It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is The Absence of Suicide Platforms in prisons a Violation of Self Determination?

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 08:23 PM
Dear America; I believe the death penalty in your country (as it exists) is largely pointless…
There are moral problems like the fact that (however unlikely) a mistake is always possible in human justice; or the fact that someone may reform themselves (mentally or morally).
But what I don’t understand is why do so many people want a dead body when they support the death penalty? There isn’t very much you can do with it; I suppose the head could make a good football (used to happen in some ancient cultures) but the body is always buried or incinerated so you can’t even do that.

Alternatives to the Current Death Penalty…

1: Donate prisoners to medical research. This would be like a lethal injection where the first needle is something that puts you to sleep. But what happens afterwards might be a series of new cancer drugs, which could save both human and animal lives. After all assuming we can be near 100% certain someone really is guilty of absolute evil; then surely it would be constructive to try to save lives, perhaps even tens of thousands of lives by granting life to others who did not choose their illness, at the expense of those who forced death upon victims who did not choose their fate.

The trouble with this first idea is that it would require rewriting your constitution as it specifically states people should not be subjected to cruel or unusual punishments. Then again I suppose if someone sentenced to death can choose a humane and quite usual death sentence like hanging, or medical research then you have not subjected them to anything unusual or cruel.

2: The state builds purpose built suicide platforms which prisoners can jump of.
Obviously for very clear moral reasons these platforms should not be available to drug addicts or the insane, because both of these people suffer a lot in their own minds, and even drug addict has imposed their illness they cannot control it’s effects like cravings and addictions (if they could then crime would be a lot less overnight nationwide).
Besides if the insane or drug addicts really want to kill themselves there are (in my opinion unfortunately) plenty of e.g. bridges with which to do so.

The great advantage about the last idea is that firstly the state never kills anyone and secondly that it’s a lot faster than death row which can take 20 years.

Well does anyone have any other alternative ideas?
I look forward to what could be a very good debate.

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 07:46 AM
Liberal: have you ever noticed how DESPERATE criminals are to live?

Have you listened to their lies?

Have you noticed the appeals they launch?

Have you seen them blame their crime on everyone and everything else, rather than admit to OTHERS, let alone themselves, that THEY are responsible and are guilty?

Have you noted that regardless of the often lengthy sentences imposed on them (sometimes 30 or more years) that they nevertheless persist in existing, persist in lodging appeals, persist in marrying, insist (as in the case of Ted Bundy for example) upon procreating whilst incarcerated in order their often diseased genes will continue after them? And they wait, for 20, 30 or more years, for their chance to re-enter society.

In movies, criminals sometimes claim they would die, if possible, in order to 'repay' their debt to their victims and society.

But in real life ... ?

In real life, they lie like the devil. They will say and do anything if it will grant them their liberty or evan a few more hours of existence.

Just as they lie according to script when their case is before the parole board.

I think you might have a higher estimation of criminals than is justified, in the case of murderers, child rapists, serial killers and other such freaks of nature.

Suicide platforms? Well, fortunately they wouldn't be terribly expensive to construct, because I suspect they wouldn't get much use.

As to donating themselves to science: in the case of serial killers and paedophiles, perhaps this may have some merit and may possibly provide science with partial answers.

The bodies themselves would be valueless though: medical research has stockpiles of bodies received as donation and those of the homeless.

Personally, I'd rather see the problem tackled at the start, before monsters such as murderers, child rapists and kilers and serial-killers get the chance to harm anyone at all.

Psychiatrists and scientists have been credited with saying that the same 5 to 10% of males cause problems throughout life. They are the criminal element. Their life of crime commences at a young age. As juveniles, they usually commit 'small' crimes such as petty theft, breaking and entering, bullying, arson, etc. By the time they reach maturity, they already have a long criminal record and go on to spend stretches of time in jail.

Such individuals (generally male) are a drain upon society. Until relatively recently, scientists claimed such anti-social individuals possessed double X chromosomes.

Then the liberals (zionist led) insisted this anti-social element was the result of poor parenting, lack of education, understanding, opportunity. Triumphantly, the liberals -- swallowing spin fed them by Frankist lawyers and Frankist behavioural scientists -- claimed that sociopathy was caused by childhood abuse.

Ergo (according to the liberals and Frankist lawyers) paedophiles had been themselves sexually abused. They claimed child-abusers had themselves been abused in childhood. Etc.

And it worked like a charm ! While police kept control over their justified emotions of outrage, killers and paedophiles and child abusers walked free --- often to commit the same crimes as soon as opportunity presented itself.

Yet take a look around. Which sectors of society are MOST often the victims of violent crime. Yes, that's right: women and children.

Yet it is men who are far and away the largest statistic regarding perpetrators of violent crime. And no -------- very often they were NOT themselves childhood victims.

For example: young man brutally raped the daughter of his de-facto wife while she was out of the house for a short time. The attack was SO brutal, grown men (police, ambulancemen, police) WEPT when called upon to give evidence. The child's hips had been BROKEN by her rapist, in order he could achieve greater penetration.

Do you imagine that child screamed? Yet the rapist ignored the unimaginable pain and damage he caused that child ------- in order he could sate his momentary lust.

The rapist enjoyed normal sexual relations with his de-facto wife (the mother of the child-victim).

Yet he WOULD not control his lust for the half hour it took for his de-facto wife to return to the home. Instead, he raped a tiny baby. That child had such massive internal injuries, her grandmother stated that it would have been better had the child died.

Now we come to the trial. The rapist's Frankist lawyer (is there any other kind, any longer?) INVENTED a past-history for his rapist client.

The lawyer claimed his client had been sexually and physically abused in childhood. The lawyer claimed his client therefore believed child abuse was normal, acceptable. The lawyer also claimed that BECAUSE of the abuse he'd suffered as a child, his client had a diminished appreciation of others' pain and was stunted, emotionally. The lawyer claimed his client had never been able to establish a normal relationship with adult women because he still had the mind of a child and 'related' to children more than to adults. Etc.

The jury listened. They'd been programmed --- via innumerable Frankist publications, tv shows, etc. --- to accept that child abusers/rapists WERE that way because they had themselves been abused/raped in childhood. Simplistic. And for that reason, it makes sense to the simple Sheepies.

BUT ----- evidence was presented to the court which PROVED beyond doubt that the brutal child-rapist had enjoyed an extremely privileged childhood. In fact, he'd been the golden child within his wealthy family. No expense had been spared on him. He'd been sent to the most prestigious schools, for example. And far from having a 'stunted' intellect, the rapist (as evidenced by his school reports, etc.) had a HIGHER than average IQ and had EXCELLED academically and at sports.

The child-rapist had been popular with his peers. He possessed superior communication skills. AND --- he'd enjoyed NUMEROUS intimate relationships with adult members of the opposite sex and had lived on a number of occasions in de-facto relationships. He was regarded as a playboy by women with whom he'd had relationships. They all testified to the court that the child-rapist had performed 'normally', sexually.

The child-rapist's family members informed the court that he had never been sexually or physically abused.

Continued next post

posted on Feb, 3 2007 @ 08:02 AM
The rapist was unable to offer any substantiation of his lawyer's claim that he'd been sexually or physically abused as a child or teenager.

The rapist was well-built and good-looking, charming, accomplished. He was an avid sportsman and had taken part in equestrian competition, white water rafting, etc. and was well-employed.

In short, he was Mr. Above Average.

Yet he brutally raped a tiny baby, despite what must have been her ear and heart breaking screams.

THEN he lied and clawed and fought for the right to get back out onto the street !

He was incarcerated, although no doubt he's walking the streets again now.

Suicide platform ?

He would regard your ideals as belonging to an idiot.

He has no intention of surrendering his life.

He was outraged that anyone should be able to deprive him of his precious liberty !

So, rather than offer violent criminals the option of surrendering their lives via suicide platform AFTER they have taken and ruined OTHERS' lives, I wish instead that 'science', 'church' and 'State' would grow some balls and abort them BEFORE they were born.

It would be a simple matter for scientists to ascertain which foetuses were amongst the ' 5 to 10% '.

That same 5 to 10% impose a massive burden on society. Why should society be required to WASTE its resources on an unwanted criminal element ? If given a choice, I would certainly vote to have potential criminals aborted.

And it would mean society would be spared the expense not only of violent crime and its effects upon society, but also the expense of supporting violent criminals in jails. It would also spare society the expense of constructing unused Suicide Platforms !

As an afternote: some years ago, I read about an elderly nurse who'd spent virtually her entire career caring for newborns in a large NY hospital.

When she died, she left behind a series of notebooks, in which were noted names and dates of birth. Later notations in the books concerned the criminal careers of those noted in the books.

Apparently, when a young nurse, the woman had passed along a corridor and had stopped to peer into a cot containing a child which had been born only shortly before.

Expecting to see a sweet infant face, the nurse had recoiled in shock, because the child in the cot glared at her with what she claimed was sheer evil.

So disturbed was she, that she made a note of the child's name and the date.

As the years passed, the nurse continued to add names to her book. The names belonged to all those children (out of many thousands of 'normal' babies) who had struck her as bearing an aura and expression of evil, of violence and hatred.

When she retired, she spent her time tracing those children, who were by now adults. They invariably had led life as criminals.

After her death, investigators who checked the nurse's notes, said she had been wrong about a child only once, in all those years.

posted on Feb, 4 2007 @ 07:59 PM
It sure is great I guess to consider them less than human, disposable waste. You probably think its better them than those poor rabbits or something. I feel sad for you

new topics

top topics

log in