Bill of Rights and death row inmates...

[Orsorum]

This is a question that's always interesting to debate... This article piqued my interest in the subject.

The US Constitution designates that all men are born with certain inalienable rights. To what extent do those rights apply? Obviously, in the case of death row inmates, their right to freedom of movement, etc, is lost - they lost that right when they committed (or allegedly committed) the crimes that got them where they are.

What rights are they afforded while they're still alive? Are they allowed the right to free speech? Freedom of religion, assembly, etc?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

 

[Atrail]

Rights are for law abiding citizens.
In jail they have the right to breath, eat, and poop.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Atrail
Rights are for law abiding citizens.
In jail they have the right to breath, eat, and poop.

That narrows it down.

Rationale behind it?

They lose the right to freedom of movement and how they spend their time - what about their health? Should they be afforded medical care? Does the extent of their allowance depend on the crime committed?

 

[Lucky]

disturbing article-the prison threatens the prisoners with punishment if their webpages that are maintained by a 3rd party are not taken down, but the 3rd party refuses? WTF kinda sh*t is that?

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Lucky
disturbing article-the prison threatens the prisoners with punishment if their webpages that are maintained by a 3rd party are not taken down, but the 3rd party refuses? WTF kinda sh*t is that?

Dunno. The article just got me thinking.

 

[Amused]

The only right a prisoner has upon conviction, Constitutionally, is the right to be free of "cruel and unusual punishment." (I know, could it be any more vague?)

All other rights are forfeited.

Later court decisions have ruled that being kept from one's religion is "cruel and unusual punishment."

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Amused
The only right a prisoner has upon conviction, Constitutionally, is the right to be free of "cruel and unusual punishment." (I know, could it be any more vague?)

All other rights are forfeited.

Later court decisions have ruled that being kept from one's religion is "cruel and unusual punishment."

Anything else at all?

 

[gopunk]

seems clear to me they're not allowed the right to free speech....

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: gopunk
seems clear to me they're not allowed the right to free speech....

Are they? Is there any precedent for this?

 

[0roo0roo]

sure why not? they can yell all they want in their cell.. as long as they are ready for an asswhoopin after

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
sure why not? they can yell all they want in their cell.. as long as they are ready for an asswhoopin after

 

[Need4Speed]

As far as I am concerned, you relinquish those rights when you comitt a crime. Since we are speaking of death row inmates, it can be assumed that they have comitted murder or some other similiar offense. Having just recently lost a dear friend by violent crime, I feel even stronger about this now.

These people do NOT deserve the same rights as we do, since they did not respect the rights of those they violated.

Furthermore, we spend we too much taxpayer money keeping these people locked up, just so that they can turn around and find a loophole in the system. Quite often, they have some much spare time and so many RIGHTS, that they practically become lawyers while in the system...

 

[jjones]

Rights are forfeited upon conviction of a crime. Amendment 13:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

 

This debate has been going on ever since the Constitution was written.
As times change,so do the veiwpoints and beliefs of the people.
Take a close look at the chain gang situation,it used to be fairly common to find prisoners working on the side of the highway,then after a long battle in the high courts,they banished that kind of work program.Now we see it slowly coming back in the southern states again.

My personal opinion on the matter,you commit a crime,you are convicted of that crime,you should lose all your rights except for several things ;

(1)Health care
(2)Food
(3)Bathroom facilities

Everyting else including free speech should not be allowed period.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Roger
This debate has been going on ever since the Constitution was written.
As times change,so do the veiwpoints and beliefs of the people.
Take a close look at the chain gang situation,it used to be fairly common to find prisoners working on the side of the highway,then after a long battle in the high courts,they banished that kind of work program.Now we see it slowly coming back in the southern states again.

My personal opinion on the matter,you commit a crime,you are convicted of that crime,you should lose all your rights except for several things ;

(1)Health care
(2)Food
(3)Bathroom facilities

Everyting else including free speech should not be allowed period.

It's true poeples veiws change and thus the rights afforded to the convicts change. Recent history seems to be more about punishment and revenge then getting these people to live in society again as productive members. The sentences get longer (three strikes ect) and nothing is really being done to ensure humane treartment. Prisoners are raped which makes some take retribution on the society which imprisoned him upon his realease. We should get back to basics with hard labor, time off for good behavior, citizenrey and ediquite classes, basic education, and most importantly protect them from one another... The main reason we have repeat offenders is because society has said we don't give a Sh1t about them so they really have nothing to loose by returning. Three meals, heath care and kicking back all day talking of scams with other inmates while society feels a temorary amout of releaf and takes comfort in the crimminal "paying" for his crime.

As far as food, If they grow it they can eat it. Teach them what its like to actually make something rather then destroy it. It would also teach them how to work with othersn (no-violenty) which seems to be the main reason crimminals are there.

Heath care should'nt be any better than what medicad pays and they should have to work to pay a partial premium.

 

[bGIveNs33]

I believe its the Declaration of Indepence that talks about unalienable rights.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
This is a question that's always interesting to debate... This article piqued my interest in the subject.

The US Constitution designates that all men are born with certain inalienable rights. To what extent do those rights apply? Obviously, in the case of death row inmates, their right to freedom of movement, etc, is lost - they lost that right when they committed (or allegedly committed) the crimes that got them where they are.

What rights are they afforded while they're still alive? Are they allowed the right to free speech? Freedom of religion, assembly, etc?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

They have right to a big hairy bunkmate named Bubba
They have the right to toss his salad
They have the right to mush and gruel
They have the right to a miserable life
If they choose to give up this right,
they have the right to a death of their choosing

All their rights cease to exist when they pull the trigger

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Rights of the criminal. Bull.

You left out a couple, Nitemare:

They have the right to save their butter.
They have the right to use it later.
They have the right to get on their knees.
They have the right to drop the soap.
They have the right to bend over the metal toilet.
They have the right to grab their ankles.
They have the right to audition for a position in HBO's Oz.
They have the right to scream for a guard, who in turn has the right to tell them to STFU.

Make that a new punishment. Instead of death, just forever send them on conjugal visits to the biggest, burliest men of solitary. Buck-naked, with their hands cross-cuffed to their ankles. Eventually they take their own life.

- M4H

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Zakath15
This is a question that's always interesting to debate... This article piqued my interest in the subject.

The US Constitution designates that all men are born with certain inalienable rights. To what extent do those rights apply? Obviously, in the case of death row inmates, their right to freedom of movement, etc, is lost - they lost that right when they committed (or allegedly committed) the crimes that got them where they are.

What rights are they afforded while they're still alive? Are they allowed the right to free speech? Freedom of religion, assembly, etc?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

They have right to a big hairy bunkmate named Bubba
They have the right to toss his salad
They have the right to mush and gruel
They have the right to a miserable life
If they choose to give up this right,
they have the right to a death of their choosing

All their rights cease to exist when they pull the trigger

What if you were convicted for a crime that you did not commit? people have been sentenced to death for crimes they did not commit before...

There are two part of the world where capitol punishment are used, one is the third world (and usually by primitive communities only) the other is?

 

[Zebo]

http://www.innocenceproject.org/

Has exonerated over 100 death row inmates. Only because postconviction DNA testing of evidence could yield conclusive proof of innocence. How many are out there wrongly accused? How many don't have DNA evidence to prove their innocence but instead were a victim of cicumstance? I don't know but if your executing innocent poeple something does'nt seem quite fair with the system.

And the threshold of evidence is much higher with capital cases. The other crimes must see an alaming rate of innocence which no lawyer ever pursues to appeal since on life is involved.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
http://www.innocenceproject.org/

Has exonerated over 100 death row inmates. Only because postconviction DNA testing of evidence could yield conclusive proof of innocence. How many are out there wrongly accused? How many don't have DNA evidence to prove their innocence but instead were a victim of cicumstance? I don't know but if your executing innocent poeple something does'nt seem quite fair with the system.

And the threshold of evidence is much higher with capital cases. The other crimes must see an alaming rate of innocence which no lawyer ever pursues to appeal since on life is involved.

You are so wrong, it is still the jury's decision, if they find him guilty, the sentence has to be death.... actually, a higher percentage of cases where death penalty would be considered if they lost again are appealed... (compared to the other cases)

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: SnapIT
What if you were convicted for a crime that you did not commit? people have been sentenced to death for crimes they did not commit before...

Thus proving again that the theoritical "Lifetime Sentence of Sodomy" is a better option. Also, "sentenced to death" and "executed" are two different things. I can't recall any famous examples, but I'm pretty sure someone was executed for a crime they didn't commit. Right?

- M4H

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
Rights of the criminal. Bull.

You left out a couple, Nitemare:

They have the right to save their butter.
They have the right to use it later.
They have the right to get on their knees.
They have the right to drop the soap.
They have the right to bend over the metal toilet.
They have the right to grab their ankles.
They have the right to audition for a position in HBO's Oz.
They have the right to scream for a guard, who in turn has the right to tell them to STFU.

Make that a new punishment. Instead of death, just forever send them on conjugal visits to the biggest, burliest men of solitary. Buck-naked, with their hands cross-cuffed to their ankles. Eventually they take their own life.

- M4H

Sounds like a plan to me

SnapIT - I'm sorry, but with DNA evidence and confessions that's all she wrote. Give them an option for quick death or life long torment. Have a gallows next to the jury stand even...I'm tired of wasting my taxes on paying for some murderer to watch cable TV, play bball, and file worthless appeals