Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'll reiterate what United1892 said; a strong NAY.
    .
    .
    There is a plethora of things wrong with this bill.

    (Original post by Birchington)
    b) Murder
    c) Attempted murder
    d) Paedophilia
    There's a chance for me getting a lot of hate for saying this, and I care little, but paedophilia shouldn't be a crime.

    Paedophilia is merely characterised by the sexual attractions to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger, and criminalising this is introducing thought crime, a tad Orwellian.

    You're understanding of this matter conflates sexual behaviour with sexual attractions, child molestation with paedophilia, and ignores other possible motives for such a nefarious act (child molestation.)

    As a product of conflating, you're also ignoring:
    - hebephilia, the sexual attraction to early adolescents (11 - 14)
    - ephebophilia, the sexual attraction to late adolescents (15 - 19)
    Both of which either in part or entirely transgresses the age of consent in terms of acceptable "behaviour" in the context you gave them.

    It is semantically wrong to use those terms, and it looks unprofessional.

    e) Terrorism
    Just for a complete review, as somebody else has already mentioned, 'terrorism' has been mentioned twice.

    f) Treason
    Absolutely not, don't appeal to loyalty (meant like don't appeal to nature.)(Loyalty being the best antonym for treason I could find.)

    An action should be judged by the circumstances, motives and consequences of said actions, on an individual basis. Morally (though morality is largely subjective) Britain as an entity might be in the wrong, as opposed to the "traitor".

    Treason just isn't applicable, as an action shouldn't be judged like that; there could be good albeit treasonous things, and bad treasonous things.

    3 Appeal

    (1) A person may appeal their death sentence a maximum of once, if new evidence has came to light, or the person feels they have been tried unfairly.
    The case should automatically be reviewed and temporarily postponed if new evidence comes to light, regardless of whether the convicted person makes the appeal or not.

    4 Death

    (1) The criminal will be put to death by lethal injection
    (a) A specialist small team will be trained in how to administer this, and will be based out of a location within the United Kingdom
    I haven't done any research on this, but is the lethal injection the most humane method of doing this? I can't imagine so, for both the prisoners and the people responsible for carrying this out.

    Notes

    As well as getting rid of the worst in our society, it will inevitably deter some criminals from committing these offences!
    So you're trying to force/superimpose loyalty onto the subjects of Britain by using this act as a deterrent to treasonous activity? (Also inadvertently introducing thought-crime.)
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Citation? You also have a single case, how many executions are there in the US each year?
    But can that excuse the one mishappening? Just a thing to ponder on, as I can think of arguments for and against.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Morally, I don't agree with the death penalty, the risk of error is too high.

    More importantly, studies found that instilling the death penalty DOES NOT act as a deterrent, and the cost of an execution comes out more expensive than regular imprisonment.

    Also, death penalty for attempted murder? Really?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Paedophiles for merely being paedophiles, or paedophiles who have committed a crime against children with the motive of paedophilia?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I support the death penalty only if public executions are legalised, as it is not much of a deterrent if the execution is carried out in some dark room where potential criminals cannot see the potential consequence of committing a crime. Having public executions mean that people can see the consequence of committing a serious crime, which will resonate in their minds more deeply, so they may reconsider when they think of committing a crime.

    I do not support some kind of non-punishment where criminals are given a lethal injection or are shot by a firing squad. Many people suffer a lot more when they die, so why should criminals have the benefit of getting an easy death when good people who abide by the law may suffer a lot more when they die, for example, if the die from cancer. If we are going to have all these non-punishments just to seem humane, we should just send people to prison for life, as that means they may actually suffer for years, which can be a justified punishment for their crime.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    I support the death penalty only if public executions are legalised, as it is not much of a deterrent if the execution is carried out in some dark room where potential criminals cannot see the potential consequence of committing a crime. Having public executions mean that people can see the consequence of committing a serious crime, which will resonate in their minds more deeply, so they may reconsider when they think of committing a crime.

    I do not support some kind of non-punishment where criminals are given a lethal injection or are shot by a firing squad. Many people suffer a lot more when they die, so why should criminals have the benefit of getting an easy death when good people who abide by the law may suffer a lot more when they die, for example, if the die from cancer. If we are going to have all these non-punishments just to seem humane, we should just send people to prison for life, as that means they may actually suffer for years, which can be a justified punishment for their crime.
    So hang them in public then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    So hang them in public then?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I fear that that hanging may not be a sufficient form of punishment for some extreme cases.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I am a libertarian, I believe that the state's influence should be limited to the economy and so will naturally vote nay. To go further than this, and actually somewhat add to the debate, in the USA each death penalty costs more than lifetime incarceration, there's a chance that you may kill an innocent in some cases, with imprisonment some may be found innocent or at least be rehabilitated, and finally, in the name of progress, we've moved on from this barbaric ritual, to go again to capital punishment is a step backward and regressive.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nay.

    I am opposed to the death sentence. No system of justice is perfect and I would never wish to hang an innocent person. Secondly, those motivated to kill for a supposed political or religious motive would regard it as martyrdom and I am not going to give that satisfaction to them or their supporters.

    I welcome the opportunity to vote no and for the House to renew its opposition to the death penalty.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Nay.

    I do not believe in the death sentence, and having only one appeal is a bit silly really. What if new evidence surfaces after their first appeal? Are they put to death anyway?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Then what's the point of a justice system, surely all penalties are "wrong"?
    The point of a justice system isn't retribution. Retributivism is barbaric*.

    The point of a justice system can be any or all of rehabilitation, deterrence, protection of the public, repayment to the community, etc etc.

    *going to note that this is my opinion, and there are valid (but incorrect IMO) arguments against it.

    While I don't believe in the sanctity of life, I still don't see anything good about the death penalty. Nay.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. Where is your proof that crime rates in those areas have gone up because of the abolition of the death penalty in the UK?

    It also doesn't work with terrorism because terrorists are brainwashed with the idea that they'll be rewarded for their death to the cause, so they are not afraid to die. Plus this will make those terrorists martyrs. No one really cares about the terrorists in prison, but they'll worship the terrorists who were killed by westerners. When has the death of a prominent terrorist inhibited the activity of that organisation?

    Why don't you find more rehabilitation methods for those who are paedophiles? I mean I understand child rape, that could be punished by other means, but stopping the roots of child pornography sites and distribution should more important than stopping the end users. For example, arresting a drug addict isn't going to stop other drugs addicts from taking drugs, mostly because they're addicts. Like I said, if the state spent more time treating their psychological problems rather than punishing them for some who commit the milder acts, they would be less of a paedophilia issue.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Looks like yous liked this bill then
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Under no circumstances will I vote for any bill such as this.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nebelbon)
    Compensation can be given for false imprisonment. You cannot compensate a dead man.
    A dead man no longer cares…
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    Looks like yous liked this bill then
    Just to reiterate, if you make the execution process quick (no decades of waiting on the death row like in 'Murrica) and only in cases of terrorism, completely mental killing sprees, murderers who can't be rehabilitated, etc. with solid direct evidence or a confession, I'll give you an aye.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Just to reiterate, if you make the execution process quick (no decades of waiting on the death row like in 'Murrica) and only in cases terrorism, completely mental killing sprees, murderers who can't be rehabilitated, etc. with solid direct evidence or a confession, I'll give you an aye.
    I will consider it
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    A dead man no longer cares…
    I'll use that excuse in my next murder trial. Oh, and by the way, for any innocent that's killed, it's state sponsored manslaughter.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, it's immoral and serves no purpose. This bill should also be costed as it will cost the tax-payer enormous amounts of money.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    A dead man no longer cares…
    "It's fine to kill innocent people as dead people can't kick up a fuss!"


    The TSR conservative party ladies and gentlemen.
 
 
 
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
Are you going to a festival?

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.