Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Quick question about death row

Announcements Posted on
Post on TSR and win a prize! Find out more... 10-04-2014
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why does a death row exist?

    Why don't they just execute all those on the death row and be done with it? What exactly are they keeping them alive for...? They've gotten their punishment already, so why don't they act on that punishment? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I'm just wondering why people spend years and years on death row, instead of just getting executed for their crime.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I guess they keep them alive because it has been reported that the anticipation of death is worse than death itself.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M4LLY)
    I guess they keep them alive because it has been reported that the anticipation of death is worse than death itself.
    reported by all those dead criminals?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    No, by psychologists who studied death row inmates. It has also been reported that gathering psychological data from dead criminals is somewhat difficult as well.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Part of the point is that it allows time for appeal.

    Also, as someone else has said, the punishment is in the waiting for execution, not the actual execution.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    because of appeals I think
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Okay, thanks for the responses. I guess they keep them to give them the right to appeal and yeah perhaps the anticipation of punishment can be pretty difficult too. I think they should have a pretend execution every year or so just to keep their fear of getting killed alive.

    Many death row inmates have been in jail so long they don't even care about death..in fact they probably wish for it.
    • 60 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    Okay, thanks for the responses. I guess they keep them to give them the right to appeal and yeah perhaps the anticipation of punishment can be pretty difficult too. I think they should have a pretend execution every year or so just to keep their fear of getting killed alive.

    Many death row inmates have been in jail so long they don't even care about death..in fact they probably wish for it.
    That's called torture, and it can, and does, cause people to go insane from psychological trauma.

    Even if you can't access some human feeling or compassion, you ought to realise that we live in a civilised country and are party to human rights laws. This is not North Korea.

    BSMS didn't assess you for empathy (or common sense), did they?
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    That's called torture, and it can, and does, cause people to go insane from psychological trauma.

    Even if you can't access some human feeling or compassion, you ought to realise that we live in a civilised country and are party to human rights laws. This is not North Korea.

    BSMS didn't assess you for empathy (or common sense), did they?
    I don't think my suggestion is torture and I think it's kind of easy for you to comment that something like that can cause insanity, but it's entirely unfounded.

    What about prisoners who are kept in segregation/isolation/solitary confinement? This is actually a regular practice for many high profile killers. Additionally, many prisons isolate prisoners for misbehaving while incarcerated, for attacking other inmates/guards, etc. Do you also believe this to be torture? Being alone in a small dark room with zero social contact can also drive a person insane...

    http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1898
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rascacielos)
    Part of the point is that it allows time for appeal.

    Also, as someone else has said, the punishment is in the waiting for execution, not the actual execution.
    I'm amazed that you'er the only person to say this they're allowed three appeals and also it leaves time for them to gain either a pardon from the state's Governor or the President also time for new evidence proving their innocence to surface. "The Confession" by John Grisham is a book which exploits flaws in the system that appear to be caused by people much like our OP that are over-eager to kill a man that has(/those that have) been sentenced to death
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCaledonian)
    I'm amazed that you'er the only person to say this they're allowed three appeals and also it leaves time for them to gain either a pardon from the state's Governor or the President also time for new evidence proving their innocence to surface. "The Confession" by John Grisham is a book which exploits flaws in the system that appear to be caused by people much like our OP that are over-eager to kill a man that has(/those that have) been sentenced to death
    Well the way I see it is...if they are just going to spend a bunch of years in prison anyways...then just remove the death penalty. Whether to have capital punishment or not is such a huge debate in society, and it's all worthless if the actual death row inmates are just chilling for multiple years.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    Well the way I see it is...if they are just going to spend a bunch of years in prison anyways...then just remove the death penalty. Whether to have capital punishment or not is such a huge debate in society, and it's all worthless if the actual death row inmates are just chilling for multiple years.
    I agree the death penalty should not exist however since it does then I believe that a maximum amount of time should be given to prove that person innocent but I don't think it's really long enough I believe the average in Texas is 7 years thats hardly a long time (Compared to life imprisonment) and the inmates are hardly "chilling" they're facing their own mortality
    • 60 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    I don't think my suggestion is torture
    That's because, and I choose my words carefully here, you are not the sharpest tool in the shed.

    Why don't you put yourself in the criminal's shoes for a moment. Setting aside the fact that they are a criminal who has committed certain acts in the past, at their core, they are a human being just like you and I. With the same emotions, the same uncertainty regarding what comes after death, the same (completely natural) fear of death and a natural desire to stay alive. These are base human instincts and emotions. Unless the criminal is emotionally dead (or you're really stupid), you won't argue with me on this bit.

    So...to take this human being, with all these emotions...and to actually tell him or her that they are about to die and then to take them somewhere and force them to mount a stool. To put a noose around their neck. To ask them if they have any last words. Consider what emotions are going through this person's mind at this precise moment. Again, unless you're very stupid, the answer should be fairly obvious. To lead them right until that final moment of life, to make them believe that this is it...to cause such a colossal build up of emotion and fear within them, and then to actually take it away at the last moment...well, of course they'll be emotionally damaged from the stress of it all. Who wouldn't be? If you say you wouldn't be, you're a ****ing liar.

    And if you're still unable to think outside your reactionary little box, please ask yourself, if this isn't torture...why is it that only countries like North Korea and Iran use these methods...in other words only totalitarian dictatorships?

    and I think it's kind of easy for you to comment that something like that can cause insanity, but it's entirely unfounded.
    Erm...read above, if you're still not able to comprehend just what kind of psychological stress the impending fear of unnatural death puts on someone, you're somewhat emotionally deficient.

    But fine, here you are:

    http://www.iranhrdc.org/english/news...l#.T62y-sXoDbM

    http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/259/18/2725.abstract

    http://phrtoolkits.org/toolkits/ista...ce-of-torture/

    There are many more accounts of mock executions written by political prisoners and so on showing that even years on they are still affected by what they went through. Do a search yourself.

    What about prisoners who are kept in segregation/isolation? This is actually a regular practice for many high profile killers. Additionally, many prisons isolate prisoners for misbehaving while incarcerated, for attacking other inmates/guards, etc. Do you also believe this to be torture?
    How can you not see the difference between keeping someone in isolation (for a set number of days which are specified) and making someone believe that they are about to die an unnatural death?

    Being alone in a small dark room with zero social contact can also drive a person insane...
    Indeed, I agree...which is why authoritarians do use this as a method of torture. Of course, where this happens I'm be against it...because I am fundamentally against the idea of torturing prisoners.
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCaledonian)
    I agree the death penalty should not exist however since it does then I believe that a maximum amount of time should be given to prove that person innocent but I don't think it's really long enough I believe the average in Texas is 7 years thats hardly a long time (Compared to life imprisonment) and the inmates are hardly "chilling" they're facing their own mortality
    Well they're just facing punishment for their crime. I have empathy for them in the sense that I don't envy their position/life/future (or lack thereof) however I have no empathy for them in terms of their serving their sentence.

    I know Democracy or someone else is going to jump in and question my abilities to be a doctor (lol it's funny how ad hominem is literally all they have against me), but I don't believe that doctors are "supposed" to have universal empathy because that can start superseding their decision making abilities and studies have also shown that it can lead to emotional attachments to the patient.

    As a doctor, I would treat a person on death row to the best of my ability. But does that mean I will feel sorry for them that they will be dying soon? No. Am I required to as a doctor? Nope.
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    ~
    This is all just a giant appeal to emotion.

    Also, you are trying to make it seem that I suggested regular torture for these inmates. Wake up every day...have a mock execution..go about the rest of your day...next day...repeat...

    That's not what I said at all. Also, it seems our definitions of torture are at odds here.

    I think in the world that you live, any type of threat against the prisoner can be seen as torture. In your highly idealistic mind, it seems that if anyone suggests a type of threat against the prisoner in order to get them to behave or follow rules...you automatically see it as torture.

    You do realize that by your logic, threatening to lock away prisoners, threatening to put them in solitary, threatening to punish them for bad behaviour, etc, etc can ALL be seen as torture.

    How exactly do you plan on containing the world's prisoners and keeping them in line then?

    On a side, I will say this: in an ideal world, you are correct. Such actions should not be taken. However, wake up...we don't live in an ideal world. A certain level of threat and fear of punishment is necessary to keep people in line. Don't come here acting all politically correct and lecturing me on what is torture and what isn't. I am quite clear on those concepts thanks. Your definitions of what actually constitutes torture are quite flawed.

    As an example, I can show you studies too which show that MERE imprisonment ALONE can lead to insanity. So by your logic, we must also stop imprisoning criminals right? Cause..well it's torture.

    http://www.manoneileen.com/2011/02/2...vs-insanity-3/
    • 60 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    This is all just a giant appeal to emotion.
    Yes, that's right, JAMA is actually an emotional diary :rolleyes:

    Also, you are trying to make it seem that I suggested regular torture for these inmates. Wake up every day...have a mock execution..go about the rest of your day...next day...repeat...

    That's not what I said at all. Also, it seems out definitions of torture are at odds here.
    :nah:

    http://www.apa.org/news/press/releas...rrogation.aspx

    I think in the world that you live, any type of threat against the prisoner can be seen as torture. In your highly idealistic mind, it seems that if anyone suggests a type of threat against the prisoner in order to get them to behave or follow rules...you automatically see it as torture.
    Don't confuse matters and don't attempt to change your position. You did not suggest this as a method of enforcing rules, you suggested it because in your own words, "I think they should have a pretend execution every year or so just to keep their fear of getting killed alive".

    You suggested it because you wanted to scare them ****less, which is pretty sadistic and abhorrent. Don't attempt to give your sadism greater meaning, at least have the guts to stand by your warped views.

    You do realize that by your logic, threatening to lock away prisoners, threatening to put them in solitary, threatening to punish them for bad behaviour, etc, etc can ALL be seen as torture.

    How exactly do you plan on containing the world's prisoners and keeping them in line then?

    On a side, I will say this: in an ideal world, you are correct. Such actions should not be taken. However, wake up...we don't live in an ideal world. A certain level of threat and fear of punishment is necessary to keep people in line.
    LOL wut? We need mock executions to keep prisoners "in line"? Truly bizarre...last I checked the UK was doing fine without resorting to your fascist concentration camp methods...and you didn't address my point from before, why is it that the only countries which feel the need to keep their prisoners "in line" using these methods are all despotic dictatorships?

    Don't come here acting all politically correct and lecturing me on what is torture and what isn't. I am quite clear on those concepts thanks. Your definitions of what actually constitutes torture are quite flawed.
    Lol, you really aren't very sharp are you?

    PS, the APA and the UN disagree with you, it is torture:

    http://www.apa.org/news/press/releas...rrogation.aspx

    So don't patronise me again.

    Finally, I can show you studies too which show that MERE imprisonment ALONE can lead to insanity. So by your logic, we must also stop imprisoning criminals right? Cause..well it's torture.

    http://www.manoneileen.com/2011/02/2...vs-insanity-3/
    Erm, the conclusions of the Zimbardo study weren't that prison = insanity. Read it again.

    Mere imprisonment alone can cause insanity in some cases, I'm well aware of this. However, the goal of imprisonment is not to torture the inmates (I'm talking about the ethical and legal definition of torture here). The goal of mock executions is this. And furthermore, the emotional impact of a mock execution is on general much greater than simply being imprisoned. This is especially true in a country like the UK where prisoners are not treated badly on the whole so prison is not as awful as it would be in some less developed areas of the world. There is no compassionate method of mock execution, nor does it serve any rehabilitative purpose.
    • 2 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    Why does a death row exist?

    Why don't they just execute all those on the death row and be done with it? What exactly are they keeping them alive for...? They've gotten their punishment already, so why don't they act on that punishment? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I'm just wondering why people spend years and years on death row, instead of just getting executed for their crime.
    As has been pointed out, they are there while they exhaust all their options for appeal. This can take years--the average is 15. The intention is not to make them suffer as they wait; this is an unavoidable consequence of giving them such extensive rights to appeal.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCaledonian)
    I'm amazed that you'er the only person to say this they're allowed three appeals and also it leaves time for them to gain either a pardon from the state's Governor or the President also time for new evidence proving their innocence to surface. "The Confession" by John Grisham is a book which exploits flaws in the system that appear to be caused by people much like our OP that are over-eager to kill a man that has(/those that have) been sentenced to death
    I recommend "The Innocent Man", also by Grisham. It's a non-fiction account of a man who was sentenced to death for a crime he didn't commit. If it were not for him being on death row for such a lengthy amount of time, he, an innocent man, would have been executed. It took 11 years after a shoddy trial (the "evidence is laughable) and conviction for Williamson and the man also imprisoned for life alongside him to be exonerated.
    • Thread Starter
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    ~
    When you evaluate my argument, or any other argument for that matter, don't just see the suggestion itself, but also acknowledge the rationale given right next to it. I did not say mock executions should be conducted because it's a great way to rehabilitate prisoners or to get them to confess or because it's a good thing to do or because sadism is nice or anything even close to the stuff you are attributing to me. My rationale was quite simple really: to keep the fear of their punishment alive.

    You are ignoring the second part of the statement entirely, concentrating only on the first part, and making judgements on me based on that part alone.

    Additionally, it doesn't really matter (in this argument) what the conclusion of the experiment was, it's the findings that are important. In your first post, you said that mock executions can lead to insanity and for this reason you abhor it and say its torturous. Fine. I showed you another way which can also cause insanity (whether it is the primary purpose or not is irrelevant...we're concerned with its effects). In your view, because something may result in insanity or mental duress, it must be avoided. Under that logic, even imprisonment should be abolished. Your only response to that was that the primary purpose of imprisonment is not torture. Well that's not the point because your initial argument was that mock executions can cause insanity and are thus torture. It seems you've diverged from that and are now throwing APA and UN at me.

    Again, let me reiterate, under ideal conditions I wouldn't be saying such things and you'd be absolutely right. However, in the depraved world we live in a certain level of fear of punishment is necessary. If a person has been sentenced to death, then the crime they have committed has been deemed worthy of said sentence. Why must the inmate be provided the sufficiency of mere imprisonment when the gravity of their punishment is death? Also, keep in mind that I am not advocating this due to some sadistic pleasure in seeing torture. Keep my original rationale in mind...I only advocated it as a means to remind the inmate of their crime and subsequent punishment. Anything you attribute to me beyond that is your own creation.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .eXe)
    Why must the inmate be provided the sufficiency of mere imprisonment when the gravity of their punishment is death? Also, keep in mind that I am not advocating this due to some sadistic pleasure in seeing torture. Keep my original rationale in mind...I only advocated it as a means to remind the inmate of their crime and subsequent punishment. Anything you attribute to me beyond that is your own creation.
    Why do you assume the 'guilty' party is actually guilty ?

    Your idea of 'kill them and get it over with' cannot work in the real world.

    Imagine for a moment that you, an innocent man, have been wrongly convicted of a crime.

    Thanks to people like you, you are not provided time for appeal and you are marched straight of to your death.

    The reason people remain on death row is NOT because prison officials derive some joy from staying executions but because of these lengthy appeals.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: May 20, 2012
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.