Sarah_Jayne

should they be resuscitated?

Today in the UK we have the story that Ian Huntley, a man that killed two little girls in a case that was very high profile here, overdosed in his cell on pills he had stockpiled. However, he was discovered and resuscitated. He isn't serving a death sentence as we don't have that in the UK but even if he was the same question stands.

I am of two mind. My first idea is, of course, that the world certainly wouldn't be worse off without him. However, the other side of me doesn't want HIM to beable to make the choice of when he dies and get out of the punishment of his sentence. Afterall, those little girls didn't have control over their death so why should he?

So, should a prisoner who committed a serious crime be resuscitated if they try to kill themselves?

Doctor Dre

Jesus christ let him die this is just costing the state money and he's gonna be there for ever anyways.

__________________

2HousePlague

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre Jesus christ let him die this is just costing the state money and he's gonna be there for ever anyways.

No. There is value in the fulfillment of justice, and therefore value in that life.

2hp

__________________
tada!

madawgz

yeah, he should be kept alive, to rot in that cell....he must get the shit kicked outa him daily

__________________
TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.

Webby

Mmmm... tempting

Throw this one at you Sarah - Whoever is responsible for the operation of govt facilites - could be prisons, mental health facilities, whatever - is it up to them to make decisions like that? The docs would prob say it's against their code of ethics etc. Once you start with the thin edge of the wedge - how much further will it go? Into hospitals?

Sure.. could be a prison "rule" of no recovery procedures - but that's gonna catch out a lot of people with very varying backgrounds - some could just "break" over imprisonment for fairly petty crime.

See what your saying - and valid point, but smell it's not up to any prison staff or loading this on docs to decided based on a certain type of crime. A judged passes folks over for confinement, - nothing more, nothing less and it up to the govt to support them to a standard. Smell it's something we have to go along with irrespective of the crime (tho that's a kinda unusual one).


PS Another thought - nothing to do with serious crime in particular - more triva. Can't remember the exact deal, but was told by US law that convicted persons also have other "rights" removed - stuff like voting and something to do with a license to drive a car? (Not that they'd be doing much driving )

Always wondered who made these rules?? Judges normally send someone down for whatever - and confinement supposed to be the punishment - nothing else (apart from jail rules). Just thought this strange.

Where I am now - all prison population get, eg.. voting rights etc as normal and the sentence is that of confinement and nothing else. (They also get a very low repeat offender rate - but that may be more down to the crap jails )

And... PPS Amusing side - personal "rights" and stuff like individual privacy seems to come before all else - part of the Constitution. But the funny side to that is the justices will not permit any government officer to inspect personal data (apart from crime stuff) since this is "an invasion of privacy rights of an individual. So... this was also the reason the govt can't have personal taxation because no taxation officer would be permitted to inspect tax filings

__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

Sarah_Jayne

well, a decision has to be made ..you either keep them alive or let them die. Either way it is a choice to be made.

Sarah_Jayne

Ian Brady is another one...he is trying to starve himself to death and they are force feeding him. Again, I have no problem with that evil man being dead. However, he is a control freak and being able to make the choice of when he dies would be just that - him having one last act of control. He is an evil beyond most other evil people..fuck letting him go out on his own standards.

SpaceAce

This is an easy question to answer, ESPECIALLY if it happens in the United States. If you don't do everything you can to save his life, the local, national and international media will be all over the story like flies on shit. The people in charge and the entire system will be indicted as heartless and cruel. Everyone will say not trying to save the man's life shows how barbaric the nation is and that it's an indictment against both the government and the people.

This is a no-win situation but the backlash for just letting the guy die in custody simply isn't worth it. Do your best to save his life and then your conscience is clear. Just imagine standing over the guy and watching him gasp his last breath because you don't feel like saving a murderer. Then, two weeks later, DNA evidence overturns the case. Now you've basically murdered an innocent man. It's not worth that risk, either.

SpaceAce

reynold

Death will only shorten his suffering. Let him spend the rest of his life in jail.

Sarah_Jayne

Yup, it is pretty much the same case in the UK. The fallout from not trying to save him would be worse than it would be if you saved him.

XRatedX

I think that the answer to that question is more obvious that it seems on the surface. I think you HAVE to resuscitate them, regardless of how much I think that particular guy should die. One reason is because you cannot pick who the prison is required to resuscitate and who they are not. Some people in prison are put there for things that I don't even disagree with, like for smoking weed. I'm not even biased with that one cuz I generally don't even smoke weed, but if someone wants to they should be able to I think. That's a whole other story, but what if someone is in prison for something ridiculous and they aren't given proper medical treatment?? If i went to prison for smoking weed and was being fucked in the ass every day I might (at that time) think it's better to be dead knowing that I had to take another year of it otherwise. Heck what if you are falsely accused of something and found guilty??? That happens all the time. If that happened to me I might try to kill myself. Prison is a bad place and it fucks up your head. I would not be surprised if anyone in prison tried to kill themselves regardless of why they are there or how they got there. You either give reasonable medical to everyone in prison or you give it to nobody. This means, as far as I am concerned, you give it to everyone, which means that sometimes people that (by some peoples' opinions) deserve to die get medical care too. Sometimes you have to take the bad with the good and that's just the way it is.

__________________
ICQ - 10026419
AIM - JeremyUCSB

Webby

Mmmm.. evil guy and agree - he's one of these people with a touch of evil and a manipulative control freak personality - dangerous combination.

What are these people fussing over? Brady and Huntley? Someone needs to kick their ass down the corridor back to their jail cell

__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

Webby

Overall - inclined to agree XRatedX - ya can't pick and choose.

Another aspect - that's a doc's job - not any rights of prison management (dunno if it's true, but undestand from the law side, they are usually dumb as shit anyway) and doctors have a moral/ethical responsibilty to keep folks alive - and not based on the track record of the patient.

__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

bizarredollars

I really can't decide which would better... him being dead so we are not paying to keep him in prison... or him being forced to serve his sentence as punishment, knowing that he is going to have to go through the rest of his life in prison, with little or no hope of release. I don't really care if he lives or dies, but suicide would be the easier option (for him) - and perhaps he shouldn't have the priviliage of an easy way out?

__________________

[email protected]
icq: 205-252-550

cheekycherry

Every day he spends in prison will be like living in HELL. The other inmates will make sure of it. I say make him serve his sentance and then let him commit suicide the day before he gets out.

$5 submissions

Hmmmm, interesting policy. Should the institution treat him the same way as other criminals who are similarly situated (but didn't commit the exact same crime). It becomes an institutional parity issue. Should all inmates get equal protection/rights or do others have 'less rights' by dint of their crimes?

I would say yes. Once we start drawing arbitrary lines regarding institutional care then there's a lot of fine grade minutiae and hairsplitting that ensues. Just on the basis of a COHERENT institutional care policy, I say yes.

__________________

notabook

Bring him back from death as many times as possible, giving him tastes of what he did to those he wronged. Living in prison with the crimes he did is certainly no picnic; yeah it may cost the tax payers more money by keeping him alive but why let him have the easy way out of death?

__________________

Webby

notabook:



Sheesh.... Wot a sig notabook - Hate, venom, racism and vitriol is alive and well on GFY

__________________
XXX TLD's - Another mosquito to swat.

Why

what kind of question is this? really!

of course not. no one that tries to kill themself should they took thier own life. it was thiers to take. let them be gone from this world if thats what they wanted.

keeping them alive just to kill them makes you a sick twisted fuck. better to let them have more blood on thier hands then you.

notabook

You know it! Elron has that problem of putting his foot in his mouth, just felt the need to share the wealth. That said, normally it would just be a sig about murdering cats or burning books or something, I like this one just as well.

__________________

scottybuzz

no, noone can get to him, but in the paper, it was said he had some pretty bad food.

__________________
$$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

Sarah_Jayne

Well, there isn't the death penalty in the UK so he wouldn't be killed.

I am just asking it because it is something be talked about a lot here today because of this case.

I am personally against the death penalty for the reason that innocent people have been put to death. However, I have no problem in letting a guy who killed two kids - who trusted him as he wroked at their school, no less - rot in jail.

As I said, I am of two minds but I know in the end he has to be looked after as best medicine allows.

jerseygto

hummm wow!! theres a lotta good points in here!!! even with the dna one!!! should they bring him back yea! because he was trying to kill himself anyway taking the easy way out then you put him in solitary pitch black darkness till he dies naturaly maybe feed him once a day just make his life a living hell...now if he had some kind of illness no!! cause he will suffer just like those girls did knowing that he was gonna die an cant do anything about it

__________________
Promote http://www.pecash.com/cgi-bin/click1.cgi?14216 http://www.coolwebstats.com/cgi-bin/...iliate=1282672 www.webfantasy69.com

Paul

This case is a tough one because he is such an evil fucker, he raped 2 little girls and then disposed of the bodies and pleaded insanity to try and get a lighter sentence.

As much as it would please me to see him dead, it pleases me more to see him being kept alive and having to suffer.

I'm disgusted that he was given anti depressent pills though He should have to face his crimes and guilt on a daily basis 100% sober

Suicide is the easy way out and he shouldn't be allowed to take that choice

Tom_PM

He should be kept alive until he dies of natural causes.

I believe the death penalty is NOT the harshest penalty.. Life without parole is.

That guy clearly chose to END his life behind bars, releasing him from his penalty and suffering..

__________________
43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.

godisdead

Toughie. The basic question here would be: Now that he has killed two girls, does his life still belong to him, does he still have the right to his own life. It's already restricted to a high degree as he has to sit in prison all day.
Nice question. I'll have to think about this for a while. My current but rather unreflected view:

Given that he decided to end his life, it's basically his choice. Even though he's a sick fuck who should be severely punished. But I still think he has the right to commit suicide.

__________________

Sarah_Jayne

I think sometimes they are treated with things such as anti-depressants in an attempt to make them less dangerous. In general though I am okay with him living in a horror of a mind.

I hope it is making Maxine Carr think a bit today too.

Paul

They are in prison, I don't understand how anti-depressants can make them less dangerous. IMO it's just a method used to make the whole situation "easier" on their mind and I do not agree with this. They should be 100% sober with ZERO help, they are not the victims here they are the criminals.

To be honest though, although this stuff disgusts me it does not surprise me. We live in a society were criminals get treated better than the tax payers.

If she had any sense she would start a new life for herself in another country, far far away from the UK

dcortez

From a practical standpoint, they are less a burden on society if left to the natural consequences of their self-inflicted suicide attempt.

Unfortunately, society is so hung up on wanting to exact its own punishment (ie. the penal system removes your freedom to kill yourself as well) that absurdities like suicide watches for death row inmates prevail.

That's getting silly.

detoxed

how do you know he wasnt framed?

69pornlinks

prisons are a business...if he died there goes X amount of money...why people don't realize this

__________________

Paul

Most people don't realize a LOT of things

As they say, ignorance is bliss

nAtuRaLbEautY

yeah, i guess so...
let him suffer his sentence

__________________
Prime Outsourcing│offshore solutions│manual labor│staff leasing│full time employees
starting at $695.00/month=managed and dedicated | icq: 309570461 | live chat

Sarah_Jayne

Firstly, he admited it.

edgeprod

That's how I feel.

I hate the money it costs us, but I do like the idea of suffering.

Gillespie

The whole idea of punishment is based on the fact that the subject should be discouraged about doing the same thing again if he's ever in a position where he can repeat the crime.

Now, there really isn't any point in punishing him because he will be stuck there for life. I mean, he wil never do the crime again because he won't have the chance since he's in there for life.

So, is there really a point in punishing someone who will never get out? What lesson are you teaching him? Yes, he fucked up in the past, but with a sentence for life, there really isn't much he can do to redeem himself. You cannot fix a man who is in jail for life, because there is no point in it to start with.

__________________
Blue Design Studios
My choice for web design.
Click this to see why.

Get a REAL host. Try JaguarPC.

294-659-259

edgeprod

Not really. I think that's a fallacy that a lot of people subscribe to. People also say that the "punishment" deters other people from doing crime.

Both, likely, have very little effect.

Punishment is being meted out for the sake of punishment, I suspect.

Peaches

Resuscitate him. He must be miserable in jail. Let it stay that way.