Death sentence. Yes or no?

[SvennoJ]

fory77 said:

>Kill 10 people on purpose somehow.
>Death sentence: Life ends quickly, but you get a last meal before that.
>Life sentence: Live meh life in shit prison, rape/be raped, small chance of escape, there's bound to be some sort of entertainment in cell, so it's not that bad i guess. You might as well be living in a gangster neighbourhood (only with a lot of police/guards)

In conclusion: Instead of instantly killing them or letting them live their lives in prison (which sometimes ends up being better than life before) just let them be tortured everyday for the rest of their lives in a cell and let them rot - just so that there's a message being sent to the more "sane" potential murderers.

Fuck, i think i just cut myself on my edges.

Now look at the wrongful conviction rate, and imagine yourself being tortured daily while innocent. Still sounds good?
What about the life of the torturer, seems like a sane job to torture people?

Wait a minute, FBI hires hackers to test security, prisons should employ sadists to torture serial killars. Brilliant.

Btw Gitmo costs 2.8 million per year per prisoner. But they do get tortured and rot in their cells.

The death penalty is pretty expensive too
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
Each death penalty case in Texas costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years.

Make prisons self sustaining, let the inmates work for their food and small comforts. And if it turns out to be better than your own shitty life, then why not let people in without having to commit a crime first. If it generates money instead of costing it, sign your freedom away and join prison life.