The Student Room Group

Should James Holmes (Batman killing) get the death penalty?

What do you think as this question has sparked some debate.

I think yes he most certainly should.

The man is a monster.. he shot a baby and killed a 6 year old and continued to shoot people as they begged for him to stop.. He is evil.

Am interested to hear the arguments for both sides.

Please make sure before you debate on here you are familiar with the case, I don't support the death penalty but after reading reports on this from witnesses about what he did I think he should be killed.
(edited 11 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

No.

the point of sentencing somebody to prison/community service/etc is rehabilitation. sentencing somebody to death is you saying that they'll never ever be able to contribute positively to society
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 2
Avatar for IndyAM
IndyAM
I do not think he should, he may be able to be reformed or suffering from a mental illness. Life in jail could be best if he is found to be fully capable though. No government should be able to kill its own citizens.
Original post by Miracle Day
What a brilliant, clever and well thought-out explanatory post!


i edited it after, realised not everyone would appreciate my concise argument
Reply 4
Avatar for hamijack
hamijack
15
Original post by Miracle Day
What a brilliant, clever and well thought-out explanatory post!


That's a bit rich considering your post is mainly hyperbole.
Reply 5
Avatar for Miracle Day
Miracle Day
OP
21
Original post by didgeridoo12uk
No.

the point of sentencing somebody to prison/community service/etc is rehabilitation. sentencing somebody to death is you saying that they'll never ever be able to contribute positively to society


That implies he's going to eventually be released and so he could positively contribute to society.

Going to prison for life, as he will no doubt face is not going to rehabilitate someone as he's never going to return to the outside world
Reply 6
Avatar for Aoide
Aoide
11
No, I am against the death penalty in every situation. Killing him wouldn't be justice it would be revenge. If he is completely beyond rehabilitation just lock him away for life.
Reply 7
Avatar for chiggy321
chiggy321
8
Original post by didgeridoo12uk
No.

the point of sentencing somebody to prison/community service/etc is rehabilitation. sentencing somebody to death is you saying that they'll never ever be able to contribute positively to society


And you think that one day in the future this a'hole is going to be able to" contribute positively to society"? Sure, after he's served his time maybe he'll come out and do some voluntary work. No, let's face it he won't. If he doesn't get death then he'll be in high-security prison for ever, won't be making much of a contribution to society from there.

The only circumstances where I wouldn't support this guy being killed is if he's insane.
Reply 8
Avatar for Miracle Day
Miracle Day
OP
21
Original post by hamijack
That's a bit rich considering your post is mainly hyperbole.



Original post by Miracle Day
What do you think as this question has sparked some debate.

I think yes he most certainly should.

The man is a monster.. he shot a baby and killed a 6 year old and continued to shoot people as they begged for him to stop.. He is evil.

Am interested to hear the arguments for both sides.


Feel free to tell me what in the post is "hyperbole"

Yes a 6 year old got murdered, no exaggeration.
Yes a baby got shot.
Yes people would have been screaming and asking him to stop, crying as he shot them. Do you think everyone's just going to remain silent?

Perhaps you should invest some time in the dictionary :smile:
Reply 9
Avatar for Steezy
Steezy
15
No. Firstly it's too easy & I imagine not painful enough to compensate for the killing of 12 people.

Secondly I'm against the death penalty.
Reply 10
Avatar for Aoide
Aoide
11
What positive effect does killing him have?
Original post by Miracle Day
That implies he's going to eventually be released and so he could positively contribute to society.

Going to prison for life, as he will no doubt face is not going to rehabilitate someone as he's never going to return to the outside world


but ideally he should someday be released. It's impossible to tell what he's going to be like in 10 or 20 years time, he may well be a reformed member of society
Reply 12
Avatar for Miracle Day
Miracle Day
OP
21
Original post by Aoide
What positive effect does killing him have?


Well as alot of the families of the victims have said they want him dead and will not have justice until so.. there's your positive effect.

Edit: Oh I'm sorry, was that not positive enough?

Money saved by having to keep him in prison - another positive effect.
(edited 11 years ago)
I think the fact that he has done something so heinous negates the idea that, if it was possible to reform him, he should be freed on the principle that he would now be able to contribute to society.
Yes he should.

He contributes nothing to society. Insane or not. He had a set goal to wreck peoples lives and he done that. Why is that condonable with letting him live?

The only reason I wouldn't let him have the death penalty because it may be like an easy way out. He should probably suffer in prison.

Ha, changed my mind whilst writing this post.

NO. NO HE SHOULDN'T. Stick him in prison for life.
No. I don't think the death penalty would be a correct means of punishment here. It's fairly safe to suggest that most mass murderers are probably mentally ill by default, but there's reason to believe that Holmes was too... Some believe he was suffering from the same problems that he was investigating for his doctoral degree.


I think if you're up against life in prison (no chance of leaving, ever. With a sentence which would extend your age to that of the oldest person alive +10-20%) then you should be offered the death sentence, but it should be down to the prisoner. It costs a lot to do a capital punishment trial, but if you're in a clink, are proven to be suitably aware of your decisions, have served some years, then I think they should be offered the chance to die. They can't really rehabilitate because they'll never leave anyway. Their sentence is effectively a death sentence because it's so long that they'll die there. Might as well let them do it.
Reply 16
Avatar for U.Ahmed
U.Ahmed
9
The only time I would say no to the death penalty would be if there was any doubt whether the person committed the crime or not.
In this case, there is no doubt whatsoever, and I believe that he should be handed the death penalty as soon as possible.
Killing him is not justice, making him suffer is.

They should torture him to the point where he wished he never went to that cinema.
Original post by chiggy321
And you think that one day in the future this a'hole is going to be able to" contribute positively to society"? Sure, after he's served his time maybe he'll come out and do some voluntary work. No, let's face it he won't. If he doesn't get death then he'll be in high-security prison for ever, won't be making much of a contribution to society from there.

The only circumstances where I wouldn't support this guy being killed is if he's insane.


That's because the prison system is broken, especially in the USA.

You need to look into the motives of why he did it and fix him. You can't say you would't do the same as him if you weren't in the same situation. Obviously though at the moment nobody really knows any details about the case so its pure speculation
Reply 19
Avatar for Redolent
Redolent
10
No, we're not in a position to decide who deserves to die and who deserves to live, no matter how right we think we are.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you