Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cristocracy)
    No, because:

    1) Not everybody goes around poking others in the eye. Not many do it. In fact, people who do poke others in the eye number as a very small minority. So if I do blind them, the whole world hardly goes blind.

    2)Not all stolen property can be returned. What if a thief steals a priceless Rembrandt and irreparably damages it in the process?

    Also, it is true that taking a life does not return one, but this in itself is insufficient reason not to impose it. Imprisoning a kidnapper will not make up the time a kidnapped victim loses while being kidnapped; yet it is perfectly just to imprison the kidnapper and take away his time. Ticketing a person speeding also does not make him 'unspeed' as you cannot go back in time to reverse his act of speeding, but we fine him for it nontheless.

    3) Luckily for me and unluckily for you, the case study of Singapore exists.

    Singapore is a country with extremely harsh punishments, bordering on what some consider brutal. It is also a strong advocate of capital punishment. Yet, Singapore consistently ranks #1 in overall safety, as well as personal safety. Some studies might rank is as #2, but it has always fallen within the #3, usually #1.

    So what you just said is factually inaccurate.

    However, it is also true that most european countries are safe without capital punishment, but here you are, missing the point again. The point is not that capital punishment is a must to keep states safe. The point is that capital punishment keeps states even safer.

    To draw an example: A state without capital punishment has 1 case of homicide for 500,000 citizens (very good)
    But a state with capital punishment has only 1 case for every 5,000,000 citizens.

    This is an extreme example, but it makes the point perfectly: in the state with capital punishment, 9 more lives are saved, despite them both being very safe countries.

    To compare US and Singapore, US is a case where implementation of a good thing (capital punishment) is badly done: needlessly long and complicated appeals, executions happening below the brutalization threshold-thereby causing all the problems Professor Shepard has listed.

    Singapore however, is the perfect example of capital punishment done right - a very efficient yet just criminal system, with executions well above the brutalization threshold.

    End result? Extremely low crime, extremely low rates of miscarriages of justice (one of the lowest in the world)
    :five:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by katbob)
    It's all bull****, his brother was arrested pictures we show him being arrested then all of a sudden he was in a fire fight and shot dead, it's bull**** all the photographs were photo shopped placing photo shopped back packs on the brothers. all lies main stream media has brain washed the masses, the truth will come out one day tho jahar is innocent!
    The truth is already out, and that's why this man is going to die.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    usually people just disappear when proved wrong.
    There is no right or wrong answers when discussing a topic like capital punishment we are all entiteled to our own opinion
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SotonianOne)
    People who are anti-capital punishment should be forced to pay taxes for the upkeeping and maintenance of people like this.

    I don't want my tax to be used on his water, apples and plasters - he can go and starve.
    But in that case, you would be willing to pay for the process of the death penalty? Which is recorded to be more expensive than not putting to death?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:


    Justice...
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    Ok, well if you actually want to debate we can do this.

    In 2000 Illinois implemented a moratorium on the death penalty. The Cloninger and Marchesini (2006) article finds that there was an additional 150 homicides in Illinois in the 4 years following.

    Dezhbakhsh and Shepherd (2006) find that when the 1972 moratorium was imposed annual murder rate jumped by 9.3%. When it was lifted, it fell by 8.3%.
    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...-death-penalty
    this shows that over 50% want the death penalty abolished

    Another reason I believe it should be ablosished is because it is not always accurate and in a few cases it has proven not to be

    http://www.americanbar.org/groups/in...s/alabama.html
    it wasn't right in Alabama

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...eath-sentences
    in Arkansas race has played a factor

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/2183
    Ohio is having serious flaws so it should be abloshied
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by High Stakes)
    But in that case, you would be willing to pay for the process of the death penalty? Which is recorded to be more expensive than not putting to death?
    A 9mm bullet costs $0.20. That's most definitely no where close to the money paid on keeping someone alive for 50 years.

    It's inefficiency that is driving the cost. Also, starvation is free.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cristocracy)
    That is just a statistical finding, and Im afraid I cannot offer more on that point. But the logic is rather simple-if the execution rate is too low, then people will murder anyway as they believe they would not get caught, or that if they do, they would escape the death penalty. Or, they might be encouraged to murder as they view state-sanctioned killings as an implicit acknowledgement that murder is a solution.


    Thus, there rate of executions must be sufficiently high as to strike fear into the hearts of potential criminals; so much so that they reconsider their plans to murder. Statistically, this amount just happens to land in the region of 200-300. Perhaps it is because this rate averages out to be 1 or 2 such reports every other day (thus keeping the ultimate penalty fresh in the minds of criminals?)
    Okay, the idea that executions must be publicised to strike fear into the hearts of potential murderers makes some sense I suppose.

    But you mentioned Singapore in a previous post; their execution rate is well below the threshold required, isn't it?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The two eds)
    I hope he dies painfully and slowly, and I hope every minute of his life up to his death will be spent suffering both physically and mentally.

    I also hope people like you cry at night because he will die. I hope you will be saddened because he did not receive forgiveness or a second chance. I hope every day for the rest of your lives you go to sleep remembering what happened to this man. I take great joy in knowing firstly this scum will die and secondly all of you will be in tears watching his death.
    What a strange reply!
    Did you actually read my post? I don't feel sorry for him. I just think killing him will achieve nothing and life imprisonment is a better option.
    I can think of 4 purposes of punishment, and I'm not convinced it fits any.
    1. Retribution- it may well be easier for him to die than spend life in prison. And he probably wants to die and be a martyr. So life imprisonment will probably be a better way at making him pay for his crimes.
    2. Deterrence- studies suggest that countries with the death penalty don't have low crime rates. And killing him will make him a martyr and probably encourage others like him.
    3.Protection- yes, the death penalty will protect society from him but so will life in prison.
    4. Rehabilitation- clearly you cannot rehabilitate someone who is dead.
    Some will argue that the death penalty gives the victim's families closure. I doubt it- if he went to prison for life now he would go to prison now and be forgotten about. But no- he is now going to spend 20 years on death row, having various appeals. And this will waste more taxpayers money than sticking him in prison for life.
    Regardless, I remain totally opposed to the death penalty because of the possibility of someone being wrongly convicted and I see little reason to do it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hollyobxox)
    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...-death-penalty
    this shows that over 50% want the death penalty abolished

    Another reason I believe it should be ablosished is because it is not always accurate and in a few cases it has proven not to be

    http://www.americanbar.org/groups/in...s/alabama.html
    it wasn't right in Alabama

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...eath-sentences
    in Arkansas race has played a factor

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/2183
    Ohio is having serious flaws so it should be abloshied
    All totally irrelevant.

    My beef with you is your assertion that capital punishment is not a deterrent. I provide evidence proving it is, you reply with something totally irrelevant to that. I've never said it's a perfect method of justice - in fact, I don't think any method is perfect - but a lot of evidence does suggest that it is an effective deterrent.

    So next time, before making completely unjustified statements like:
    (Original post by hollyobxox)
    it has been proven that death penalty is not a deterrence in the US
    Maybe you'll look at the evidence first.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hollyobxox)
    There is no right or wrong answers when discussing a topic like capital punishment we are all entiteled to our own opinion
    Sadly, there are right or wrong answers. If you do not implement it and it does have a deterrence effect (and it does), you condemn innocents to die.

    If you treat life as sacred, then condemning innocents to die is surely wrong, and your refusal to implement capital punishment is therefore wrong.

    If you do not treat life as important, then executions should not bother you because life is unimportant.

    either way, you cant win
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hollyobxox)
    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...-death-penalty
    this shows that over 50% want the death penalty abolished

    Another reason I believe it should be ablosished is because it is not always accurate and in a few cases it has proven not to be

    http://www.americanbar.org/groups/in...s/alabama.html
    it wasn't right in Alabama

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/stud...eath-sentences
    in Arkansas race has played a factor

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/2183
    Ohio is having serious flaws so it should be abloshied

    Whether people want it to be abolished or not has no impact on whether it is an effective deterrent or not. Deterrence effect is based on facts, wanting it or not is based on emotion. They are separate.

    And I do agree US implementation is problematic, but that is not because capital punishment is a bad idea. It just means the implementation is horrible and it should be fixed. Its exactly the case where giving aid and subsidies is considered good, but when done haphazardly can lead to wastage (which is bad). But does it actually make the act of giving aid bad? No.

    For a case example of how to do capital punishment correctly, look at Singapore
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    Okay, the idea that executions must be publicised to strike fear into the hearts of potential murderers makes some sense I suppose.

    But you mentioned Singapore in a previous post; their execution rate is well below the threshold required, isn't it?
    Well above. The size of the city / country matters. Its worth me pointing out that Singapore is several times smaller than most US states, so the threshold is probably not as high.

    Capital punishments in Singapore are also very heavily publicized, and i think students in secondary / high school are generally taught about the crime and punishment system, given videos to watch on punishments (not capital ones), given tours of prisons etc to let everyone know the penalties for breaking the law.

    It is effective. People know and fear the punishment.

    Off my head (I dont have evidence right now), I do remember reading that most Singaporean prisoners are willing to accept 10-20 years more of jail time in exchange for caning (this is a very serious form of corporal punishment)-showing the effectiveness of 'brutal' punishments as opposed to mere incarceration
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:

    Wow haven't seen those before.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    While what he did was despicable and evil, I don't think even that calls for state authorised murder. The US is just sinking to his level.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cristocracy)
    Well above. The size of the city / country matters. Its worth me pointing out that Singapore is several times smaller than most US states, so the threshold is probably not as high.

    Capital punishments in Singapore are also very heavily publicized, and i think students in secondary / high school are generally taught about the crime and punishment system, given videos to watch on punishments (not capital ones), given tours of prisons etc to let everyone know the penalties for breaking the law.

    It is effective. People know and fear the punishment.

    Off my head (I dont have evidence right now), I do remember reading that most Singaporean prisoners are willing to accept 10-20 years more of jail time in exchange for caning (this is a very serious form of corporal punishment)-showing the effectiveness of 'brutal' punishments as opposed to mere incarceration
    0-2 executions per annum for a population of 5 million meets the threshold? This is difficult to believe.

    Well, maybe we should have prison tours for our school children, and let them know just how advanced surveillance is in this country. AFAIK, people are more deterred by the prospect of being caught than the severity of punishment itself.

    We're not discussing corporal punishment - cruel and degrading punishments are banned under the UN Convention against Torture.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VannR)
    Death penalty is inappropriate in this case - it makes him a martyr for his cause. Instead, he should be given a whole-life term and be forced to pay for his crimes the long way.
    He thinks he was a martyr but he ain't.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    0-2 executions per annum for a population of 5 million meets the threshold? This is difficult to believe.

    Well, maybe we should have prison tours for our school children, and let them know just how advanced surveillance is in this country. AFAIK, people are more deterred by the prospect of being caught than the severity of punishment itself.

    We're not discussing corporal punishment - cruel and degrading punishments are banned under the UN Convention against Torture.
    Explain the results then. Don't forget Singapore adopts a whole basket of very harsh punishments together-and the only reason why the execution rate is so low is simply because deterrence has already worked. The Crime rate is extremely, extremely low and hence the murder rate is also low. Consequentially, the execution rate is low. This makes perfect sense.

    Just because cruel and degrading punishments are banned does not mean they should. Now, if they can, and have a proven record of deterring very serious crimes which can cause grievous harms to innocents, can you proudly stand erect and declare, without an ounce of guilt or thought that 'it should be banned?'

    Don't forget, your tradeoff is necessarily causing many other innocents to suffer one way or another. It is not a choice where you choose between a brutal punishment and less brutal punishment with no effects to third parties.

    your choice, correctly, is between

    Brutally punishing the criminal OR allowing many other (anywhere from 7-40) innocents to die / suffer serious injuries.

    Can you really, without any doubts declare that brutally punishing one criminal is more wrong than letting that many innocents suffer? Remeber, its one or the other-there is no 3rd option
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rapt0r)
    After some Youtube conspiracy searches I found this interesting video.

    America's Homeland security is run by Zionist Jews and the Boston bombings were used to further justify turning to America into a police state just as we saw with 9/11 and the Patriot Act.

    Some people think Sandy Hook shootings were a hoax there are lot of flaws in the official narrative too.

    They are creating tragedies to scare people into supporting tyranny.
    #AlexJones
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SotonianOne)
    A 9mm bullet costs $0.20. That's most definitely no where close to the money paid on keeping someone alive for 50 years.

    It's inefficiency that is driving the cost. Also, starvation is free.
    So, clearly this is not the cost, whatever right wing ignoramuses might wish. The cost is the full weight and duration of the judicial process. Then you can add to this the moral arguments and dilemmas which thankfully mostly tend to win through despite a minority of opinion which likes to reside in the 1600s...
 
 
 

2,119

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
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.