Italian life prisioners want death penalty

[Torpedo Fodder]

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6707865.stm)

Italy inmates seek death penalty

Hundreds of prisoners serving life sentences in Italy have called on President Giorgio Napolitano to bring back the death penalty.

Their request was published as a letter in the daily newspaper La Repubblica.
Italy has almost 1,300 prisoners serving life terms, of whom 200 have served more than 20 years.
Italy has been at the forefront of the fight against capital punishment and recently lobbied the UN Security Council to table a moratorium on it.
But at home some of the country's longest serving prisoners want the death penalty re-introduced.

'Light into shadows'
The letter they sent to President Napolitano came from a convicted mobster, Carmelo Musumeci, a 52-year-old who has been in prison for 17 years.
It was co-signed by 310 of his fellow lifers.
Musumeci said he was tired of dying a little bit every day.
We want to die just once, he said, and "we are asking for our life sentence to be changed to a death sentence".
It was a candid letter written by a man who, from within his cell, has tried hard to change his life.
He has passed his high school exams and now has a degree in law. But his sentence, he says, has transformed the light into shadows.
He told the president his future was the same as his past, killing the present and removing every hope.

'Need for change'
Italy abolished the death penalty after World War II.
Under current laws, prisoners serving life can obtain the right to brief periods of release after 10 years and conditional release after 26 years of good conduct.
The Communist Refoundation party's senator, Maria Luisa Boccia, has proposed draft legislation to abolish the life sentence and replace it with a maximum sentence of 30 years.
The president has spoken many times about the need to change the sentencing regime.
But in his response to the letter, he said it was now for parliament and the government to deal with the prisoners' request.

this is certainly interesting, though I doubt it'll come to anything. In any case I see no reason to give these scum the easy way out.

[kurtz]

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6707865.stm)

Italy inmates seek death penalty

Hundreds of prisoners serving life sentences in Italy have called on President Giorgio Napolitano to bring back the death penalty.


The president has spoken many times about the need to change the sentencing regime.
But in his response to the letter, he said it was now for parliament and the government to deal with the prisoners' request.

this is certainly interesting, though I doubt it'll come to anything. In any case I see no reason to give these scum the easy way out.

Well how about it costs something like £30,000 p.a. to keep each inmate in the luxury they've come to expect. Hanging £5 startup cost for rope from DIY store.

Not to mention the abscence of recidivism amongst hangees:D

[fatty]

There are easier ways to kill yourself than a letter-writing campaign.

[Happy Times]

It seems life sentence is better than death sentence:hmm:

[SUBMAN1]

Sounds like propoganda to me

[Happy Times]

Sounds like propoganda to me

Yes, they want sympathy and to get out. They hate it there.
Good, life sentence rocks.:rock:

[Skybird]

I strictly oppose any rules that claim there is a right to prevent people from deciding themselves when they want to die or committing suicide, no matter if it's a doctor or a priest or a laywer arguing. Man has the right to decide himself wether he wants to live on, or not. So I would offer them the possebility to commit suicide if that is what they wish, by giving them the according tools or means that usually may not be available to prisoners. And if then they change their minds, the items can be taken away from them again.

Life sentence more cruel than death, so you want them to live, some of you argued - obviously you are wanting only one thing then: revenge. Okay then, so that's the way you are and feel - but don'T hide behind terms of justice and legal consequences then. Say that you do not care for a legal system, lawful penalty and conformity with constitutions then, and that bloody revenge, as painful as possible, is what you want.

[TteFAboB]

Since it's far more likely that the law is changed to a maximum sentence 30 years than a re-introduction of the death sentence, I wonder if this is aimed at achieving the first while pretending to ask for the second:

They want to die. But nobody is going to kill them. Here, I have found a compromise: you get out after 30 years and go commit a proper suicide, since it's disgracefull to force you to improvise by smashing your head on the wall or something. Of course, since you're no longer dying day by day, you no longer need to suicide once you're out. But fear not! You'll get killed by the victim's hired hitman.
:arrgh!:

[bookworm_020]

So there feeling blue about spending the rest of their lives in jail? What about the people who live with the life sentence of the loss of love ones or the injurys they suffered due to them? Death is easy, life is the hardest sentance.

[P_Funk]

So there feeling blue about spending the rest of their lives in jail? What about the people who live with the life sentence of the loss of love ones or the injurys they suffered due to them? Death is easy, life is the hardest sentance. Ah the old victim's rights routine.

Contrary to what you say I'm pretty sure that almost everybody gets over a person's death before they get over not being free. People put death behind themselves all the time and move on. But being incarcerated for the reamainder of your life, robbed of the human dignity to decide your own fate is a punishment that actually exceeds death in its horror. There have been too many revolutions and wars where people have died for freedom.

And the justice system isn't about the victim's families. Its about the crime. The punishment isn't about retribution on behalf of the agrieved. Its about rehabilitation or the protection of society.

[Torpedo Fodder]

Contrary to what you say I'm pretty sure that almost everybody gets over a person's death before they get over not being free.

That is one of the most callous things I've ever seen anybody declare. The murderer chose to kill their victim with full knowledge of the potential consequences. They damn well deserve to suffer a worse fate than their victim, or thier victims' family, who deserve the closure of knowing that the murderer will be punished. Like it or not the justice sisytme is in part about retribution.

Having said that, I wonder if some form of corporal punishment wouldn't be more for suitable for some lesser crimes rather than imprisonment, preferably something that inflicts the greatest level of pain for the least amount of physical injury: We really need to invent an agony booth.

[bradclark1]

I'm all for chain gangs for lesser crimes. At least something gets accomplished.
I'm all for life without parole in an 8'x10' cell now because I think it's a worse punishment than death.

[Skybird]

:huh: What's up here? Have I landed on the planet of the beasts? This thread should be renamed "Bring back the medieval witch torture"-thread. You surely do want to do your share to bring bible's hell to life on earth, eh? Hope the devil is paying you a good fee, then?

A legal system that is only about revenge, could be abandoned completely. Also, it does not deal with reason, but with lower emotions exclusively, and it only thinks in extremes. Emotions and extremism is a very bad combination.

Sometimes people who did saomething bad can change. Truely. But they wouldn't get a second chance from many of you. That's what makes you as cold-hearted as those that you claim to doom. I am not sure if there is really a difference between them, and you.

Some myths about statistics of crimes including killings have been linked to and shown several weeks ago, in a thread on death penalty. Also some statistics about how fallible legal proceedings can be. Without doubt it would be useless to put up all that again. It would be ignorred.

Some of you seem to demand even two eyes for an eye, and three teeth for a tooth. More grim than even the old testament you are, eh?

One guy once said in a movie that the whip doesn't make a bad man a good man, but that it turns a good man into a bad man. I'm sorry if you can't see why I quote that here.

[kurtz]

Not to mention the abscence of recidivism amongst hangees:D

I'm not out for revenge, just want them out of society and it's expensive to keep them. In fact if we whipped out there organs (humanely, please) they could help repay their debt to society.

Of course I'm not suggesting this for parking offences, amputations for them--kidding:D

[Skybird]

Not to mention the abscence of recidivism amongst hangees:D

I'm not out for revenge, just want them out of society and it's expensive to keep them. In fact if we whipped out there organs (humanely, please) they could help repay their debt to society.
You mean like they do in China, and did with hair and skin in the Third Reich.

[kurtz]

Not to mention the abscence of recidivism amongst hangees:D

I'm not out for revenge, just want them out of society and it's expensive to keep them. In fact if we whipped out there organs (humanely, please) they could help repay their debt to society.
You mean like they do in China, and did with hair and skin in the Third Reich.

Do you mean by that because it was done by those regimes we shouldn't do something. The Nazis were the first to build autobahns that doesn't mean no one else should. Thats a purely emotive argument.
The fact is we are getting to a point in the world where we will have to make choices about who gets resources I can't see that any point is served by using those resources on people who damage society.

[Happy Times]

:huh: What's up here? Have I landed on the planet of the beasts? This thread should be renamed "Bring back the medieval witch torture"-thread. You surely do want to do your share to bring bible's hell to life on earth, eh? Hope the devil is paying you a good fee, then?

A legal system that is only about revenge, could be abandoned completely. Also, it does not deal with reason, but with lower emotions exclusively, and it only thinks in extremes. Emotions and extremism is a very bad combination.

Sometimes people who did saomething bad can change. Truely. But they wouldn't get a second chance from many of you. That's what makes you as cold-hearted as those that you claim to doom. I am not sure if there is really a difference between them, and you.

Some myths about statistics of crimes including killings have been linked to and shown several weeks ago, in a thread on death penalty. Also some statistics about how fallible legal proceedings can be. Without doubt it would be useless to put up all that again. It would be ignorred.

Some of you seem to demand even two eyes for an eye, and three teeth for a tooth. More grim than even the old testament you are, eh?

One guy once said in a movie that the whip doesn't make a bad man a good man, but that it turns a good man into a bad man. I'm sorry if you can't see why I quote that here.

We are all capable of bad things. Havent you ever wanted to kill someone in anger?
The punisments have to be hard enough to stop most people from breaking the law.
Our system in Finland is based on the thinking that people can change. We have three time killers getting out after each killing, just to kill again. Something wrong with that too..:roll:

[Jimbuna]

In the UK we still have the death penalty for Treason....but it's never been invoked for years.
The problem we have is....life is exactly the opposite....some people are released after having served only 5 years.
Personally I couldn't imagine anything worse than being incarcerated in a small cell for the rest of my life.

[Skybird]

:huh: What's up here? Have I landed on the planet of the beasts? This thread should be renamed "Bring back the medieval witch torture"-thread. You surely do want to do your share to bring bible's hell to life on earth, eh? Hope the devil is paying you a good fee, then?

A legal system that is only about revenge, could be abandoned completely. Also, it does not deal with reason, but with lower emotions exclusively, and it only thinks in extremes. Emotions and extremism is a very bad combination.

Sometimes people who did saomething bad can change. Truely. But they wouldn't get a second chance from many of you. That's what makes you as cold-hearted as those that you claim to doom. I am not sure if there is really a difference between them, and you.

Some myths about statistics of crimes including killings have been linked to and shown several weeks ago, in a thread on death penalty. Also some statistics about how fallible legal proceedings can be. Without doubt it would be useless to put up all that again. It would be ignorred.

Some of you seem to demand even two eyes for an eye, and three teeth for a tooth. More grim than even the old testament you are, eh?

One guy once said in a movie that the whip doesn't make a bad man a good man, but that it turns a good man into a bad man. I'm sorry if you can't see why I quote that here.

We are all capable of bad things. Havent you ever wanted to kill someone in anger?
The punisments have to be hard enough to stop most people from breaking the law.
Our system in Finland is based on the thinking that people can change. We have three time killers getting out after each killing, just to kill again. Something wrong with that too..:roll:

Both extremes are bad - no matter at what end of the spectrum. In Germany, legislation certainly is far too forgiving, too well-meaning, too weak. I have experienced that myself in a very tragic incident years ago, that led to the death a loved one. Sure I had spiking emotions back then, and I still think the guilty one got off the hook far too easily. My demand for an acceptable ammount of justice has not been fulfilled. but I neither killed the court members, nor that bastard. I also wouldn't have seen him in jail for all the rest of his biological life.

C'mon all you guys, think twice of what you are saying here.

[Heibges]

There is a very intersting debate about Imprisonment vs Corporal Punishment in Heinlein's "Starship Troopers".

He argued that Imprisonment is more cruel, and less likely to deter crime than lashes at public square.

[Skybird]

Do you mean by that because it was done by those regimes we shouldn't do something.
Something? No matter what?

The Nazis were the first to build autobahns that doesn't mean no one else should. Thats a purely emotive argument.

You demand that it is done what your government and othe rwetsern governments critizises china for practicing since long. If I would have let you your way, than I see no more substantial argument that would allow me to attack the Sharia. Ethically, both practices are off limits for me.

And btw, building Autbahnen, and enforcing transplantation and extra-cruelly taking revenge in jurisdiction does not really compare. Justice has nothing to do with cruelty, a judge's job should have nothing to do with emotions of revenge, a law-code should not reflect such motives.

The fact is we are getting to a point in the world where we will have to make choices about who gets resources.
So may the strongest beast win? I use force only to defend me. Beyond that I refuse to accept needing to live in a jungle. That is simply not good enough a life for me - for I am more than just an instinct-driven, genetically programmed beast with a predetermined fate and no free will. I have a strong power and gift: the ability to influence most men for the good or the worse, and the freedom to decide if I want to forgive, or not. As Happy Times indirectly indicated, that better ios used with wisdom only, not blindly.

[Skybird]

There is a very intersting debate about Imprisonment vs Corporal Punishment in Heinlein's "Starship Troopers".

He argued that Imprisonment is more cruel, and less likely to deter crime than lashes at public square.
for lower crimes I may agree on some cases, although I have something different in mind: making people feel ashamed, or a combination of both. Biut there are significant cultural difference concenring shame, of course. Pillory someone who has stolen in a shop, putting him naked on display for two days and nights, in public on the marketplace and let people express their disgust of him in word and deed, may proove to be an effectice thing. Other societies like the traditional parts of the Japanese one have an internal code of honour that makes loss of honour a shame wiothiout needing such obious means to enforce that offenders feel ashamed - like is being seen in the suicide they just had. But for that being possible here, our western culture probably already is too immoral now. many people even find it chick to earn their money by making rodoiculous fools and total idiots of themselves. talking of implementing new standards of honour and shame probably is useless thing, then.

Seen from a behavioristic perspective, physical pain certainly is a very motivating stimulans. If it is compatible with this or that code of ethics, is something different. Brad's idea of chaingangs also is something worth to think about, it also includes the element of shame and being put on public display.

[kurtz]

In the UK we still have the death penalty for Treason....but it's never been invoked for years.
The problem we have is....life is exactly the opposite....some people are released after having served only 5 years.
Personally I couldn't imagine anything worse than being incarcerated in a small cell for the rest of my life.

Well..Friday night just back from the night out but...This treason thing, we hung Lord Haw Haw (is he in the radio pack?) and all he did was tell jokes right, but we've got these religious maniacs whot try to kill British soldiers abroad and we campaign to get them released from Gitmo, what's going on?

Again I reiterate it's not revenge, there's virtually no hope of rehabilitating criminals let's just tidy them away.

Bet I delete this and a few other post in the morning.

'Night all

[P_Funk]

Again I reiterate it's not revenge, there's virtually no hope of rehabilitating criminals let's just tidy them away. You say virtually. So then there is some hope? But its too hard isn't it to try at least. Lets just throw all these men's lives away because the value of human life can be weighed against the common will to be fair and moral. And if its too much work... f**k 'em.

Thats the problem with so many people. They just don't care or respect their own freedom. Its isn't a double standard where there is a brand of human being whom we can just dismiss as irrelavent or too much of a hassel. If we want the institutions of society to govern us then we have to be responsible for them. This isn't some laissez-faire economic scheme. You can't cop out and say that I don't want to waste the resources of our nation on people that you feel have become incompatible with society.

If we let the value of a man's life be qualified by the mistakes he's made and to then deny him the universal rights that he still is owed then we turn rights and freedom's into a thing that is not guarenteed but qualified by a narrow social judgement. A man is always a man, no matter the pain he inflicts or the crimes he commits. You don't torture him, you don't sacrifice him. It isn't every man has a right to live unless he's inconvenient to society. You always need to give a man a second chance or else you are as cruel as he is. You kill him anyway and sometimes he doesn't deserve to be locked away forever.

So many people ascribe to extremes for solutions. Extremism is what makes religion, politics, and economics fail. Balance and critical judgement is what makes these things last. You can't say "lets just" anything. You don't lump people together. Hasty generalizations are the stuff of lazy minds. Its hard to make the world work and keep it from being a jungle. People seem to think that its all supposed to be easy. Its not.