[jackorange]

If someone is intent on committing crime. Say a serial killer who has killed many people, then while incarcerated continues attempting to attack and kill guards and other inmates, you would say this person should not be killed? I feel that your view is not realistic. The goal of executing criminals is not to punish them like "haha, we got you", it's to physically prevent them from continuing to cause chaos.

[ginko]

So put them into high security or solitary confinement. You call that unrealistic, but it's handled like that in tons of places all over the world.

[jackorange]

In high security and solitary confinement there are guards that will have to deal with them, and the inmates are afforded rights like visitation or recreation where they can gain contraband, make shanks, extort and assault inmates and other guards.

Inmates will pretend to or legitimately damage the cell or themselves to get guard attention and then assault the guards.

Study these issues further and you will find it's not simply a matter of putting someone in a single cell by themselves and now that's it, they can never harm anyone again.

There are elaborate criminal schemes that occur inside of correctional institutions.

Eventually, society will have exhausted every recourse in attempting to accommodate this person, and I say not to be sarcastic, but to present you something to think about, would you welcome a known serial killer into your home since you are so against killing them and there's no place left to put them? How much do you expect others to suffer and sacrifice for one criminal and your own perceived social justice?

[vadfa]

That costs A LOT of money.

[avh02]

Yet is cheaper than processing for the death penalty

https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/death-penalty/death-penalt...