Right to death

[billy]

the thing is you keep saying we, i'm talking about me, and my opinion.
why show we give entertainment, and believe it or not the guy is allowed to buy designer trainers out of his prison wages.
we (society) don't put people in prison to teach them a lesson though they can get courses, they're put away because it's a last resort, and it is a punishment. and a punishment for a crime committed is also classed as revenge, they call it justice but it's revenge. it's making someone pay the piper. i'm not saying cut his tongue off, i'm saying it's what i would do were i in charge. ii'd realease half of those in prison and keep many in there till they die, without any creature comforts what so ever. brady would be one of the latter, minus his tongue and possibly his hands. but thats just me.

[heslopian]

The "we" I'm referring to is society. I'm just trying to imagine a society where people like Brady are subjected to lifelong psychological torture. Keeping serial killers away from the general public for the rest of their lives to me isn't about revenge but about protection; protecting other potential victims. In the case of a car thief or a wife beater, someone whose crime won't keep them inside until they die, it is I suppose more about punishment, but punishment for a useful end. When you smack a child for swearing at the dinner table it isn't because you want revenge on them, even though it is a punishment, but because you want to teach them a lesson. You want to teach them how to behave in civilised society. People like Brady, however, have reached a point where they can't be trusted to play a part in society ever again, so we remove them from it.
If you want to live in a world where people's hands and tongues are removed, kept naked in cells and tortured, take a time machine back to the middle ages, when you could also be subjected to such punishment for holding a certain religious belief, having an affair, being gay, or not saluting your commanding officer at exactly the right moment.
I'm not saying you're wrong for having the opinion you do, I'm just saying I strongly disagree with it.

[Leanne]

Jack, I think you're missing one vital point.

Jail is not about protecting anyone from anything. It's a punitive measure. Punishment -- the consequence for using free will to break the laws of society. Without consequence, there is no deterrent. This man knew exactly what his punishment would be should he get caught. He was mentally disturbed, but not irrational or stupid. He knew, and he chose. He still knows.

And he gave up his right to be treated as a member of society when he broke those laws. Some may say he gave up his right to be treated as a member of the human race, so appalling were his crimes. Do not torture him, certainly -- but don't allow him the right to make a single choice for himself, ever again.

[Touchstone]

Jail is not about protecting anyone from anything. It's a punitive measure.

That's very short-sighted. Unfortunately it's a view that is far too prevalent.

As galling as it may be to watch our taxpayer dollars being spent on helping people who have harmed society, it is far more effective in the long run both in cost terms and in 'net societal good' terms to treat jail not as a punishment but as a chance to rehabilitate people.

Remember that the vast majority of those who enter prison come out again. Piss on them (figuratively) for as long as they're in there then not only have you failed to do anything useful which might help them avoid causing society trouble in future but you've embittered them and made it more likely that they will do so. It's basic psychology. Watch any pet training or supernanny show (or think about how you've raised pets or children if you have any) to see that encouraging behaviours you want to see repeated is far more effective than attempting to discourage behaviours you don't want to see.

For the genuine lifers, treat them humanely because, if you don't, you're worse than them--hypocritical as well as inhumane.

[billy]

i agree with leanne and with you

i think while it is punitive many inmates can also be taught a trade, how to fit into society, why their crimes were wrong.
so much so that they come out and become acceptable members of society. the junkies can be weaned of drugs and given help, the thief can also be helped as well as the violent cons.

that said, people like hindely should never be released and as such needn't be taught a trade, needn't be given education. he's already been diagnosed as never being able to fit into society. nothing can be done for him that would be a benefit to either him or society.
as such his sentence is purely punitive. he is beyond rehabilitation. while most cons can gain something positive from a prison sentence, some such as hindley can not.

[Leanne]

As galling as it may be to watch our taxpayer dollars being spent on helping people who have harmed society, it is far more effective in the long run both in cost terms and in 'net societal good' terms to treat jail not as a punishment but as a chance to rehabilitate people.

Yes, that's why there are sentences of differing lengths for a whole range of offences, and why a custodial sentence is imposed only on those who are deemed to require one -- in order to deter them from reoffending, since they initially had little regard for consequence. It is true that many who find themselves imprisoned deserve all possible opportunities to better themselves and be released as productive members of society.

Before you go calling people hypocrites, you might just like to learn to read properly. I have not advocated any inhumane measures, nor have I once complained about the expense of properly running a prison system.

We are discussing a single case here -- unless you truly believe that all prisoners are not individuals who deserve to be treated as their unique circumstances, histories, personalities and prospects require.

[Leanne]

Watch any pet training or supernanny show (or think about how you've raised pets or children if you have any) to see that encouraging behaviours you want to see repeated is far more effective than attempting to discourage behaviours you don't want to see.

As any parent knows, you can only use positive reinforcement if you witness behaviours that you want to encourage -- and you can't ignore those you want to discourage.

What opportunity for positive reinforcement did Brady give us?

"Look, it was probably not a good idea to kill all those kids, but at least you shared it with a friend."

[Touchstone]

I doubt that very many people actually get rehabilitated in the prison system.

I agree. And that's a big problem. It's because it is politically very hard to devote taxpayer dollars to rehabilitation when the general public is baying for blood.

But the mob is mindless and the consequences:

Most prisons function effectively as "colleges of crime", and the graduates usually get in touch with each other after they are released.

predictable.

[billy]

off topic. for those not like brady...if only a small percentage end up being able to fit into society then it's worth it. if only a small percentage of junkies are helped to stay off the stuff it's worth it.

back on topic. as far as brady is concerned i can't help but feel inhumane towards him. i think sometimes just has to be inhumane. for inhuman crimes

[kath3]

I think he should be given a bed, a reasonable diet and some form of entertainment to stave off madness. That doesn't mean I think we should spend money buying him Jimmy Choo shoes and food from the Savoy. A and C in the reasons you put forth to justify torture are the same. I'm not trying to justify his actions Billy. Of course if we did cut his tongue out he'd have been asking for it, but that doesn't mean we should do it. Think of it how you like but causing intense physical and psychological pain to someone like Brady is revenge; you're doing it to please yourself, not to help anyone. I don't want to live in a world where the authorities can exact such brutality on criminals under the guise of justice. Otherwise where does it end? We’ll end up back in the dark ages where you could be executed for stealing a loaf of bread.

You have a much bigger heart than I do Jack, and I appreciate your reasoning, and to a great deal agree with ya. I too believe that criminals deserve all the needed help to be rehabilitated. But, for the sick, twisted individuals such as this guy my mercy is short lived. While I would not want to inflict the same brutality that he inflicted on his innocent victims, keeping him alive, housing/feeding/clothing, and providing medical care is not in my heart for him. If this were to happen to my child, my emotions would plead for his suffering. But as you say ... we're doing it to please our self, not to help anyone. I would definitely want him put down, to never again enjoy a single shred of life.

@ Touchstone: from my experience as a child and as a parent myself, a good crack on the bum for bad behavior is far more effective than a pat on the back for doing something good ... and I am by no means suggesting that all bad behavior warrants corporal punishment, just saying there are times when it is more useful than just positive reinforcement.

[Leanne]

from my experience as a child and as a parent myself, a good crack on the bum for bad behavior is far more effective than a pat on the back for doing something good ... and I am by no means suggesting that all bad behavior warrants corporal punishment, just saying there are times when it is more useful than just positive reinforcement.

Politically incorrect and absolutely true, Kath. Now wait for the bleeding hearts to come baying for blood.

[addy]

He was found guilty of a horrendous act... under the state and society he is no longer a free man. His life is no longer his to do whatever he wished, at least not completely.

Unless he's suffering from some kind of painful and debilitating terminal disease, it's hard to make this count as euthanasia (which would be very clearly humane). He's simply demanding that the state honor his wishes.... and frankly they don't owe him shit.

[Touchstone]

He's simply demanding that the state honor his wishes.... and frankly they don't owe him shit.

Excellent point. Mentally competent or not, those convicted of crimes are (and should be) given a sentence not a menu.

[srijantje]

i don't understand the request,if he wants to die why doesn't he simply top himself?

[kath3]

He probably has trouble when it comes to his own pain and suffering.
A needle would be quick and painless.

[billy]

plus, people like brady need an audience. once myra was gone and he was convicted, the public became his audience.

[Touchstone]

He's in a psych ward, isn't he? And he's asked to die. I suspect he's being watched pretty closely. They probably don't give him scissors or long pieces of rope.

[billy]

he was and prob is, i'm not that well up on the case.
he supposedly has the power to influence people.
i'd say he's fairly smart and knows how to play the system
it probably easier to handle him in there. while he's probably on watch
it's not that hard to top yourself if you've a mind to. a shirt could do the trick.
he most likely just wants a less painful way out of his sentence or has a need to be heard.