Alternatives to the Death Sentence?

Elegran
Hollydaze has already explained that FM = Forum Member - do keep up!!

I am walking away from this pointless argument discussion now.

Typos - "so that THEY do not offend again." and " We ARE NOT a prisons think-tank."

My laptop has developed an annoying habit of hopping back several characters if my wrist brushes the keypad (or perhaps just the chassis) while I am typing on the keyboard.

What is an FM? I don't know that one.

Hollydaze ^"I see little point in continuing this.^" I agree that there is little point in debating it without any suggestions for alternatives to life (not death) sentences. Many people more knowledgeable and experienced than us have presumably tried to come up with humane and safe ways of keeping serious/serial offenders away from potential victims and/or changing their ways so that do not offend again. I am not surprised that no-one has any answers. We ot a prisons think-tank.

I suspect you might have had more co-operation if you had not mentioned the death sentence at all (we don't have one in this country) and just asked what alternatives we could think of to life prison sentences without bringing in cryology - which requires the "customer" to be dead.

Thank you Ana - it is impossible to discuss if half the FMs don't seem to understand what has been said! Ah well, c'est la vie

Well, if no-one can think of anything to offer as an alternative to the death sentence (other than denigrating the work of scientists who could be providing a valuable healthcare system in the future should they succeed), I see little point in continuing this. Cryonics was not intended as the sole contender but just a starting point for discussion that was so far at the end of the spectrum that others may have felt more at ease posting their thoughts; even though Cryonics is a worthy subject in itself.

One other point: if FMs are going to comment, can you please make those comments factually correct. It is tiresome having to repeatedly post 'that is factually incorrect' (or words to that effect) and reading what is written would be a huge help (I just hope that those who continually misread the written word on here were not part of the teaching circle).

janeainsworth

"You suggested experimenting on prisoners in your OP. Hollydaze, when you put forward the idea of cryonics as a solution for longterm prisoners." You actually said in you OP What about cryonics as a solution for long-term prisoners who have no hope of release as they are too much of a danger to the public. You then said: It would be very interesting to hear you explain how you came to that conclusion. The explanation was implicit in my post. I'm at a loss to explain it more clearly or more interestingly for you.

None of your posts have explained your opinion that I was advocating experimenting on prisoners - you know why? Because I didn't say or imply it. I am also at a loss to know how to get you to understand that if you can't see it. However, kind soul that I am, I shall make one last attempt:

I said, in the OP, ^ if science discovers a way to correct their pathological behaviour traits, they would have the chance to resume life^ - note the word 'if' and the use of future tense with regard to successful outcome of the research?

Cryonics is still sci-fi ( even if there are films about it

Untrue:

'Cryonics is the low-temperature preservation of humans who cannot be sustained by contemporary medicine, with the hope that healing and resuscitation may be possible in the future'

Cryonics is happening now - do you think that they're going to suddenly abandon all research on it?

not endless incarceration but reform and rehabilitation

And how's that working out?

And those who have the temerity to express a contrary opinion are denigrated as not taking part in a discussion

No, only those who have been rude and ill-mannered have been negatively commented on. Sadly, some opinions are factually incorrect - such as your own.

Not as easy as Doctor Who seems to suggest, is it?

No idea, I've never watched Dr Who

Well, there's a problem—his contemporary family members and friends would be however many years older or dead. He'd be coming back to a lot of unknowns

Doesn't that sometimes happen with those who have served 30+ years?

So are we not allowed to talk about other countries, Soutra?
The OP does not say in Britain.

hollydaze
I said
"You suggested experimenting on prisoners in your OP. Hollydaze, when you put forward the idea of cryonics as a solution for longterm prisoners." You actually said in you OP What about cryonics as a solution for long-term prisoners who have no hope of release as they are too much of a danger to the public
You then said
It would be very interesting to hear you explain how you came to that conclusion.
The explanation was implicit in my post. I'm at a loss to explain it more clearly or more interestingly for you.

Hello Bags.

HollyDaze, I agree absolutely with your post of 15.22 today.

nfk, love the reference to bacon

Thank you Soutra. If only there were a Like button on GN! instead.

This seems to me a totally bonkers thread and please god don't let the DM get hold of it or they would think the old dears had really lost what few marbles they possessed
1) Cryonics is still sci-fi ( even if there are films about it . There are also films about little green men and Dr Who- doesn't make them true.)
2) We do not have the death penalty in this cozntry and I believe we also do not have indefinite sentences either but a "tariff" system as the intention is not endless incarceration but reform and rehabilitation.

So we are reading an argument between something which does not exist and domething which does not exist. And those who have the temerity to express a contrary opinion are denigrated as not taking part in a discussion but just spouting from their personal soapbox. <shakes head in despair>
There must be better ways of wasting spending one's time. Watching Montalbano for instance

Not as easy as Doctor Who seems to suggest, is it?

(Oh dear. Cured. Refrozen. My mind just slipped towards bacon!)

What if he couldn't be cured? He couldn't be refrozen. (Or she of course)

Suppose you were to freeze a criminal and then twenty, thirty, forty, howevermany years later the cure for his pathological behaviour traits were discovered and you applied the cure to him so he could carry on his free life where he left off, so to speak. Well, there's a problem—his contemporary family members and friends would be however many years older or dead.

He'd be coming back to a lot of unknowns. I reckon you'd need more than freezing and 'curing' of criminal behaviour. You'd need a lot of psychological help to adjust. Sounds impractical to me.

At the moment it costs a fortune to have one's life terminated if, through terrible disease, one cannot go on. And even then - dead is dead. Some people now pay a fortune to have their bodies frozen after death in order that one day in the future it may be possible to be resurrected. And maybe healed of their ills.

Assuming cryonics works, it doesn't seem right to have this as an option for criminals. It's almost a reward.

But at present the problem would be finding doctors willing to perform what is at present a death sentence.

If someone in America who has paid thousands for cryogenics then commits a crime for which he is to have the death penalty, what should happen? Which has priority?

To get into prison of course and get a cryonic sentence of course!!

(Sorry - it's just the way my warped mind sometimes works.)