Should convicted murderers be allowed to have children?

[gopunk]

this is not where they are already pregnant, pretend they are in prison already, and they are asking for permission to either impregnate or get pregnant.

 

[b0mbrman]

Hmm...I don't think they *should* have children...but at the same time, I don't know if I hsould be allowed to decide it for them...

Then again, they definitely lose some rights after having killed someone...

 

[gopunk]

<< Hmm...I don't think they *should* have children...but at the same time, I don't know if I hsould be allowed to decide it for them... >>



well, it's just a hypothetical, i just want your opinion



<< Then again, they definitely lose some rights after having killed someone... >>



that's what i'm thinking... they clearly lose the right to move about freely, and in some cases, the right to live...

 

[Elledan]

Less than 1% of all persons who have once murdered someone in their life will ever do so again.

It can be assumed that those who committed the crime merely out of anger and did not plan to murder someone won't ever murder someone again. Some anger-management classes might be in order, though.
These can have children without problems.

 

[gopunk]

<< Less than 1% of all persons who have once murdered someone in their life will ever do so again. >>



interesting, i did not know that. now, is that because they're incarcerated, or is that stat for those who get out?

 

[Juniper]

Unless there is a murder gene found and proven, I think that they have the rights to have children.

Just wondering. What if the murderer is the last of his line of family line, is he allowed to do so? Something like Saving Pte Ryan...

 

[chibchakan]

<< Should convicted murderers be allowed to have children? >>



No. :disgust:




post count +1

 

[Elledan]

<<

<< Less than 1% of all persons who have once murdered someone in their life will ever do so again. >>



interesting, i did not know that. now, is that because they're incarcerated, or is that stat for those who get out? >>


This number counts for The Netherlands, and probably most European countries. As you might know, in (most) European countries the maximum penalty is around 25 years in jail.

This means that every 'criminal' is released unless they died in prison. An exception can be made for serial killers and similar 'big' criminals, who can receive multiple times the maximum penalty, or put (in The Netherlands) in a TBS prison, where they can be kept as long as the Justice department wants to keep them there.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

<<

<< Less than 1% of all persons who have once murdered someone in their life will ever do so again. >>



interesting, i did not know that. now, is that because they're incarcerated, or is that stat for those who get out? >>



Cause next time they know what they did wrong and won't be caught again.

P.S. Less than 1% of those murdered will ever kill someone afterwards

 

[Amused]

Where's the poll?

No. Unless, of course, they are released for some reason.

 

[dude]

The reason behind that number can be because:

1. They are so damn old when they get out they don't really have the strength in them to do it anymore
2. They never get let out

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

<< The reason behind that number can be because:

1. They are so damn old when they get out they don't really have the strength in them to do it anymore
2. They never get let out >>



Only if they're the one-time only type killers, the serial killers are set loose again within a week due to lack of evidence until they killed enough.

 

[jjones]

<< this is not where they are already pregnant, pretend they are in prison already, and they are asking for permission to either impregnate or get pregnant. >>


i'm assuming conjugal visits are allowed. in the case of a male con, why not allow them to impregnate their wife assuming she is not also a con? in the case of a female con, this is a different story because it then places the burden upon the prison system to handle the pregnancy. personally, i don't think so. a con has lost certain rights and combined with the inherent danger of prisons, the pregnancy of a female con would place an undue burden upon the prison relating to the health and safety of the unborn child.

btw, i don't know anything about conjugal visits and under what circumstances they are allowed. i didn't think for your average con in for murder that they are allowed.

 

[Jerboy]

<< this is not where they are already pregnant, pretend they are in prison already, and they are asking for permission to either impregnate or get pregnant. >>




No! :disgust:

They cost us enough money as it is. Whose going to pay for the consequence? We are.

 

[gopunk]

Unless there is a murder gene found and proven, I think that they have the rights to have children.
Just wondering. What if the murderer is the last of his line of family line, is he allowed to do so? Something like Saving Pte Ryan...

why? they do it in saving private ryan because those boys are fighting for their country... are we about to extend that perk to murderers (and no trite comments about soldiers and murderers, i know some of you are thinking it )?

i'm assuming conjugal visits are allowed. in the case of a male con, why not allow them to impregnate their wife assuming she is not also a con?

why should we? a.) i think it's easier to just keep them locked up, rather than go through the procedures of a visit, b.) we should be striving to make their lives hell, not accomodate their needs.

btw, i don't know anything about conjugal visits and under what circumstances they are allowed. i didn't think for your average con in for murder that they are allowed.

they were allowed for ted bundy :Q


just to clarify, i personally believe we shouldn't, but as an extension of the punishment, not to get rid of their genes or anything.

 

[ToBeMe]

But why stop there???? What about those convicted numerous times of drug abuse????????? Or rapists????? Child abusers???? Those found to have mental problems????

 

[gopunk]

<< But why stop there???? What about those convicted numerous times of drug abuse????????? Or rapists????? Child abusers???? Those found to have mental problems???? >>



i suppose, but i don't really want to go there, lest we get into some "slippery slope" debate. i just find it shocking we let ted bundy procreate.

 

[GasX]

NO - you should have to get approval to have children. Anyone not white, married, english-speaking, protestant, drug-free and employed would be refused permission. Unlicensed babies would be sold by the state at auction. Their parents would be imprisoned.

 

[gopunk]

<< NO - you should have to get approval to have children. Anyone not white, married, english-speaking, protestant, drug-free and employed would be refused permission. Unlicensed babies would be sold by the state at auction. Their parents would be imprisoned. >>



are you then equating non-whites, et al, to murderers?

 

[GasX]

That was just my over the top way of saying it is not our place to decide who procreates. I DO take issue with paying to raise and educate the child of a woman who has a child while in prison.

 

[Yeeny]

What they do if they get out of prison is one thing. But to allow it while they are serving their sentence? No way. You took away someones loved one, and someones light in their life. You have no right to have that in yours, while you are paying your debt. If you get out, then you paid your debt, and if you can go on to be constructive, then thats wonderful. But until then, you need to lose certain rights, and having a child is one of them.

 

[gopunk]

<< That was just my over the top way of saying it is not our place to decide who procreates. I DO take issue with paying to raise and educate the child of a woman who has a child while in prison. >>



yet it is our place to decide who is free and who isn't?

btw, you could look at it this way, if we stopped letting them have conjugal visits, the murderers are deciding for themselves whether they procreate, when they commit the murder.

 

[GasX]

<< btw, you could look at it this way, if we stopped letting them have conjugal visits, the murderers are deciding for themselves whether they procreate, when they commit the murder. >>

I could and I do.

 

[skace]

While in prison? No.

Those that have gotten out of prison? Yes.

Why do I say 'no' to while in prison? Not because of the genes or anything else like that. Simply because I don't think we should have to cater to every needs of someone who is a convicted murderer.