Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should the Death Penalty be reintroduced for convicted paedophiles? Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    First off why are you writing these posts as though they're emails?

    What's most hilarious is the allies applied retroactive justice and then were part of the universal declaration of human rights a couple of years later which banned it. It was also already banned in the US under the constitution. Unfortunately where someone does something terrible but it just so happens to not be a crime they can't be punished. Ex post facto law is all but banned for the protection of the public.

    What you've described is essentially 'beyond reasonable doubt'. It would be rare for someone to be convicted simply off of one witness or one piece of DNA evidence


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ahh sorry if these look like Emails, its just i have a typically formal way of talking/discussing with people in real life. If we'd met physically i'd have shaken your hand by now and we'd probably be sitting down discussing this with a good drink in our hands .

    Like I previously said i'm not going to go into the full discussion of the Nuremberg trials on this thread other than to say that i do support them and shall continue to do so. To me it was not retrospective but necessary and much-needed for the remaining survivors. Justice like all things is imperfect, and it is naive of us to believe that the Nuremberg trial was carried out purely out of a sense of justice. It was not, some of it was straight-up revenge, and some of it was needed. This isn't be supporting the death penalty from a vengeful standard, but sometimes the public interest will be so strong that even the courts and justice systems cannot remain impartial. I can not even to begin to understand the pressure those judges were under, and i do wonder just how much the public opinion came into it when sentencing and prosecution.

    One final point is that it is important to remember that the publics of nearly all major countries did not fully know/understand what the Holocaust was until the end of the war, and when the true extent of the horror was revealed the public were shocked to the core.

    Finally i agree with you on the definition of beyond reasonable doubt too, so my idea would basicallly probably call for a double-prosecution process or something like that, where essentially you have the first stage and the second stage, similar to house of lords and commons when it comes to legislation, a dual-process that goes on at two-seperate times. Lengthening the process greatly but providing greater detail to everything.

    Or perhaps have the prosecution, but a fixed time before the sentencing is carried out there is an intensive review into the case, although i like this idea less as it only gives them a limited timeframe to work with, though perhaps it could be extended upon request.

    Best Regards
    Francis

    PS: Going out for a walk as i've been ill this week so i'll probably reply to you later underscore! Take care and see you later
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Francis Urquhart)
    Ahh sorry if these look like Emails, its just i have a typically formal way of talking/discussing with people in real life. If we'd met physically i'd have shaken your hand by now and we'd probably be sitting down discussing this with a good drink in our hands .

    Like I previously said i'm not going to go into the full discussion of the Nuremberg trials on this thread other than to say that i do support them and shall continue to do so. To me it was not retrospective but necessary and much-needed for the remaining survivors. Justice like all things is imperfect, and it is naive of us to believe that the Nuremberg trial was carried out purely out of a sense of justice. It was not, some of it was straight-up revenge, and some of it was needed. This isn't be supporting the death penalty from a vengeful standard, but sometimes the public interest will be so strong that even the courts and justice systems cannot remain impartial. I can not even to begin to understand the pressure those judges were under, and i do wonder just how much the public opinion came into it when sentencing and prosecution.
    Regardless of whether you support them there is no doubt whatsoever it was retrospective justice. Something all of the allies clearly thought was wrong, hence why it didn't apply in their countries.

    (Original post by Francis Urquhart)
    One final point is that it is important to remember that the publics of nearly all major countries did not fully know/understand what the Holocaust was until the end of the war, and when the true extent of the horror was revealed the public were shocked to the core.
    The law isn't based on the emotional opinions of the public

    (Original post by Francis Urquhart)
    Finally i agree with you on the definition of beyond reasonable doubt too, so my idea would basicallly probably call for a double-prosecution process or something like that, where essentially you have the first stage and the second stage, similar to house of lords and commons when it comes to legislation, a dual-process that goes on at two-seperate times. Lengthening the process greatly but providing greater detail to everything.

    Or perhaps have the prosecution, but a fixed time before the sentencing is carried out there is an intensive review into the case, although i like this idea less as it only gives them a limited timeframe to work with, though perhaps it could be extended upon request.

    Best Regards
    Francis

    PS: Going out for a walk as i've been ill this week so i'll probably reply to you later underscore! Take care and see you later
    You're proposing things which just aren't realistically feasible. There isn't really anyway at present we could have a second authority review a case because all capital punishment cases would inevitably get to the Supreme Court. Also there would be no benefit to adding a second trial, it would likely just be a rerun of the first but this time the defence would know everything the prosecution was going to use.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I'm all for it as long as it doesn't extend to people who have sex with 15 year olds who lie about their age, just genuine paedophiles.

    Plus I could just see it being applied willy nilly to Brits while paedo Imams get a child support boost. So it would have to be 100% equal across the board which I can't see it being to be honest.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    Regardless of whether you support them there is no doubt whatsoever it was retrospective justice. Something all of the allies clearly thought was wrong, hence why it didn't apply in their countries.



    The law isn't based on the emotional opinions of the public



    You're proposing things which just aren't realistically feasible. There isn't really anyway at present we could have a second authority review a case because all capital punishment cases would inevitably get to the Supreme Court. Also there would be no benefit to adding a second trial, it would likely just be a rerun of the first but this time the defence would know everything the prosecution was going to use.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm afraid although the law isnt based on the emotional opinions on the public it can still have an impact, even so-called objective justice can bend under the weight of the masses, some would argue that the Nuremberg trials which you state the allies so detested were because of public outrage. Anyways, this will be my last post for a little while but it's been a pleasure putting our brains together to see where this would end up.

    Best regards to ya!
    Francis
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    The fact that there are people out there who support the death penalty at all is quite disturbing but the fact that there are people who advocate it's use for crimes other than murder just shows how barbaric and primitive some people are.

    What's barbaric about it? So you do support the death penalty for murder, right?


    There's no such crime as 'being pedophile'. The media labels most people involved underage sex offences as pedophiles.

    I agree. What the media defines as a pedophile and what pedophile actually is gets blurred.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I agree. What the media defines as a pedophile and what pedophile actually is gets blurred.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The death penalty is never the answer.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    I agree. What the media defines as a pedophile and what pedophile actually is gets blurred.
    I don't support the death penalty for any crime, there are literally no positives to it


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Francis Urquhart)
    I'm afraid although the law isnt based on the emotional opinions on the public it can still have an impact, even so-called objective justice can bend under the weight of the masses, some would argue that the Nuremberg trials which you state the allies so detested were because of public outrage. Anyways, this will be my last post for a little while but it's been a pleasure putting our brains together to see where this would end up.

    Best regards to ya!
    Francis
    I didn't say they detested it, I pretty much said it was blatant hypocrisy.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    I don't support the death penalty for any crime, there are literally no positives to it


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Can save money. I just gave you a positive.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    Can save money. I just gave you a positive.
    There's no evidence to suggest it'd save money, it's likely it'd cost us more


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Roast)
    I do. I never said there was any solid evidence, it's a genetic defect in my opinion.


    There's certainly a gay gene, probably a straight gene too or a lack of, there has to be a gene for paedophilia because it is a sexually orientation in itself.

    It's logical.

    Well seeing that most cases of paedophilia are perpetrated by men, so it seems to be an issue with the 'Y' chromosome. Or it could be down to a segment of the brain itself, the sector that controls emotions.
    How can you be 100 percent sure about an opinion ?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    There's no evidence to suggest it'd save money, it's likely it'd cost us more Posted from TSR Mobile
    The cost of keeping a prisoner is around £40,000 per year in the UK.The cost of some rope is a one-off payment of about £5.A lot of money can be saved.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Deyesy)
    It actually is a mental disorder. It's listed in the DSM-V which is like a bible for Psychiatrists.
    I believe there is more to paedophilia than just a "mental disorder" ,remember this is the same DSM that used to say things such as
    Homosexuality being a mental disorder
    One of its authors wanted to include premenstrual syndrome (was dropped )

    New research is showing results that seem to conflict with DSM,such as that bipolar disorder and schizophrenia seem to share a similar genetic component.As we progress in the future,I suspect DSM will become outdated as molecular biology advances in that area.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Peer Support Volunteers
    (Original post by Kadak)
    I believe there is more to paedophilia than just a "mental disorder" ,remember this is the same DSM that used to say things such as
    Homosexuality being a mental disorder
    One of its authors wanted to include premenstrual syndrome (was dropped )

    New research is showing results that seem to conflict with DSM,such as that bipolar disorder and schizophrenia seem to share a similar genetic component.As we progress in the future,I suspect DSM will become outdated as molecular biology advances in that area.
    I have my own greivances against the DSM-V trust me; I'm not saying it's perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It says if you grieve over a lost one over a certain about of time, greiving can be counted as a symptom of depression. Something like paedophilia isn't black and white in terms of finding out what causes it.

    I stand by my original comment that we should be exploring the reasons behind it and not killing every single last person who commits such an horrendous offence.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Deyesy)
    I have my own greivances against the DSM-V trust me; I'm not saying it's perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It says if you grieve over a lost one over a certain about of time, greiving can be counted as a symptom of depression. Something like paedophilia isn't black and white in terms of finding out what causes it.

    I stand by my original comment that we should be exploring the reasons behind it and not killing every single last person who commits such an horrendous offence.
    Yeah, I agree about your comment on the paedophile thing,it`s just the psychiatry thing.That's pretty silly of them,although I do sympathise to a small extent since we know so little about the brain and having a full picture would require complete knowledge of the pathophysiology of the brain,an unenviable research task.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    The cost of keeping a prisoner is around £40,000 per year in the UK.The cost of some rope is a one-off payment of about £5.A lot of money can be saved.
    The cost of capital murder trials and the subsequent appeals are enormous. I find it amazing how people are so happy to revert back to archaic forms of justice and abandon the human rights that are there to protect us. There are people dying fighting for human rights but here people just want to lynch some pedos.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    The cost of capital murder trials and the subsequent appeals are enormous. I find it amazing how people are so happy to revert back to archaic forms of justice and abandon the human rights that are there to protect us. There are people dying fighting for human rights but here people just want to lynch some pedos.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The cost of a trial is relatively low, if done efficiently.

    Who mentioned lynching?

    I also never mentioned pedos.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    The cost of a trial is relatively low, if done efficiently.

    Who mentioned lynching?

    I also never mentioned pedos.
    You're just making baseless claims, trials for murder are already expensive. If the stakes were raised the cost would go up. Sorry, I'll rephrase: '...some people here just want to hang some criminals'



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yes. Also murderers
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    You're just making baseless claims, trials for murder are already expensive. If the stakes were raised the cost would go up. Sorry, I'll rephrase: '...some people here just want to hang some criminals'



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So you admit that the trials are happening regardless.

    An appeal over a death sentence does not need to be more expensive than that of a regular appeal.

    The death sentence can save a huge amount of money, for that reason, it is worth doing alone, never mind the other reasons.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • 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.

  • 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.