Should crime victims be able to choose punishments?

[ShyGuyInChicago]

On another forum I had a debate about the death penalty, and I read this comment on the Internet:

"I think it should be up to the family of the victim, Some may want these criminals to suffer in the lonely horrible prisons. On the other hand some may want "an eye for an eye" and to have them killed. They also may not want to risk the possiblity of the criminal escaping the jail. Everyone has a different opinion, and I believe the people should decide the fate of the convicted murderer, as the murderer decided the fate of their loved one."

I disagree completely because it would make the law a tool of retribution. Also such a thing is not needed because the judge will take the victim's family's wishes into account.

[Azunite]

Uhh, no.

They can simply say "Life sentence"

[Death]

Sounds like another way to pretty the legalised murder to me. So no, I think this is better left to judges as to help keep punishments consistent.

[KylieEatWorld]

Sounds like more of an excuse for America to be a little 3 year old who wants revenge.

[TheMatrix]

I am in favour of it.
They will have 2 choices, "Life sentence" or "Life sentence".

[Modus Operandi]

nope.avi

Crime victims are in no position to make a sound, rational judgement as to what the criminal's punishment ought be. That's why we have judges.

[Awesome]

No, unless they get to choose life sentence or death. Because some people just dont want to sit in a prison for the rest of their lives.

[Schizothemia]

I really just don't see how this makes sense at all. I mean while the American judicial system isn't perfect it's a lot better than other countries where all the leader has to say is to kill the person.

That's basically what would happen should the crime victim be allowed to choose the punishment. They simple aren't in a position to provide a fair punishment for the individual who did something to them.

That's why we have judges, to judge the appropriateness of the punishment (of course with other obligations as well.)

If this were to actually happen, then the American judicial system just become hired thugs so to speak and have a free pass to kill people.

Also, what if an individual were wrongly proclaimed guilty and the victim demanded the death penalty? Then an innocent person would have been killed before even being given the opportunity to challenge the decision and prove their innocence.

[TheMatrix]

No, unless they get to choose life sentence or death. Because some people just dont want to sit in a prison for the rest of their lives.
Then they would probably choose death, because that would be the easy way out.

[Continuum]

Uhh, no.

It gives victims an excuse to commit biased (but somehow justified) punishments. It should be left for the Judges to decide.

[Jess]

ummm no way. judges are supposed to decide the punishment, not crime victims.

[Unlucky_Leprechaun]

nope.avi

Crime victims are in no position to make a sound, rational judgement as to what the criminal's punishment ought be. That's why we have judges.

I agree completely....that says it all

[Sporadica]

well here in Canada we don't have the death penalty, got rid of it in 1976, but I do know of a case where Atlanta Thrashers hockey player Danny Heatley killed Dan Snyder in a car crash due to wreck less driving and he avoided prison time because Dan Snyder's parents spoke that prison wasn't necessarily and Heatley ended up with 3yrs probation (with exception for travel restrictions because of his career) a $20k fine to pay for investigation/clean up and had to make XXX number of speeches on driving safely.

[User Deleted]

I think that they should have the privilege to take death sentence over life in prison or vice versa. Fines and other punishments go to the judge to decide.