Samira wrote:
Quote:
Personally, if it can be proven without doubt, I say cut off his dangly bits . It's often hard to prove something without doubt though (this case seems pretty cut and dried- although what do you then do with Garridos wife, who was in on the act too!).
Well, again, if it's a choice between killing some woman he just raped or potentially being castrated, the average rapist probably isn't going to hesitate to do away with the witness. So depending on what our goal is, draconian punishments are not necessarily more effective.
I'm pretty much an eye for an eye kind of person, so if it could be proven he killed her, then sure, snuff him. Save a fortune on the annual prison spending. My logic only works in cases where there is no doubt - for example, witnesses or evidence that can't be disputed.
I think prison in general is too cushy (In the UK, I don't know much about USA prisons). Why should people who are a menace to society have free TV, while I have to pay for a TV licence every year . Why should they have access to a gym, while I can't afford to join one, so instead excerise merely by running, walking, or the occasional drunken weightlifting with baked bean cans .
Why should they have access to free education, when I, a busy mother, have to turn down a college place because I simply can't afford the travel costs and additional childcare costs.
In the UK, we've actually had people admit to re-offending so they could get back into prison where life was easier. At least in the UK, something needs to be done to make prison a truly awful place to be, as it stands, it's really not much of a deterrent.
I don't know much about prisons in the states . From what I've seen on some TV programmes, they seem to be a lot more basic, and a lot tougher.