Should convicted felons get hospice care?

Simple question. Some liberal bleeding hearts want to provide expensive hospice care to convicted felons who are on their death bed – on YOUR dime. Yep, you the taxpayer will soothe the felons last days and hours of death.

How do you feel about that?

More importantly, I wonder how the victim’s family feels about paying for the scum that killed/raped/etc their family/family member? Full time hospice care – now for murderers!

Sometimes I think liberals are going too far. I think the convicted criminal should suffer as a final punishment. To hand hold a cold blooded killer to ease his pain on taxpayer money is a total shame.

Everybody has the right to health care; death bed or not; felon or not. They’re still citizens of the state.

I’m getting bored of Vanguarde threads… I see a new thread and think maybe theres an argument for this..and it’s not.

Syneil answered it. /thread

Why do taxpayers have to pay this? It would be cheaper not to provide hospice care.

Are you arguing that they cease to become people once they are in prison? Because that’s the only reason I can think of for justifying denying them the same healthcare rights of normal citizens.

I don’t see what the big fuss is. I would rather provide care for a dying felon in my own country then send the money overseas to kill other people.

Originally posted by FuzzyBacon:

Are you arguing that they cease to become people once they are in prison? Because that’s the only reason I can think of for justifying denying them the same healthcare rights of normal citizens.

Well, yes. They become convicted felons. They lost their right to vote. To me that means they are dead. They are not people in my mind anymore.

We already know your mind isn’t working quite right; forgive us for not taking your extremist opinions very seriously.

Extreme actions get things done FAST.

Slow actions gets things done SLOW.

We are all so concerned about human rights that we are choosing the rights of one person over the rights of a species to live.

I’m going to have to gulp kind of agree with Vanguarde here.The guy that brutally raped and murdered three young girls then roasted their livers and had a Sunday brunch with his family doesn’t deserve my sympathy or my tax dollars. I don’t think much money is lost there (I’m not sure how many convicted felons are in a deathbed). But I can see how Vanguarde is upset with this. Keeping “lifers” at retirement home is kind of the same deal here. What do you do with people, like George Banks, who have lost all physical use and are really only being kept alive because they have a thousand life sentences to carry out?

This assumes that the so called “felons” aren’t victims of state terror.

MY TAX MONEY.

You go down the slippery slope of questioning who is entitled to anything when you start this.

They still have rights as a human being and inhabitant of your country.

They should not, they did something wrong they pay for it.

I’m getting bored of Vanguarde threads… I see a new thread and think maybe theres an argument for this..and it’s not.

Originally posted by pmr0078:

I’m getting bored of Vanguarde threads… I see a new thread and think maybe theres an argument for this..and it’s not.

I am glad you can contribute to the thread, Mr. Troll.

This IS a valid question.

Are you comfortable in providing hospice care to a lifer who killed 3 girls after he raped and tortured them?

Are you comfortable in providing hospice care to a lifer who killed 3 girls after he raped and tortured them?

Can you prove beyond reasonable that he in fact did so? Has he exhausted his appeals options? Innocent untill proven guilty. Citizen even when guilty.

Are you comfortable in providing hospice care to a lifer who killed 3 girls after he raped and tortured them?

Are you comfortable DENYING hospice care for someone who went to jail for stealing to feed himself

It would be for only heinous crimes.

Who gets to define “heinous” ?

“In the United States, where the felony/misdemeanor distinction is still widely applied, the Federal government defines a felony as a crime which involves a potential punishment of two-and-a-half years or longer in prison.”

That is a very wide range of crime, and “heinous” was in no way mentioned in the OP.

You go down the slippery slope of questioning who is entitled to anything when you start this.

just put Arizona Joe Arpaio in charge of the whole prision system, it will make life much less expensive for us (21 cents a day is spent on an inmate, 28 cents a day on the cat that lives there) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio

other then the stand off with the NYT He’s generally a good guy :)

Joe Arpaio

His system reminds me of a certain Soviet system involving remote environments and few supplies.

I don’t think all his ideas are terrible, but outside during the day in Arizona…I suppose it depends on if they are issued proper amounts of water and medical care.

His methods sound barbaric…

Originally posted by SaintAjora:

Joe Arpaio

His system reminds me of a certain Soviet system involving remote environments and few supplies.

I don’t think all his ideas are terrible, but outside during the day in Arizona…I suppose it depends on if they are issued proper amounts of water and medical care.

you do know that it is entirely voluntary to go to tent city? They get more good behavior days by going to tent city.

Originally posted by tyralpha:

Originally posted by SaintAjora:

Joe Arpaio

His system reminds me of a certain Soviet system involving remote environments and few supplies.

I don’t think all his ideas are terrible, but outside during the day in Arizona…I suppose it depends on if they are issued proper amounts of water and medical care.

you do know that it is entirely voluntary to go to tent city? They get more good behavior days by going to tent city.

Shortening someone’s prison time by treating them bad isn’t “right” even if it is voluntary.