The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

JonathanH
No, you execute someone to show that MURDER is wrong, not that killing is wrong.
Indeed, the mix-up between the words 'kill' and 'murder' can be traced back practically to the bible. The common misconception of the sixth commandment is 'Thou shalt not kill'. However, when translated properly it is actually 'Thous shalt not murder', an entirely different concept.


What has the Bible got to do with it? At any rate I doubt whether the word murder existed back then in what is now Isreal. And the defintion of murder has changed over time.
I was using it as an example of the confusion between the concepts of 'killing' and 'murder' which the person posting before me had seemingly missed.
Entering into the thread kinda late, but--

I don't believe in capital punishment. I believe it has an inherent aspect of vengeance in it and is uncivilised. What’s more the point that it is a wrong that cannot be legally rectified (as in the case of wrongful executions) is a pretty good point it would be better to see one hundred criminals walk free than to see one innocent man go to the gallows. A few people believe they had it coming… who has the right to make that judgement? I don’t believe that any judge has the right to essentially erase someone’s entire existence.

I also don’t believe prison should be seen as a way of reforming criminals. The reason behind punishments is to punish people for a wrong against the people or the state. To attempt to reform someone is forcing your will upon them, and I don’t believe that is right. While it’s all well and good to stop someone breaking the law, trying to change their personality in the name of the state isn’t.
Reply 83
Stop shifting the goalposts! Execution should merely be a possible punishment. It does not have to be obligatory!

Latest

Trending

Trending