Reply #105: Theoretically I could agree but the devil is in the details [View All]

[dmallind]

Who supervises this labor? How is that person protected? Who shares in this labor? How are they protected?

Now Jeffrey Dahmer (who I think deserved execution at the hands of the state, but that's moot and irrelevant) was brutally tortured and beaten to death by other prisoners on a work detail. His killer was also serving life without parole IIRC - pretty certain it was life anyway.

Now assuming you think even Dahmer should not have been killed, and with the understanding I am sure that that is just a prominent example of slayings in prison - some of people who are far less horrible than Dahmer and some of guards etc who are productive law abiding folks - how can we prevent that?

Again I would be fine with life without parole if there was a sure fire certain way - as certain as death - that prevents that person from killing again. If life without parole were uniformly adhered to and included solitary confinement with full restraints while around any other human being (despite what our histrionic friend implies MY safety is not the likely one endangered - the "rest of us" includes 6 plus billion people of which I am but one) then count me in. But that's just theoretical and incidentally unlikely to pass constitutional review. What life without parole really is is probable life, while surrounded by potential future victims.