"Can life in prison be worse than death" ... for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev?

One of the few posts in this blog that got a few hits over the years was one on the question of life imprisonment being worse than the death penalty. This came to mind after the subject question was posed elsewhere. Someone actually involved in defending those on death row added his .02. But, perhaps mine own is worth something as well:

I do think life can be worse than death -- support of euthanasia shows that.

Solitary confinement is a special factor here, but I don't think the average person who is in prison for decades has it very easy either. Especially for some, long prison terms can be very hard, leading to mental problems and as seen by a recent post, things like rape or other abuses. So, the argument proves too much on some level.

It would seem that many in prison for time years have it harder than some of the "worse of the worst," since some of the latter are executed after a certain amount of time & in various cases reside in arguably better (see the sexual offender post) conditions before they do. But, we don't want to increase executions for robbery to ease the treatment of these people. So, execution doesn't seem to be the answer.

But, it does remain true that being in prison can be worse than death. This suggests those who think "abolitionists" are softies are a tad misguided. Those confined, such as the murderer in the American Sniper case, still are treated as persons, with interests and a chance to be redeemed in some fashion. They might get out at some point. And, if there was a mistake, they will be still around when it is determined. And, most on death row don't "volunteer" and end all appeals.

I'd add that Tsarnaev is a special "worse of the worst" case for which the death penalty seems a tad less horrible than a case like the murder for insurance that resulted in the woman in Georgia whose execution was held up for a least a bit. Seems a special reason to execute here though even here there are practical  problems. Timothy McVeigh, who murdered many more people, was eventually executed, but this is going to be a long drawn out affair.  The death penalty is not likely to be a threat that would help confessions or guilty pleas too much -- the person who this did seems the sort who would want the publicity of a trial. And, he's no kid, but someone who murders at around twenty still can be immature. 

But, ultimately, killing people is wrong when not required by necessity or personal choice in respect to euthanasia, especially when it is carried out in the problematic way as this nation's death penalty is. I'm willing to rest on this, and at the end of the day, it is what one should rest on in some cases at least.  Not everyone on death row are the "worse of the worst," but some pretty much are.  Citing some sort of "leniency" argument for the death penalty doesn't really work though it can help the defendant's side, partially since it has some bite.

Anyway, other than those sentenced to die being able to opt out of further appeals, and some limited appeals and related oversight should be present whether a defendant wants it or not, this isn't euthanasia either. People don't quite choose whether or not to be sentenced to death.