How about a 21 gun salute by way of firing squad?
Death Penalty
- Thread starter miniCyb3r
- Start date
"two thumbs up for the death penalty" ME...I said that.
I think 40 years in prison is a worst punishment than death in some prisons, but most prisons here in the UK get more funding per prisoner than our school kids. It's a complicated issue. If some fella ran around and killed 20 school kids in a school shooting.. yes deserves to be put down (or permanently away from other humans) but one murder? stick him in a cell for 15 years he'll come out regretting it.
Before the death penalty is considered, it is important to look at the prison system. We currently have a revolutionary prison system. Before the last 100 years or so, prisons were not a place for criminals to have a long "time-out". It was a place to await trial. For instance, if a person was caught stealing, he would go to prison until his trial. After the trial, he would be forced to make restitution by either paying for his damages, or some other work.
If someone steals a coin from me, he should lose it back to me. If someone steals an expensive car from me, he should return it from his possession. If someone steals my life from me, he should lose his.
Another issue with letting murderers get off with a time out, is that it sets a precedent. How many people do you think are willing to commit murder if they know they will face the prospect of also dying? Now, how many people do you think are willing to commit murder if they know that they will simply live in prison?
I think that the death penalty is appropriate when dealing with purposeful murder.
If someone steals a coin from me, he should lose it back to me. If someone steals an expensive car from me, he should return it from his possession. If someone steals my life from me, he should lose his.
Another issue with letting murderers get off with a time out, is that it sets a precedent. How many people do you think are willing to commit murder if they know they will face the prospect of also dying? Now, how many people do you think are willing to commit murder if they know that they will simply live in prison?
I think that the death penalty is appropriate when dealing with purposeful murder.
Life in prison would be worse than death penalty,let them rot if they did the crime, DO THE TIME !!!
[DOUBLEPOST=1422643344][/DOUBLEPOST]
Murderers and rapists rule prisons. They have the most power among inmates, and many times there are miniature political systems that are set up. Small time crooks get beat up by murderers. For some, prison is just another slap on the hand.
Murderers and rapists rule prisons. They have the most power among inmates, and many times there are miniature political systems that are set up. Small time crooks get beat up by murderers. For some, prison is just another slap on the hand.
Murderers and rapists do not rule prisons. The strongest people do. Most rapists are targeted in prison, because even the most violent murderers hate rapists.
We also have to look at the families. If we kill a prisoner who has killed then instead of one family mourning the death, it's two.
And look at Bred's cousin. He went to prison for murder because it was a kill or be killed situation. He's now a productive member of society.
There are too many variables here. There is no reason for the death penalty. This "eye for an eye" mentality is very destructive.
We also have to look at the families. If we kill a prisoner who has killed then instead of one family mourning the death, it's two.
And look at Bred's cousin. He went to prison for murder because it was a kill or be killed situation. He's now a productive member of society.
There are too many variables here. There is no reason for the death penalty. This "eye for an eye" mentality is very destructive.
When people are enraged to the point where they commit a murder (or some other crime) i don't think many stop and ponder the possible prison sentences they are going to receive and weigh the pros/cons of committing a crime.
Take the drug war for example. The GVMT started handing out 10 and 20 year sentences for possessing small amounts of an illegal drug. This stopped no one and made little difference in anything. Harsh punishment , IMO, does little to deter people from crime.
Sex offenders are usually the low man on the totem pole. Those who rule in prison are the gangs. Strength in numbers. I think people have a misconception that a lot of random violence, rape etc. takes place. As i understand it, when violence occurs it's due to the inmate violating code of conduct. Not paying back a debt, stealing etc. Gang violence is probably the biggest contributor.
We can't take the stance that all "purposeful" murders should be executed. If we cover the entire body in the same cloak, we often end up blind.
Take the drug war for example. The GVMT started handing out 10 and 20 year sentences for possessing small amounts of an illegal drug. This stopped no one and made little difference in anything. Harsh punishment , IMO, does little to deter people from crime.
Sex offenders are usually the low man on the totem pole. Those who rule in prison are the gangs. Strength in numbers. I think people have a misconception that a lot of random violence, rape etc. takes place. As i understand it, when violence occurs it's due to the inmate violating code of conduct. Not paying back a debt, stealing etc. Gang violence is probably the biggest contributor.
We can't take the stance that all "purposeful" murders should be executed. If we cover the entire body in the same cloak, we often end up blind.
I do not know if that's really the point but I think my taste (I checked) the most terrible punishment is total isolation as it is practiced in the usa occurenc (death penalty )
http://solitarywatch.com/2012/09/11/total-isolation-solitary-confinement-in-oregon/
http://solitarywatch.com/2012/09/11/total-isolation-solitary-confinement-in-oregon/
i used to be against the death penalty, cause thats what you are thaught when you are young here in europe. however that has changed, althou im not for it, im not against it either.
my line of thinking is this: i sit and eat my breakfast and read in the newspaper that that someone was murdered, well that is bad news, but to be honest, it prolly wont ruin my day and i wont have any sleepless nights. but it did deeply scar the entire life of the family and freinds of the victim. given that contrast, who the hell am i to judge what kind of justice/ revenge they should get?
millions in our "western" culture are discussing this, and wanna be civilized about all of it. acting like that primitiv sense of justice died with the neantherthals or sth. like already mentioned a guy in norway kills 77 people gets 20 years and is now complaining about his fucking xbox games, really??? all in the name of being some fucking champion of tolerance, as i said, i cannot jusge what justice those families deserve, but i do know that that is bullshit. and there are many less extreme cases like this in europe, especially scandinavia.
i think noone can fully appriciate the gravity of the situation when a horiffic crime is done to one of YOUR loved ones, until it happens. and then having people talking about what is just and what is not... idk. thats why i am neutral on the subject of punishment.
as for the theory that harsh punishment leads to less crime:
i think its somewhat true . for example china has very harsh punishment, in some provinces you get shot just for snatching a handbag or a few gramms of drugs. and china is a very safe contry. same goes for many other asian contries, and many others like belarus, saudi arabia etc.
as the gap between poor and rich gets bigger in europe, crime is on the rise here. and i am very convinced some harder punishment would make a huge difference.
on the other hand like damage suggested, no punishment will stand between the biggest producer of drugs and the biggest consumer of drugs. but that is an american fenomenon. so i think the theory sort of holds.
my line of thinking is this: i sit and eat my breakfast and read in the newspaper that that someone was murdered, well that is bad news, but to be honest, it prolly wont ruin my day and i wont have any sleepless nights. but it did deeply scar the entire life of the family and freinds of the victim. given that contrast, who the hell am i to judge what kind of justice/ revenge they should get?
millions in our "western" culture are discussing this, and wanna be civilized about all of it. acting like that primitiv sense of justice died with the neantherthals or sth. like already mentioned a guy in norway kills 77 people gets 20 years and is now complaining about his fucking xbox games, really??? all in the name of being some fucking champion of tolerance, as i said, i cannot jusge what justice those families deserve, but i do know that that is bullshit. and there are many less extreme cases like this in europe, especially scandinavia.
i think noone can fully appriciate the gravity of the situation when a horiffic crime is done to one of YOUR loved ones, until it happens. and then having people talking about what is just and what is not... idk. thats why i am neutral on the subject of punishment.
as for the theory that harsh punishment leads to less crime:
i think its somewhat true . for example china has very harsh punishment, in some provinces you get shot just for snatching a handbag or a few gramms of drugs. and china is a very safe contry. same goes for many other asian contries, and many others like belarus, saudi arabia etc.
as the gap between poor and rich gets bigger in europe, crime is on the rise here. and i am very convinced some harder punishment would make a huge difference.
on the other hand like damage suggested, no punishment will stand between the biggest producer of drugs and the biggest consumer of drugs. but that is an american fenomenon. so i think the theory sort of holds.