Against death penalty but for mutilation and torture? If you ask me we should just throw them all in the nearest volcano, that way we get them off our hands and appease the Gods who will bless us with a bountiful harvest.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 6 years ago

    I like you idea.

    Instant death is too good, they should be tortured

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.