Depends on the crime and the family. It’s good reassurance they’re safe from that person and they can’t hurt anyone else. Some might find it to be unnecessary bloodshed and only make the victims feel more traumatised.
It’s one of those where you can never say for sure, as some people would argue that getting revenge is getting justice, and for those emotionally attached would probably feel safer with the person gone.
However, the family may not see it as enough, they may feel that escaping life through death is unjust and not enough for the criminal, and may want something like a full life sentence with no parole. Or they may take a more moral stance, arguing that they don’t want more blood on their hands than there already is; some people have also said before that they’ve only felt more empty afterwards, and that it brought them no satisfaction or comfort.
Humans are weird, but this is always an interesting thing to think about
You have to ask the family. There’s no blanket answer. There are countless stories of victim families speaking on behalf of the inmate and speaking against them.
Depending on the severity of the crime and how much pain the family is in.
id say if the family feels like they can’t move on because of the trauma or the criminal’s sentencing is too lenient then yeah I’d say it deserves to be an option but definitely a last resort if therapy doesn’t work and or the grief is just too much for the family to start the healing process.
Generally, in cases of murder or rape, the victims and their families are comforted when the perpetrator receives a very harsh punishment. It makes them feel like they matter and like their suffering isn’t just being ignored.
In contrast, when a perpetrator receives a punishment that’s too lenient, the victim can feel crushed. For an example, look at the Brock Turner case where a rapist received a slap on the wrist. His victim said she felt victimized all over again.
Personally, I oppose the death penalty in practice, not in theory. There are people who deserve to die, and it’s not inherently immoral to kill a guilty person. However, the risk of accidentally killing innocent people is too high. I hated that Leopold Loeb got paroled and died free, but I hated it even more that Joe Arridy was killed.
Comments
Depends on the crime and the family. It’s good reassurance they’re safe from that person and they can’t hurt anyone else. Some might find it to be unnecessary bloodshed and only make the victims feel more traumatised.
It can be. It doesn’t undo the harm that was done and it still isn’t moral to kill people in cold blood.
No
It’s one of those where you can never say for sure, as some people would argue that getting revenge is getting justice, and for those emotionally attached would probably feel safer with the person gone.
However, the family may not see it as enough, they may feel that escaping life through death is unjust and not enough for the criminal, and may want something like a full life sentence with no parole. Or they may take a more moral stance, arguing that they don’t want more blood on their hands than there already is; some people have also said before that they’ve only felt more empty afterwards, and that it brought them no satisfaction or comfort.
Humans are weird, but this is always an interesting thing to think about
If we want a simple yes vs no answer, then yes
Life without parole is a far worse punishment imo
You have to ask the family. There’s no blanket answer. There are countless stories of victim families speaking on behalf of the inmate and speaking against them.
Depending on the severity of the crime and how much pain the family is in.
id say if the family feels like they can’t move on because of the trauma or the criminal’s sentencing is too lenient then yeah I’d say it deserves to be an option but definitely a last resort if therapy doesn’t work and or the grief is just too much for the family to start the healing process.
Generally, in cases of murder or rape, the victims and their families are comforted when the perpetrator receives a very harsh punishment. It makes them feel like they matter and like their suffering isn’t just being ignored.
In contrast, when a perpetrator receives a punishment that’s too lenient, the victim can feel crushed. For an example, look at the Brock Turner case where a rapist received a slap on the wrist. His victim said she felt victimized all over again.
Personally, I oppose the death penalty in practice, not in theory. There are people who deserve to die, and it’s not inherently immoral to kill a guilty person. However, the risk of accidentally killing innocent people is too high. I hated that Leopold Loeb got paroled and died free, but I hated it even more that Joe Arridy was killed.