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

Death Penalty review Watch

  • View Poll Results: Reinstate death penalty
    Yes, given thorough reform
    38.89%
    No, it's immoral in all cases
    61.11%

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    I didn't make myself clear enough, or perhaps you're struggling with English: this is about degrees of error. It is an accident that the wrong person has been sentenced to death, as it is an accident that a driver ends up in a car crash.
    I'm perfectly fine with English, you however seem to be confused. In an accident, the wrong person has not been sentenced to death. The person has been killed and not sentenced to death, so I do suggest you look up the definition of sentenced as you seem to be struggling with the meaning.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by College_Dropout)
    I'm perfectly fine with English, you however seem to be confused. In an accident, the wrong person has not been sentenced to death. The person has been killed and not sentenced to death, so I do suggest you look up the definition of sentenced as you seem to be struggling with the meaning.
    No one (unless you're insane) intentionally crashes to die, and those who do will hit someone who had no intention of being hit. These are accidents in the same way that sentencing the_wrong_man to death is an accident. Do you see now?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    I didn't make myself clear enough, or perhaps you're struggling with English: this is about degrees of error. It is an accident that the wrong person has been sentenced to death, as it is an accident that a driver ends up in a car crash.
    Yes, but a modern society can function perfectly well (if not better) without the death penalty.

    On the other hand, a modern society could not function without the use of automobiles. Banning automobiles because there are accidents isn't the solution, for this would be too drastic. Instead we use better safety regulations and technology to make automobiles safer.

    The same can be said with the justice system; we don't jump to the drastic step of reinstating capital punishment, we reform in more moderate (and effective) ways.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thomasllf)
    Yes, but a modern society can function perfectly well (if not better) without the death penalty.

    On the other hand, a modern society could not function without the use of automobiles. Banning automobiles because there are accidents isn't the solution, for this would be too drastic. Instead we use better safety regulations and technology to make automobiles safer.

    The same can be said with the justice system; we don't jump to the drastic step of reinstating capital punishment, we reform in more moderate (and effective) ways.
    At the end of the day, you're left asking what the justice system is there for. If it's for protecting the innocent, then the criminal justice system is simply the last port of call for the evils that society has allowed to flourish. It's the point of no return, and any reform made must be strict to uphold justice: crossing that line.

    As you say, you do not dilute justice or remove it completely due to it's few faults- you improve with technology and method. Just like automobiles.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    At the end of the day, you're left asking what the justice system is there for. If it's for protecting the innocent, then the criminal justice system is simply the last port of call for the evils that society has allowed to flourish. It's the point of no return, and any reform made must be strict to uphold justice: crossing that line.

    As you say, you do not dilute justice or remove it completely due to it's few faults- you improve with technology and method. Just like automobiles.
    Right... So what I'm saying is is that you need to take the most moderate (but effective) steps possible to fix problems; it's a balancing act. Reinstating the death penalty is not the most moderate or effective step to reduce crime. There are alternatives that are more moderate and more effective. Also, I'm fairly certain there are stats that say that capital punishment does little to deter crime.

    The criminal justice system is not just used for protecting the innocent - it's used (or very much should be used) for rehabilitation as much as punishment, deference or protecting the innocent; you can't rehabilitate a corpse.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HigherMinion)
    No one (unless you're insane) intentionally crashes to die, and those who do will hit someone who had no intention of being hit. These are accidents in the same way that sentencing the_wrong_man to death is an accident. Do you see now?
    A large proportion of fatal collisions are caused by driver error, for example if you are not driving appropriately during wet road conditions it is foreseeable you may lose control which may result in a crash and cause death. Yes you may not directly go out there looking to kill someone but it is foreseeable and therefore not an accident, so no I dont see the similarities.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think from the point of view of a policy maker whether it's "moral" or not is of subsidiary importance to it's effectiveness compared with the effectiveness of what it would replace. There's a clear economic argument, especially if implemented in such a way that it isn't plagued with inefficiencies like the American system. There's a social argument for a greater sense of victim justice than the current terms of sentencing allow, and possibly severe crimes which aren't punishable by the death penalty would result in longer sentences assuming many of those now given life would be eligible for the death penalty.

    I don't see capital punishment as an end in itself but rather as an indication of the rational revision of an inefficient system. Naturally the liberals, secular by name but religious by thought, recoil at the idea then search for words to justify their feelings.
 
 
 
  • 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?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.