Why are punishment for crimes so lame? Watch

Iknowbest
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
It wouldn't be difficult in this day and age with the technology we now have to catch and convict somebody of a crime to a 100% certainty. CCTV footage or DNA results, for examples.

IF a person is 100% convicted of a crime and there was no chance of this person being framed or mis-identified and depending on the crime, why shouldn't punishment be much more severe?

I do understand that it isn't always possible to convict somebody to 100% certainty.. i.e rape cases where even though dna testing is accurate and semen found, it still might have been consensual sex at the time! This poses a huge problem of course!

With people caught committing crimes on CCTV and it is 100% conclusive evidence.. and a conviction is made, then these criminals should be punished very severely. Armed robbery or even a mugging on the street are both life changing events for the victims.. and therefor the criminals should have their hands cut off or worse! It would deter others from doing it I am sure!!

I know it's not easy but I feel a LOT more could be done to deter criminals.. and it makes me wonder why it isn't?
0
reply
Meridian-S
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
Um, maybe not cutting off their hands? But perhaps 5 years might not mean a lot to you, but for the criminals actually willing to change, that's a heck of a lot of time. Repeat offenders will have a much more serious case put forward for their crimes, it's not just a tier of a crime it's how many times it's been committed as well. Using a broad spectrum of people and just labelling them as 'criminals' is quite inaccurate, as we don't know the details of their situation or what's going on in the background. But that's just my 2 cents, I might have got something wrong idk?


Posted from TSR Mobile
2
reply
DorianGrayism
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 2 years ago
#3
Yeh, well, the higher suicide rates in prison must be because it is such a laugh.

Let's make prison worse so we can create more psychopaths for release into the general population
8
reply
username749877
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
Because deterrence doesn't work, and retribution should not be the basis of a justice system that isn't based in the 16th century. When you start to treat people like that, thieves turn into armed robbers, and armed robbers turn into murderers.
3
reply
jeremy1988
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
I think that's extreme and brutal Hammurabi's Code stuff. But they did used to have much more creative and entertaining punishments.

For instance, tarring and feathering people, or running them out of town on a rail. Sometimes leaving a person in stocks to be ridiculed and spit on by the public for a while.

Modern society is very boring in comparison, but also a lot safer and more sensitive. There is something to be said for the old way, although I doubt most people would seriously want to go back to that.
0
reply
Chxrlie.99
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
I do agree from the perspective of law abiding citzen that the punishment handed to sombody may seem mere compared to their crime and the result of the crime but you must bare into consideriation that once u have been branded as a "criminal" life becomes inventiably harder , also life inside prison isnt exactly luxerious and often sends many people mad being confined to such a small space.

So the question you should be asking is what can we do as a society to prevent such crimes taking place as by preventing these crimes from happeing we will ultimatley reduce crime and yes i understand we will never be crime free but understanding the route of crime and the desperation what causes people to display negativity should be our goal rather than simply locking up societys broking people hoping they will go alone.
thats my perspective anyway.
1
reply
Final Fantasy
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
Often times it's just someone else's word against another. Solicitors and barristers get paid either way.
0
reply
JoshC98
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
Rehabilitation is far more important than punishment, imo.
8
reply
The_Meritocrat
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
(Original post by Iknowbest)
criminals should have their hands cut off or worse!
Name:  BAKU.png
Views: 314
Size:  201.0 KB
5
reply
Iknowbest
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#10
Not seeing much of a solution here..

How about looking at how other Countries deal with crime? ie Switzerland for example?
0
reply
username749877
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-no...essful-2014-12

Punishment does not work. Our justice system should be focused on rehabilitation.
2
reply
Zargabaath
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
(Original post by JoshC98)
Rehabilitation is far more important than punishment, imo.
(Original post by david9640)
http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-no...essful-2014-12

Punishment does not work. Our justice system should be focused on rehabilitation.
Agreed
3
reply
Platopus
Badges: 19
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by Iknowbest)
It wouldn't be difficult in this day and age with the technology we now have to catch and convict somebody of a crime to a 100% certainty. CCTV footage or DNA results, for examples.

IF a person is 100% convicted of a crime and there was no chance of this person being framed or mis-identified and depending on the crime, why shouldn't punishment be much more severe?

I do understand that it isn't always possible to convict somebody to 100% certainty.. i.e rape cases where even though dna testing is accurate and semen found, it still might have been consensual sex at the time! This poses a huge problem of course!

With people caught committing crimes on CCTV and it is 100% conclusive evidence.. and a conviction is made, then these criminals should be punished very severely. Armed robbery or even a mugging on the street are both life changing events for the victims.. and therefor the criminals should have their hands cut off or worse! It would deter others from doing it I am sure!!

I know it's not easy but I feel a LOT more could be done to deter criminals.. and it makes me wonder why it isn't?
I hope to God you never become Prime Minister.
reply
Iknowbest
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Platopus)
I hope to God you never become Prime Minister.
Well, let's just keep going the way we are and letting criminals off with little punishment.. and the victims affected for life then?

BIG changes are needed.. and if I was to become PM, many people would be too scared to commit any crime! Thus problem solved!

The comments regarding rehabilitation works.. punishment does not... Are you serious??? So it's ok for a victim of a crime to suffer possibly all their life (or lack of it) as long as the criminal doesn't do it again?! Such a silly argument!
0
reply
999tigger
  • Answer Heroes
Badges: 19
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by Iknowbest)
It wouldn't be difficult in this day and age with the technology we now have to catch and convict somebody of a crime to a 100% certainty. CCTV footage or DNA results, for examples.

IF a person is 100% convicted of a crime and there was no chance of this person being framed or mis-identified and depending on the crime, why shouldn't punishment be much more severe?

I do understand that it isn't always possible to convict somebody to 100% certainty.. i.e rape cases where even though dna testing is accurate and semen found, it still might have been consensual sex at the time! This poses a huge problem of course!

With people caught committing crimes on CCTV and it is 100% conclusive evidence.. and a conviction is made, then these criminals should be punished very severely. Armed robbery or even a mugging on the street are both life changing events for the victims.. and therefor the criminals should have their hands cut off or worse! It would deter others from doing it I am sure!!

I know it's not easy but I feel a LOT more could be done to deter criminals.. and it makes me wonder why it isn't?
Go and do a criminology degree.

Its rarely 100%, its just beyond reasonable doubt.

You might want to look at the studies on whether severity or rehabilitation is your objective. Perhaps yousd like hanging and hand chopping to be part of the mix.

Keeping someone in prison costs the Uk taxpayer c £40-50k a year.
reply
Platopus
Badges: 19
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Iknowbest)
BIG changes are needed.. and if I was to become PM, many people would be too scared to commit any crime! Thus problem solved!
So that's why states in the USA with the death penalty have a higher murder rate than states and countries without then?
reply
Iknowbest
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by Platopus)
So that's why states in the USA with the death penalty have a higher murder rate than states and countries without then?
Many other factors involved..
0
reply
999tigger
  • Answer Heroes
Badges: 19
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
(Original post by Iknowbest)
Well, let's just keep going the way we are and letting criminals off with little punishment.. and the victims affected for life then?

BIG changes are needed.. and if I was to become PM, many people would be too scared to commit any crime! Thus problem solved!

The comments regarding rehabilitation works.. punishment does not... Are you serious??? So it's ok for a victim of a crime to suffer possibly all their life (or lack of it) as long as the criminal doesn't do it again?! Such a silly argument!
Your solution is to make people too scared? how would you be doing that?
You dont think people have tried that?
reply
Platopus
Badges: 19
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by Iknowbest)
Many other factors involved..
Uh huh. Fact remains that most of the time when people commit a crime either:

A) It's not premeditated, so the severity of the punishment has no impact on their action.

or

B) They don't expect to be caught, so the severity of the punishment has no impact on their action.
reply
JordanL_
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by Platopus)
Uh huh. Fact remains that most of the time when people commit a crime either:

A) It's not premeditated, so the severity of the punishment has no impact on their action.

or

B) They don't expect to be caught, so the severity of the punishment has no impact on their action.
Yep. Harsher punishments don't deter crime, and often make people more likely to reoffend. The purpose of the justice system is to rehabilitate people so they're no longer a risk and can be released to become productive members of society. It isn't to satisfy your barbarian thirst for blood. Countries with the most liberal, rehabilitative justice systems almost always have the lowest crime rates, but some idiots would insist on dragging us back to the stone age.
4
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (164)
18.55%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (88)
9.95%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (147)
16.63%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (127)
14.37%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (85)
9.62%
How can I be the best version of myself? (273)
30.88%

Watched Threads

View All