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

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    People are now pre-pubescent until they are no longer a minor, interesting shift in definition there.
    The definition of pedophila is pre-pubescent.
    Post-pubescent but still a minor is ephebophilia and pubescent is hebephilia.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    It's hypocritical as you're making the point that ending someone elses life is bad by ending someones life.

    It is non justice as for many, death isn't punishment. It's just the end.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You're making the point that ending somebody's life beyond the remit of the law (or in this case committing treason, terrorism, or being a kiddy fiddler also) by ending their life within the remit of the law. The fundamental concept is the action is beyond the law, the punishment is within the law.

    And it's not a punishment to withdraw a persons status of being alive? If you're going to argue it's not justice there are much more solid ways of doing so.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You're making the point that ending somebody's life beyond the remit of the law (or in this case committing treason, terrorism, or being a kiddy fiddler also) by ending their life within the remit of the law. The fundamental concept is the action is beyond the law, the punishment is within the law.

    And it's not a punishment to withdraw a persons status of being alive? If you're going to argue it's not justice there are much more solid ways of doing so.
    Ending life should never be within the law unless it's to protect other life. It should also be a last resort.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Since you're being pedantic, where the only alternative is an extremely strong risk of serious harm coming to others. There is no risk of that happening in a properly managed penal system, and thus it is always preferable to the death penalty.
    What properly managed penal systems have you seen?

    (Original post by Aph)
    The definition of pedophila is pre-pubescent.
    Post-pubescent but still a minor is ephebophilia and pubescent is hebephilia.
    Which raises the issue in the bill with using the colloquial term for child sex offences without specifying such
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    nay.

    killing terrorists actively involved in war is one thing, but this is too far.
    terrorism is nothing new (remember Guy Fawkes?) just cause he was chopped into little pieces and had his head stuck on a pole, is in no way an excuse to allow it in this day and age.
    It would be a grievous breach of human rights protocol as well.
    and as for the other crimes listed, we already have a perfectly decent way of dealing with criminals, why change it to some medieval system we ditched decades ago?
    (America hasn't left the dark ages yet)
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Ending life should never be within the law unless it's to protect other life. It should also be a last resort.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Whether it should or not is irrelevant to the fact that if it is there is the critical distinction
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Oh, so you can't remember the definition of murder either? I thought you were more intelligent than that.




    Then one case of false imprisonment, especially if only proven to be false post mortem, is surely enough to oppose imprisonment.
    Nope.

    Compensation can be given for false imprisonment. You cannot compensate a dead man.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What properly managed penal systems have you seen?



    Which raises the issue in the bill with using the colloquial term for child sex offences without specifying such
    Yes but that wasn't my point.
    (Original post by JeremyOU)
    nay.

    killing terrorists actively involved in war is one thing, but this is too far.
    terrorism is nothing new (remember Guy Fawkes?) just cause he was chopped into little pieces and had his head stuck on a pole, is in no way an excuse to allow it in this day and age.
    It would be a grievous breach of human rights protocol as well.
    and as for the other crimes listed, we already have a perfectly decent way of dealing with criminals, why change it to some medieval system we ditched decades ago?
    (America hasn't left the dark ages yet)
    I salute you good sir. A Tory who has a continuous. A rare sight indeed
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    No.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    Nope.

    Compensation can be given for false imprisonment. You cannot compensate a dead man.
    You can't really compensate somebody who has been the victim of false imprisonment either, you can give them some money and a formal apology, but is that really compensation for perhaps half a life behind bars?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Which breaches how many human "rights" people keep shouting about (despite not fundamentally existing according to a majority of the British populace)?
    None, as far as I'm aware.


    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Nobody deserves that treatment. The way to bring about humane behaviour is to show our own humanity, forgiveness and compassion even when it's most difficult, not to revert to our worse and more animalistic instincts to punish and cause suffering.
    In any other case than murder, I would agree with you. But a murderer has deliberately ended another human's life. That person was someone's best friend, someone's mum or dad, someone's son or daughter, or someone's soulmate. For any one of those, someone else has lost an immeasurable amount. And you never know what that person might have done. They might have changed the world. If they were younger , they might have had children. When you think about it, that's eventually potentially a million people that will never live. I get what you're saying about showing humanity, forgiveness and compassion and of course that's important - even a murderer should be forgiven. But what's more important is showing humanity and compassion to those affected - and to do that, it's necessary to understand the enormity of the loss and impact when one human dies before their time, and as such it's only fair that the murderer should feel their share of that.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You can't really compensate somebody who has been the victim of false imprisonment either, you can give them some money and a formal apology, but is that really compensation for perhaps half a life behind bars?
    It's better than nothing, and I'd agree it isn't enough. However that is no reason not to disagree with saying no to capital punishment.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    None, as far as I'm aware.



    In any other case than murder, I would agree with you. But a murderer has deliberately ended another human's life. That person was someone's best friend, someone's mum or dad, someone's son or daughter, or someone's soulmate. For any one of those, someone else has lost an immeasurable amount. And you never know what that person might have done. They might have changed the world. If they were younger , they might have had children. When you think about it, that's eventually potentially a million people that will never live. I get what you're saying about showing humanity, forgiveness and compassion and of course that's important - even a murderer should be forgiven. But what's more important is showing humanity and compassion to those affected - and to do that, it's necessary to understand the enormity of the loss and impact when one human dies before their time, and as such it's only fair that the murderer should feel their share of that.
    Unless we're talking about a psychopath - and I mean that in the sense of being severely mentally ill - I think a murderer will quite naturally feel that without draconian punishments. Very often offences aren't pre-mediated, they're conducted in a state of sheer anger that later turns to immense regret. Whatever we do, we can't bring back the dead, we can't stop a victim's lover ones hurting dearly. What we can do is work together to build a society where as few people as possible suffer that fate. Where we don't have a so-called justice system that integrates people who enjoy smoking plants with violent criminal gangs rather than their local community. Where we resist that anger, not embrace it, and stick to our principle that taking a life for that reason is never, ever justified. If we can do that, there will not be as many people lost to crime either as victims or perpetrators, and that must always be our aim.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    None, as far as I'm aware.



    In any other case than murder, I would agree with you. But a murderer has deliberately ended another human's life. That person was someone's best friend, someone's mum or dad, someone's son or daughter, or someone's soulmate. For any one of those, someone else has lost an immeasurable amount. And you never know what that person might have done. They might have changed the world. If they were younger , they might have had children. When you think about it, that's eventually potentially a million people that will never live. I get what you're saying about showing humanity, forgiveness and compassion and of course that's important - even a murderer should be forgiven. But what's more important is showing humanity and compassion to those affected - and to do that, it's necessary to understand the enormity of the loss and impact when one human dies before their time, and as such it's only fair that the murderer should feel their share of that.
    Time to look over our "rights" methinks
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Nay for reasons already stated within this thread.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, but only if it's terrorism or there's solid direct evidence or a confession.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Unless we're talking about a psychopath - and I mean that in the sense of being severely mentally ill - I think a murderer will quite naturally feel that without draconian punishments. Very often offences aren't pre-mediated, they're conducted in a state of sheer anger that later turns to immense regret. Whatever we do, we can't bring back the dead, we can't stop a victim's lover ones hurting dearly. What we can do is work together to build a society where as few people as possible suffer that fate. Where we don't have a so-called justice system that integrates people who enjoy smoking plants with violent criminal gangs rather than their local community. Where we resist that anger, not embrace it, and stick to our principle that taking a life for that reason is never, ever justified. If we can do that, there will not be as many people lost to crime either as victims or perpetrators, and that must always be our aim.
    Of course most murderers will feel some regret naturally, but in most cases someone mentally healthy who would deliberately kill someone - whether premeditated or not - isn't going to quite appreciate the pain they caused until they feel the punishment. What I'm also in favour of, though, is contact where appropriate/safe between the murderer and the loved ones of the deceased, because I think that can help in both the healing process for the loved ones and the realisation process for the murderer.

    I agree with you about building a society in which as few people as possible are murdered, and I think the key to that as much as anything is education. I'd like to see some murderers who have genuinely repented and know the full extent of what they did allowed to give assemblies etc in the schools in the inner city areas which are probably going to turn out most of the next generation of murderers. If kids have the sheer impact of murder, and violent crime in general, drummed into them by someone who was once like them and who they can sort of relate to, then perhaps they might just think twice before picking up that knife.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'd prefer attempted murder and murder to be removed (I only think mass murderers and serial killers should get it), paedophiles should be chemically castrated, oh and child killers should also be executed.

    On a minor note, I believe hanging to be a better method, as believe it or not, when done properly, there is no pain and it's much quicker than a lethal injection.

    I'd like the points at the top to be considered to allow me to vote aye.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Wellzi)
    I'd prefer attempted murder and murder to be removed (I only think mass murderers and serial killers should get it), paedophiles should be chemically castrated, oh and child killers should also be executed.

    On a minor note, I believe hanging to be a better method, as believe it or not, when done properly, there is no pain and it's much quicker than a lethal injection.

    I'd like the points at the top to be considered to allow me to vote aye.
    Also much easier to do public hangings

    Now watch the opponents find a single case of a botched hanging and cite that to say that hanging is a vile form of execution
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Christ almighty no. Why on earth should those convicted of heinous crimes such as murder be given the easy way out? I realise this is an unusual stance for a leftie to take, and I am normally in favour of rehabilitative justice, but if you've deliberately killed another human being, you should be made to spend the rest of your days sitting in a cold, damp jail cell all day with no luxuries, little contact with the outside world and one small, bland meal a day - in other words, being made to seriously regret what you did. Not dead and unable to suffer the consequences of your actions.
    Well, I'd settle for setting up gulag style camps for the crimes listed above, but I think that's even more unlikely to pass through the house...
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 7, 2015
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

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.