Kiaran Stapleton: Is 30 Years too Leniant?

Scroll to see replies

Because the time between sentencing and execution = more tax dollars wasted. Remember, that was my primary argument...to save money that is being wasted on prisoners' upkeep and use it for other needs in society that aren't a total and utter waste.

Our initial argument was about utilitarianism, not crime.

From a utilitarian perspective, wasting 50,000 dollars on one criminal for one year of free shelter, food, health, education while moral, decent, innocent people starve on the street is abhorrent because it is not maximizing benefit in any way.

I don't care what your "primary" argument was, that CLEARLY wasn't what we were discussing at the time... You yourself linked efficiency of death penalty to murder rate.

Though I thought I made it rather clear I don't buy your utilitarianism argument anyway.

Reply 261

.eXe

Original post by callum9999

Oh you made that clear but without any justification. I too can make it clear that I don't agree with you but at least I took the time to justify my position.

Instead of telling me why utilitarianism isn't the ideal, you shifted the discussion to murder rates.

Look at the title of the thread. We are clearly discussing whether 30 years is too lenient (or whether DP is warranted in this case). No one cares about murder rates and gun crime. I only pursued that discussion in the hopes that you would hopefully return to the main point but it seems you could care less about that.

Oh and PS, I answered your question about the importance of time between sentence and execution. You didn't respond.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 262

Yung Mon£y

Original post by callum9999

Right, so this discussion isn't limited to what could work in reality - just what is physically possible? If a climate could ever be created in the UK for the death penalty, it would simply not be tacked on. And why on earth do you keep calling me lad... It makes you sound even more inept than your arguments do...

As I said, that's what prison is like now... And although you claim in your stupid hypothetical that it "sounds nice" - I find it highly unlikely you'd actually enjoy living in a cell with a bunch of thugs and no freedom...

Hilarious - and you had the audacity to call me pedantic earlier... We could change the law to legalise murder as well - would you correct people who say murder is outlawed?

I don't believe I mentioned anything about dictatorships to you.

The DP could just be tacked on. End of. Stop convoluting it.
Lad, your argument is nothing more then an almost an OCD obsession with america and this picture in your head of how things "have" to be otherwise you flip out :teehee:

A stupid hypothetical you say? Well you are being naive and clearly live in some bubble world:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b011qd97
Watch it because I repeated to you the exact situation of an inmate who described jail as "a relief". So yeah, looks like your idea of what is going on couldn't be further from the truth son.

Get a reality check and sort your ego out because all your argument is based on is nonsensical moral bull**** and has **** all to do with reality.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 263

lonelykatana

Original post by wwelol

do u want to go to heaven?

Are you genuinely that thick? I made it very clear I am an anti-theist, not a single atom of religion in this body - and you still ask me if I want to go to heaven?
Only someone moronic enough to promote sharia law, the laws of a minority religion in an increasingly secular society would be thick enough to not identify the fact that atheists do not believe in heaven, I don't believe in hell either so best not to use that as a bit of a threat either buddy :tongue:

Your middle age outlook on the world is disturbing. Sharia law or any other religious moral code has no place in a modern secular society.
This country already allows religion to much of a role in society, I just thank god (heh, get it?) that very few people are moronic enough to put the clearly backward laws of Islam into place in this country.
(p.s. Before you say it, no. Thats not me being brainwashed by the media. It's me holding a strong opinion that religion, and especially religious laws have no place in society. I'd argue as much a strong point if it was any other religions twisted moral codes.)

Original post by wwelol

if i rapped ure mum and she got pregnant i would get 20years be out in half
in sharia law i would get death penalty

now which one do u want me to have if shagged ure mum

If you raped my mother I wouldn't want you to be put to death, and knowing my mother neither would she.
If you killed my mother, I wouldn't want you put to death either.
If you killed a hundred people, I wouldn't want you put to death.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't kill you to prevent the deaths of my mother or one hundred other people.
But if the act has been done, what benefit will be adding another body to the pile be?
I am a strong believer in rehabilitation, even if its a futile attempt at it.
Look at what the likely outcome will be for Angus Behring Breivik - he will certainly spend the rest of his life in prison, but the Norway penal system is still determined to make a point of attempting rehabilitation.
Its better to try and fail, rather than not try at all.

I'd rather see a rapist behind bars for the average sentence of 8 years than to have the rapist killed. Even if the victim was my mother.

You are completely missing the point of punishment in a modern society - but then again why wouldn't you be? You think Sharia law has a place in this country :wink:

The fact it costs money to keep someone behind bars should have no place in this argument. You can not put someone to death simply because its cheap to do so. That is a disgusting argument and I can't believe anyone on here would think its valid one either.

Reply 264

callum9999

Original post by Yung Mon£y

If you are that thick, son, that you believe the death penalty could ever just be tacked onto the existing legal system then there is no point discussing it anymore... Obviously it is technically possible, but to ACTUALLY happen would require some sort of autocratic regime. Just look at the way extraditions are handled... I think its fairly obvious there would be more safeguards for killing people than for sending them to sweden, whether you believe there should be or not.

Reply 265

stefl14

The best thing would be if this guy gets raped in prison and beaten up multiple times throughout his stretch. Hopefully he gets beaten to within an inch of his life and suffers a horrible life with brain damage so that he can't even feed himself.

Reply 266

Swanbow

As far I am concerned Kiaran Stapleton is an unpredictable, and unremorseful murderer who has nothing to offer society. Chuck him in the gaol with solitary confinement for the rest of his life on a diet of nothing but bread and water. Criminals have it too easy nowadays, as soon as you take away the human rights of someone else, in this case the chief right to life, then you automatically forfeit your own human rights.

Reply 267

Conciousness

Original post by rural_boy

I'm fully against the death penalty, instead I sincerely hope he loses his anal virginity in prison..

You condone rape?

Reply 268

rural_boy

Original post by Conciousness

You condone rape?

Oh yeah of course I do, or you know, maybe it was a joke. Probably the latter I'd say!

Reply 269

canela

These people are sick and I have no doubt that they will change. They act and murder innocent people like it's normal. I read that he had suffered an infedility on the part of his girlfriend and wanted revenge, that is where psychopaths attack.