Why is everyone so against giving people a second chance at life if they really show proof that they have corrected themselves and are rehabilitated?
Actions speak louder than words. And someone who has murdered another in cold blood really deserves to be put to death. In the alternative, life imprisonment should mean life.
You get more of what you subsidize.
Indeed since actions speak louder than words, people who have proven that they have changed and atoned for their previous sins should be let off ot have a second chance.
As for the death penalty, it is constitutionally banned; but even if it wasn't; given my thoughts on life imprisonment I suppose you can make a guess to what I think about the death penalty 
Question: If imprisonment is about rehabilitation, then why make them wait 40 years for review? If, say, a murderer can be rehabilitated in 10 years, then do you believe they should be released?
Well for a start, some crimes do require more rehabilitation than others. No matter how well integrated they claim to be, a serial murderer has an extremely high debt to pay towards society.
Plus let's not kid ourselves; prison still involves an element of punishment; I just don't think it should be its primary focus
Also, there are stuff that are not quite full releases but are still part of a gradual rehabilitation process. Stuff like penitentiary benefits, weekend passes, being free and just sleeping in jail or even the access to further reintegration programs themselves can be given or taken away based on behaviour and process
