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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SyedAreYouDumb)
    Victim (s) decides what the criminal should get blood money (and a prison sentence) or the death penalty.

    I am for it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What if the victim is dead because they were murdered?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheTechN1304)
    I agree with the death penalty, however I believe that it should only be used when there is enough evidence to prove that the accused is guilty. If you wrongly accuse someone and they are sent to prison, they can be released when the truth is revealed, but if you execute someone who you thought was guilty but it turns out they're innocent...you can't bring them back.
    You are only sent to prison if there is enough evidence you are guilty though.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by superdarklord)
    What are these certain offences that you think it is permittable in?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I would rather not say, can't be bothered with the uproar and quote back and forth it would cause.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Life imprisonment is worse than the death penalty.

    You don't suffer for your crime if you're dead, whereas you waste away in prison for the rest of your life knowing that the choice you made has ruined your only life.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wee.Guy)
    not against in principle, but our law system is in a bit of a mess that it needs to be sorted before death penalty is implemented.
    Our legal system is a mess?? LOL most countries would die for a system as stable and good as ours, given this isn't paradise I don't expect it to get any better.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DannyYYYY)
    Life imprisonment is worse than the death penalty.

    You don't suffer for your crime if you're dead, whereas you waste away in prison for the rest of your life knowing that the choice you made has ruined your only life.
    So why dont we torture people then as that is even worse than going to prison?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aoxa)
    No. Look at the US - the amount of money people spend on appeals ETC costs way more than prison accommodation.

    In the UK people have the right to free counsel - so the taxpayer would be footing the bill for the millions of pounds in appeals.

    So, basically, you're saying that we should bring back the death penalty to save money, whereas, in reality, you'd be doing the exact opposite. Other than your point on the economy, you have no real reason for bring the death penalty back. The death penalty does not deter people from crime - so even if we did bring it back, you really wouldn't be achieving anything.
    If someone is rightly committed after murder or any other sick criminal act they should have their right to appeal revoked. It's only because of the pathetic European court on human rights that has corrupted our justice system. No sick individual should have that right. So money saved on that count. Then there are many cheap methods of execution so money saved again.

    You assumed we reintroduce the penalty while a member of the EU but considering the liberal stance of the EU that will not happen. In any realistic world we reintroduce it as an independent nation and so a human right act which does contain the many loopholes our current one does would not exist.

    So in my world yes it would be cheaper and yes it would benefit the economy.

    Please do not compare the situation to the USA because I believe various factors especially their gun laws contribute to the high rate of crime. All I'm saying is bring the death penalty back, change our justice system and bob your uncle.

    will it reduce crime, maybe not but will it increase crime, that we cannot say because no one knows but any rational person would question why.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Undisclosed 15)
    So why dont we torture people then as that is even worse than going to prison.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    •Inhumane
    •Takes a long time
    •Would probably scar the people we employ to torture them
    •Not really cost effective.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Never, under any circumstance, for any crime. Ever.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arithmeticae)
    It solves nothing, is based on the idea for revenge and it's pretty hard to rehabilitate someone once they're dead.

    Capital punishment requires us to be unprincipled, to violate basic moral conviction, to act hypocritically, to indulge vice, to deter empathy with the condemned, to waste money, to disaffect members of society, to likely cause more harm than well-being, and to negligibly if at all decrease crime rate. Against it in all cases.

    Posted from TSR Mobile

    THIS.

    You've said everything that I wanted to say.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Against it in civil cases; for it in military cases.

    Also, long-term prisoners should have the option of being killed if they so choose. I regard whole-life imprisonment as unnecessarily cruel and abject, and would much prefer death if I were in the prisoner's shoes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Undisclosed 15)
    So why dont we torture people then as that is even worse than going to prison.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why, indeed it is.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Mediocre_One)
    Our legal system is a mess?? LOL most countries would die for a system as stable and good as ours, given this isn't paradise I don't expect it to get any better.

    yes it is far better than many, however you cant implement the death penalty when people found guilty of murder are out in less than 10years.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Always against it; I think taking someone's life can never be considered "right".

    (Original post by superdarklord)
    So say there's a man who has raped several women and tortured them before sadistically killing them. Does he not deserve to die? What do you think is a suitable punishment?


    I must say I agree with this.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Life imprisonment

    (Original post by MASTER265)
    If someone is rightly committed after murder or any other sick criminal act they should have their right to appeal revoked. It's only because of the pathetic European court on human rights that has corrupted our justice system. No sick individual should have that right. So money saved on that count. Then there are many cheap methods of execution so money saved again.
    Except this wouldn't work in principle because very few cases ever have perfect, indisputable evidence. By removing someone's right to appeal, you are increasing the chance that someone may be incorrectly punished and executed, which would obviously be wrong. If you are putting in place the most extreme punishment, you will have to put in safeguards to "double-check" the sentence.

    Removing the right to appeal would likely be going against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well, as it could lead to a violation of the right to a fair trial.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    2) I doubt it acts as a deterrent. Just need to look at the United States
    So you're saying that, if the death penalty were abolished in the US (or the particular states in which it is currently used), the crime rates would be no higher than they are now? What makes you think that?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by All-rounder)
    •Inhumane
    •Takes a long time
    •Would probably scar the people we employ to torture them
    •Not really cost effective.


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    Points 1,2 and 4 apply to life imprisonment and you support that.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MASTER265)
    If someone is rightly committed after murder or any other sick criminal act they should have their right to appeal revoked. It's only because of the pathetic European court on human rights that has corrupted our justice system. No sick individual should have that right. So money saved on that count. Then there are many cheap methods of execution so money saved again.

    You assumed we reintroduce the penalty while a member of the EU but considering the liberal stance of the EU that will not happen. In any realistic world we reintroduce it as an independent nation and so a human right act which does contain the many loopholes our current one does would not exist.

    So in my world yes it would be cheaper and yes it would benefit the economy.

    Please do not compare the situation to the USA because I believe various factors especially their gun laws contribute to the high rate of crime. All I'm saying is bring the death penalty back, change our justice system and bob your uncle.

    will it reduce crime, maybe not but will it increase crime, that we cannot say because no one knows but any rational person would question why.
    I'm not assuming that we bring back the death penalty while in the EU - a condition of joining is that the death penalty must be revoked/banned while any such country is within the EU (the Labour government of the '60s revoked the death penalty to get into the EEC)

    Also, revoking someones right to appeal on their life is harsh - this is boarding on almost a dictator style way of thinking - taking away their human right to speak freely and try to free themselves should be quashed because they committed a crime. Imagine the outrage anyways, whoever committed this crime probably has a family too - that they wouldn't see their family member again because the right to appeal was lost. Your manner of thinking here is sloppy - taking away a fundamental human right - the right to freedom of speech (as their appeal won't be heard) - will bring in all sorts of condemnation from many democratic countries, allies, and the UN.

    I also wasn't comparing the situation to the US - I was using the US as an example. I agree with your point on their gun laws, however, if somebody in this country wished to get an unregistered gun, it wouldn't be too hard - guns are smuggled into the country each year and if you have criminal links, it would be easy enough.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I don't blame people for people wanting dead the guy who murdered their brother/raped their daughter/etc (although I do think long-term resentment is unhealthy), but I am firmly against capital punishment. The purpose of the courts should not be to punish criminals, it should be to physically prevent criminals re-offending (with a prison sentence) until they can be rehabilitated.

    The death penalty is not a deterrent against crime; it generally costs MORE to kill a criminal than to imprison them until the end of their natural lives; it is irreversible in the case of juries making mistakes (which is always going to happen, the system is never going to be perfect), and it is does nothing to rehabilitate the criminal.

    (Original post by imtelling)
    Most people agree with it.
    Would you care to provide some statistics to substantiate that claim?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arithmeticae)
    It solves nothing, is based on the idea for revenge and it's pretty hard to rehabilitate someone once they're dead.

    Capital punishment requires us to be unprincipled, to violate basic moral conviction, to act hypocritically, to indulge vice, to deter empathy with the condemned, to waste money, to disaffect members of society, to likely cause more harm than well-being, and to negligibly if at all decrease crime rate. Against it in all cases.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Holy **** that was well written. I commend you.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    So you're saying that, if the death penalty were abolished in the US (or the particular states in which it is currently used), the crime rates would be no higher than they are now? What makes you think that?
    Whether the death penalty is used is decided by the states individually, as you seem to have realised. States that use the death penalty actually have a higher crime rate than those that don't.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • What newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • 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

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