Should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be put to death for the Boston Massacre?

[NeverAgain]

Many believe that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should get life in prison, because otherwise he would get what he wanted from the beginning, and go to paradise. Many others believe that he should be put to death no matter his feelings toward it, as fairness to the law. You Decide, all of the options above are ones being discussed.

[Sumner 1868]

Life in prison with no parole.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If anyone should receive the death penalty, he should. That said, I don't care much which sentence he receives.

[dead0man]

He wants to be a martyr, so no, let him rot.

[ElectionsGuy]

Life in prison with no parole.

[Franzl]

Life in prison without parole.

One of the very few cases where a true life sentence with no chance of getting out is warranted.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Life in prison without parole.

One of the very few cases where a true life sentence with no chance of getting out is warranted.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I oppose the death penalty in all cases and I believe life in prison without parole would be much harsher punishment: no martyrdom and he'll be spending 23 hours each day in a small cell, as opposed to getting off easily.

By the way, if sentenced, he can only be executed by the lethal injection, as per federal law, so there other options are stupid.

[TNF]

Life imprisonment, because the class that runs the state has no moral authority to put anyone to death

[Njall]

Life in prison without parole.

One of the very few cases where a true life sentence with no chance of getting out is warranted.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

The guy is committed to killing people. I don't support the death penalty, but releasing him is just as insane as killing him in my view.

[Samantha]

Life imprisonment, because the class that runs the state has no moral authority to put anyone to death

[SWE]

Life imprisonment, because the class that runs the state has no moral authority to put anyone to death

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Agree with Antonio . I don't know the intricacies of the parole system, but I might raise first eligibility to 30 years if that's a thing. Probably doesn't matter too much though.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

The guy is committed to killing people. I don't support the death penalty, but releasing him is just as insane as killing him in my view.

If he hasn't reformed after 20 years, then he won't be released. But every person, even the most supposedly "evil", can change, and should be given a fair chance to prove they have reformed.

[Franzl]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

The guy is committed to killing people. I don't support the death penalty, but releasing him is just as insane as killing him in my view.

If he hasn't reformed after 20 years, then he won't be released. But every person, even the most supposedly "evil", can change, and should be given a fair chance to prove they have reformed.

I agree in >99% of cases, but after a certain point I don't believe it matters whether the person has reformed or not. There are certain crimes that simply merit actual life long punishment. I honestly restrict this to cases like Breivik or Tsarnaev, but I see no reason to care whether they've changed or not.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I guess I'm surprisingly very Christian in that regard, but I tend to believe that if anyone genuinely repents for their crime and actively try to do good, then they are deserving of forgiveness. In the end, it doesn't really matter, because I'm 100% sure Breivik will never repent, and probably Tsarnaev won't either. But, as a matter of principle, I think we must at least pay lip service to this possibility.

The only exception I would make is for crimes against humanity.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

The guy is committed to killing people. I don't support the death penalty, but releasing him is just as insane as killing him in my view.

If he hasn't reformed after 20 years, then he won't be released. But every person, even the most supposedly "evil", can change, and should be given a fair chance to prove they have reformed.

I tend to agree with this view. I don't believe everybody is fit to be released (such as Breivik and, probably, Tsarnaev), but everybody should get a chance to prove they're reformed, instead of contributing to overcrowding prisons. If not reformed and still dangerous, then parole should simply be denied (or, as in Norwegian law, period extended), as opposed to paroles granted in blanco, as in so many cases.

Some people just should stay locked up, but that's hardly a general rule.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Life in Prison with Parole after 20 years (which should be the maximum existing sentence IMO).

The guy is committed to killing people. I don't support the death penalty, but releasing him is just as insane as killing him in my view.

If he hasn't reformed after 20 years, then he won't be released. But every person, even the most supposedly "evil", can change, and should be given a fair chance to prove they have reformed.

Something this simple, where the system's preference is for parole but with an option to extend in extenuating circumstances rather than the other way around, would be a huge step in the right direction.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inject him with Buh-Bye juice.   

[H. Ross Peron]

He should be put to death by firing squad or guillotine.

[ingemann]

I prefer a live sociopathic and imprisond manchild who de-legitimise his own cause to a dead martyr. But it's not like I don't understand USA if they execute him.

[Cory]

I oppose the death penalty in all cases and I believe life in prison without parole would be much harsher punishment: no martyrdom and he'll be spending 23 hours each day in a small cell, as opposed to getting off easily.

[Beet]

If anyone should receive the death penalty, he should. That said, I don't care much which sentence he receives.

Well, a case could be made that a terrorist who kills 100 people should be put to death, but a terrorist who kills "only" 3 people is little different than a non-terrorist who shoots 3 people.