Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Do you agree with the death penalty? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with the death Penalty?
    #YES
    66
    40.49%
    NEVER!
    97
    59.51%

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    There are things worse than death. I suggest people guilty of severe offenses be forced to attend X-Factor live shows.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I support it, for those who are categorically incompatible with society, despite attempts at rehabilitation.

    The taxpayer shouldn't have to fund the unnecessary prolonged longevity of criminals' lives. Prisons have limited capacity, and our resources should be expended upon rehabilitating people who are capable of reintegrating into society—not quarantining the leeches of mankind. Plus, if they're dead, you don't run the risk of them potentially escaping or repeat offending once/if they're released.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiytt)
    I support it, for those who are categorically incompatible with society, despite attempts at rehabilitation.

    The taxpayer shouldn't have to fund the unnecessary prolonged longevity of criminals' lives. Prisons have limited capacity, and our resources should be expended upon rehabilitating people who are capable of reintegrating into society—not quarantining the leeches of mankind. Plus, if they're dead, you don't run the risk of them potentially escaping or repeat offending once/if they're released.
    Agreed
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fairytalecolours)
    we should rly take a long hard look at the concepts of innocence and evil. no human is absolutely innocent and no human is absolutely evil. when we start shining the 'judgement light' around we'll see lots of dirty hands, especially from those who condone capital punishment or any other form of violence. under the right circumstances ANY ONE OF US could commit atrocious acts. there are so many factors that contribute to a human being's experience of themselves.

    those of us who murder or commit any other violent act have an acute level of accumulated emotional pain. the more emotional we are, the less rational we are = the more mentally ill/imbalanced we are. there are degrees of mental illness/imbalance in all of us. ego is inseparable from mental illness/imbalance. all of us are mentally ill/imbalanced to some extent because all of us have an ego/mind to some degree.

    so yeah stop it
    https://vine.co/v/OnwLdHlMpDZ
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Okay, so if you saw someone viciously attack an innocent passer by or even someone you know, would you handcuff that person and set up a jail within your home and lock them up there? I mean we can all agree that we want that individual to be punished, but it is not within our rights to do that, the law prevents us and we risk being sent to jail ourselves if we were to take matters into our own hands like that. We are not a figure of authority, but that's not to say that they shouldn't be punished. If we were to witness such a crime, were told not to approach that person, and to call emergency services so that they can deal with it themselves.

    & about what you said, perhaps that would work for one time offenders, or for people who commit minor offences. We all make mistakes and if we do something seriously wrong (not necessarily illegal) we probably won't do it again. We may do it accidentally/subconsciously but that is not the same for something like murder. You can't accidentally kill a number of people.

    If a completely sane person were to murder my loved ones and I had the opportunity to kill them, I'd be seriously tempted. Ive no idea if I would actually do it, but I don't see a reason why they should get to continue to live if they've unlawfully terminated the lives of others
    no, i wouldn't want to punish them. punishment is immoral and solves nothing. it implies that the punisher is superior to the one who is being punished when they're not. anyone who is prepared to punish another does so to fuel their ego. you can't know what a murderer experiences because you've not murdered anyone. it takes an extreme level of emotional imbalance to hurt another. naturally we are peaceful beings. look at young children. violence is a systemic problem and must be solved in actual, physical reality, so that those who are mentally ill have a chance to help themselves out of their minds. prisons do nothing but exacerbate the problem. punishment does nothing but validate ego. prisons need to become hospitals and criminals need to become patients.

    'figure of authority' also implies superiority and inferiority. no one is more or less than another.

    i demonstrated above why completely sane people can't murder others. completely sane people have no desire to cause harm to anyone. if we have in us the desire to hurt others, we're mentally ill. simple as that. it doesn't matter if we'd do it or not; we are, to a degree, mentally imbalanced and a harm to others. in a perfect world there'd be no judgement. a perfect world starts with the individual. we have to be the change we wish to see else an eye for an eye will eventually make the whole world blind.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Will a 25yr prison sentence bring back the victim?
    Nope, but at least it doesn't give the criminal the quick escape of death
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fairytalecolours)
    no, i wouldn't want to punish them. punishment is immoral and solves nothing. it implies that the punisher is superior to the one who is being punished when they're not. anyone who is prepared to punish another does so to fuel their ego. you can't know what a murderer experiences because you've not murdered anyone. it takes an extreme level of emotional imbalance to hurt another. naturally we are peaceful beings. look at young children. violence is a systemic problem and must be solved in actual, physical reality, so that those who are mentally ill have a chance to help themselves out of their minds. prisons do nothing but exacerbate the problem. punishment does nothing but validate ego. prisons need to become hospitals and criminals need to become patients.

    'figure of authority' also implies superiority and inferiority. no one is more or less than another.

    i demonstrated above why completely sane people can't murder others. completely sane people have no desire to cause harm to anyone. if we have in us the desire to hurt others, we're mentally ill. simple as that. it doesn't matter if we'd do it or not; we are, to a degree, mentally imbalanced and a harm to others. in a perfect world there'd be no judgement. a perfect world starts with the individual. we have to be the change we wish to see else an eye for an eye will eventually make the whole world blind.
    Now you're being absolutely ridiculous. Nobody should be punished? So how will they possibly know right from wrong? With your logic, we'll have a society of deviants operating outside of the law because there are no repercussions for their actions. We would all be living in fear, is that what you want?
    I don't need to know what a murderer experiences. What I do know is that they should be punished for their behaviour. Not all children are peaceful, in fact there are quite a few who commit horrendous crimes. They should also be punished. Not all criminals should get a pass by being found guilty by reason of insanity. Not all criminals are mentally ill, sorry to break it to you. In a perfect world, there'd be no criminals but that isn't looking too promising.

    When I eventually have children, I will teach them right from wrong and they will be punished for bad behaviour. How will they learn otherwise? Even the most peaceful of people will do something morally wrong in their lifetime. That's not to say they're mentally ill, but more so they allowed their deviant impulses to consume them. We all have those impulses within us, but that doesn't give us the label of 'mentally ill' just like we all have cancer cells within our bodies but that doesn't mean that we are all cancer patients.

    There are people that are of higher authority to us, of course there are. Those people are permitted to lock away offenders for as long as they wish, whereas we can't. If you have a problem with that, you should go and take it up with them. Don't argue with me about the facts. The fact of the matter is if you act in the same way as a figure of authority, you will be penalised and likely be punished for it. If you wish to become a figure of authority, then go right ahead, no one is stopping you. We are all equal yes, but we also play different roles in society. It's okay for you to take your child on holiday with you without permission from anyone, whereas if I were to try and take your kid on holiday with me without permission, I'd be charged with kidnap. If a figure of authority tried to take your child on holiday with them without permission, they'd too be charged with kidnap.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studentro)
    Sure, but I can't say I'm too thrilled that so many people not only would take pleasure from the killing of a human being, but don't feel any unease or guilt over it - rather, they feel it is a just thing to do. Could you please try to explain just what it is about human death that satisfies you so much?
    It wouldn't please me at all, but I do believe that if somebody commits such a disgusting act then they should be correctly punished. How can somebody kill a large number of people and not be punished? Lock them up with sky tv and free food? Sounds horrible doesn't it? 🤔

    Do you then believe the army are taking pleasure from killing isil members? And that they actually deserve to live and continue with their guilt free lives? Or should be lock them up with sky tv and an Xbox?

    I have family members in prison for committing a horrible act and they are not in any way regretting what they have done as they have a cushty life.

    You make it sound like I would love for this to happen, that I would be incredibly happy to see someone killed, this is incorrect and an awful way to twist some bodies beliefs!

    I do not find pleasure in death, I would not smile as someon was killed. But I do believe in justice - for families and those that have been hurt by the wreckless act of another.

    The only person who would feel any pleasure would be the awful human who had initially killed or raped another.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by batman1308)
    No. I'd rather let the evil ones suffer in prison
    Suffer? Have you been into a prison??
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by victorialep)
    x
    That's right. The only alternative to killing criminals is giving them an Xbox and Sky TV in a comfy cell.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studentro)
    That's right. The only alternative to killing criminals is giving them an Xbox and Sky TV in a comfy cell.
    What other options are there? I'd be thrilled to know...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    No doubt there are other ways but I'm not sure there are 'better ways'
    This goes back to our treatment of crime, and human psychology. It's all very to easy to sit back and declare that some people are just criminals, but we are a product of our history. The very concept of blame is an absurd one beyond finding an immediate cause.

    Killing people as punishment is just a symptom of the problem with our justice system, and general outlook on crime. A simplistic one where we do not bother to look into the reasons behind crime. If we do not look at these root causes and keep telling ourselves it's because "They're bad, I'm good", such crimes will continue to occur.
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Now you're being absolutely ridiculous. Nobody should be punished? So how will they possibly know right from wrong?
    How do you effectively teach someone a lesson if you kill them in the process?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Now you're being absolutely ridiculous. Nobody should be punished? So how will they possibly know right from wrong? With your logic, we'll have a society of deviants operating outside of the law because there are no repercussions for their actions. We would all be living in fear, is that what you want?I don't need to know what a murderer experiences. What I do know is that they should be punished for their behaviour. Not all children are peaceful, in fact there are quite a few who commit horrendous crimes. They should also be punished. Not all criminals should get a pass by being found guilty by reason of insanity. Not all criminals are mentally ill, sorry to break it to you. In a perfect world, there'd be no criminals but that isn't looking too promising.When I eventually have children, I will teach them right from wrong and they will be punished for bad behaviour. How will they learn otherwise? Even the most peaceful of people will do something morally wrong in their lifetime. That's not to say they're mentally ill, but more so they allowed their deviant impulses to consume them. We all have those impulses within us, but that doesn't give us the label of 'mentally ill' just like we all have cancer cells within our bodies but that doesn't mean that we are all cancer patients.There are people that are of higher authority to us, of course there are. Those people are permitted to lock away offenders for as long as they wish, whereas we can't. If you have a problem with that, you should go and take it up with them. Don't argue with me about the facts. The fact of the matter is if you act in the same way as a figure of authority, you will be penalised and likely be punished for it. If you wish to become a figure of authority, then go right ahead, no one is stopping you. We are all equal yes, but we also play different roles in society. It's okay for you to take your child on holiday with you without permission from anyone, whereas if I were to try and take your kid on holiday with me without permission, I'd be charged with kidnap. If a figure of authority tried to take your child on holiday with them without permission, they'd too be charged with kidnap.
    i'm not suggesting that people who commit crimes should be left to their own devices, i'm saying they should be helped unconditionally. here is a dictionary definition of punishment: "Punishment is the authoritative imposition of an undesirable or unpleasant outcome upon a group or individual, in response to a particular action or behaviour that is deemed unacceptable or threatening to some norm."

    I'm going to deconstruct this definition and give my insights into punishment vs rehabilitation. "authoritative imposition' means that the imposer is authoritative which implies he or she is superior. superiority is a human created concept and has no actual weight. how do we define superiority or inferiority? how do we measure it? a court judge, for example, has the authority to sentence a person to prison. who gave that right to the judge? is he or she some godly figure, sent to impose judgement? we blindly accept authority figures because we see them, on some level, as superior to us. some queen with a shiny hat is not superior to me; i am her equal. likewise, some judge who sits in a throne is not superior to me, i am his or her equal. authority is an imaginary concept and so is irrelevant. we make our own way, we define ourselves, we don't need anyone else to tell us who we are. we take responsibility for our egos and we transform ourselves into the best we can be. authority only causes conflict because where there's the illusion of superiority there's also the illusion of inferiority. we're constantly comparing ourselves to one another, constantly worried about how we appear, how our hair looks or whether we just said the right thing or whether we're good enough. no one else can judge us. we judge ourselves, inside our egos, or we forgive ourselves in our self-awareness.

    "undesirable or unpleasant outcome" speaks for itself. why would we impose something unpleasant on someone when we have no right to? that's violence, and makes us just as 'bad' as those who we're punishing. people who commit acts/crimes of violence believe they're punishing others because they deserve it and see themselves in the right. exactly the same occurs in the minds of those who punish under the law. humans are hypocrites because we're perfectly happy to project blame and responsibility but never happy to accept our own faults and responsibility. how do you define punishment? we shouldn't punish children, we should direct them, be stewards of them. i understand what you mean. i empathise with your position, but i don't think that it's necessary to take away someone else's rights under any circumstances. allowing someone their rights means treating them like an equal with no blame or judgement. the moment blame or judgement arise in the situation, we've failed to remain rational and therefore are accessing the same source of ego that the 'criminal' accessed in order to commit the crime.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Not necessarily. They can still kill fellow inmates/ prison officers. I also think that after being locked up for so long for such a crime, they will be unlikely to find employment and if they can't get money legitimately, what will they do? Back to crime
    well you have a point, but if they're not jailed or get some kind of punishment, they wouldn't care about killing a human being and how this affects the society so that's why there is rehabilitation programs in the prison for criminals who are willing to change for the better, that also help them find a job after being out of prison and help restructure their lives in which i believe they would be monitored 24/7
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    This goes back to our treatment of crime, and human psychology. It's all very to easy to sit back and declare that some people are just criminals, but we are a product of our history. The very concept of blame is an absurd one beyond finding an immediate cause.

    Killing people as punishment is just a symptom of the problem with our justice system, and general outlook on crime. A simplistic one where we do not bother to look into the reasons behind crime. If we do not look at these root causes and keep telling ourselves it's because "They're bad, I'm good", such crimes will continue to occur.

    How do you effectively teach someone a lesson if you kill them in the process?
    Some people are criminals though..
    People who repeatedly kill people in horrific circumstances deserve the death penalty imo. It's the only way to ensure they do not repeat offend even in prison.

    Just because they're dead doesn't mean you cannot still look at these 'reasons' behind crime. People do that all the time. We're still trying to understand people like Ted bundy. Serial killers like him are still being talked about years after death. A quick Google search will give details about his victims, his childhood and socialisation and other aspects of his life that may have contributed to committing such evil acts.

    Crimes occur regardless. We don't have the death penalty here, yet many crimes have been committed in the past few years which id say is worthy of it. How are you so sure that your idea of rehabilitation and what not will be effective? Because it doesn't seem to be working right now

    Your last point is fair, but as I said, for people who commit terrible crimes like the example of ted bundy I mentioned, he had over 36 victims, there is nothing to teach for people like him.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Some people are criminals though..
    People who repeatedly kill people in horrific circumstances deserve the death penalty imo. It's the only way to ensure they do not repeat offend even in prison.

    Just because they're dead doesn't mean you cannot still look at these 'reasons' behind crime. People do that all the time. We're still trying to understand people like Ted bundy. Serial killers like him are still being talked about years after death. A quick Google search will give details about his victims, his childhood and socialisation and other aspects of his life that may have contributed to committing such evil acts.

    Crimes occur regardless. We don't have the death penalty here, yet many crimes have been committed in the past few years which id say is worthy of it. How are you so sure that your idea of rehabilitation and what not will be effective? Because it doesn't seem to be working right now

    Your last point is fair, but as I said, for people who commit terrible crimes like the example of ted bundy I mentioned, he had over 36 victims, there is nothing to teach for people like him.
    do you disagree with the idea that we should replace prisons with psychiatric hospitals? if people went sent to hospitals, they wouldn't have the opportunity to be violent. they'd be treated as equals and would quickly understand themselves and their situation, unless their psychological damage is so severe that it takes a while before they come round. suicide in prison is a huge problem and in an ideal psychiatric hospital there'd be no way for anyone to kill themselves. those who are most severely psychologically damaged should be placed in solitary confinement with the best conditions possible; they should be made to feel safe and comforted with none of this current punishment crap. those who are less psychologically damaged should be allowed to live together in a similar way to current prisons except with drs monitoring them rather than guards and higher standards of living conditions. people in these psychiatric hospitals should be encouraged to write books, make music, bake cakes. to do whatever they want as long as it's harmless and productive. we could literally transform prisons into creative schools where those who've been trampled on by society/themselves can rediscover what it means to be safe and happy. THAT would solve crime.

    in rehabilitation it's recognised that the addict is not bad; rather that they're ill. all people are addicted primarily to one thing: ego. the more we're addicted to ego, the less rational we are. in rehab/hospital, there would be no personal judgement or blame.

    people who murder others do so because they're psychologically damaged. under no circumstance does murder take place unless the murderer is mentally ill. i've clearly demonstrated why this is in a previous post. it is inexcusable to send a mentally ill person to prison or to punish them. do you reject this argument? if so, why?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    If you feel they would deserve death, do so yourself and dont hide behind the state.

    It is not for the state to impose what punishments it feels they deserve, but to protect all of its citizens.
    The state does and should do both. It punishes criminals with certain punishments and jails them and tries to rehabilitates them so that they aren't a danger to others.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by victorialep)
    Of course you could - if the incident was caught on CCTV, if the rapist made the lady pregnant you could DNA test, there are plenty of ways to know for sure
    There could be several possible defences, the person could have an unknown identical twin just to name a few.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself but it is clear that you are not paying attention.

    The decision as to whether or not put the death penalty on the table will be made prior to any trial. In fact, it could be made as soon as the victim is murdered.

    The ability to consider a certain punishment would have no effect on the verdict and thus would not compromise the defendant's right to a fair trial.

    For example, judges are allowed to impose whole life tariffs or decide whether a minimum term should be served before the convicted is eligible for parole.

    Does the availability of the whole life tariff mean that the defendant's right to a fair trial is compromised? Does the availability of a whole life tariff indicate that a judge is not making the decision emotionally?
    By allowing a judge to impose the death penalty if the defendant is convicted you are playing a role in the judicial process, that is undeniable thus you are allowing someone making an emotional decision, not a rational one to play a role in the judicial decision making process.

    The difference of having a whole life tariff available is that it is from the common law, it's not an option given to the judge by someone making an emotional decision.

    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    Yes, it will be up to the next of kin but I think with a decision like that, the family as a whole will discuss and decide.
    I can't see how that could possibly have horrible consequences...imagine a wife wants the death penalty but the victims parents and siblings don't.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I refuse to go/visit any country where there is capital punishment ...
    that is how strongly I feel against it.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.