Should James Holmes (Batman killing) get the death penalty? Watch

Bonoahx
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#161
Report 7 years ago
#161
It's a bit of an odd situation.

If he's given the death penalty, that's it. But he'd be quickly sped through it and wouldn't have a chance to think about what he's done.

If he's given life with the chance of parole, he'd probably be murdered by someone upon his release. Life without parole he'd eventually be killed by the prisoners, or by himself if he's stuck in solitary confinement (he'd get so lonely he'd go crazy enough that he'd either do that or create a situation where the prison guards would have to kill him).

If he's found insane and sent to an asylum or whatever it's called in the USA, not much would change. He'd eventually be killed or kill himself. Especially if it's part of a prison. All in all, it depends on how quick the state wants him to die. Whatever the judge sentences him to, someone or some group's going to complain. They'll just have to decide which group has the least influence on the public's view.
0
reply
Bulbasaur
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#162
Report 7 years ago
#162
(Original post by InternetGangster)
I can't think of anybody more deserving of the death penalty. Kill the *******.
This is the problem. We're going about the justice system all wrong. It shouldn't be done by emotion but by morality.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
0
reply
Joeman560
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#163
Report 7 years ago
#163
(Original post by A level Az)
Neither. He should be tortured.
Would you personally torture him? If given the chance?
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#164
Report 7 years ago
#164
(Original post by Aoide)
What positive effect does killing him have?
It prevents wasting money keeping him locked up for the rest of his life. What negative effects does killing him have?
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#165
Report 7 years ago
#165
(Original post by Bulbasaur)
This is the problem. We're going about the justice system all wrong. It shouldn't be done by emotion but by morality.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
What do you propose?
0
reply
didgeridoo12uk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#166
Report 7 years ago
#166
(Original post by InternetGangster)
The man deserves to be killed. Anyway, the guy is a psychopath, you can't simply 'fix' him.
revenge is never a healthy quality in a society, which is why the people affected by a crime aren't the ones who decide the punishment. nobody deserves to die.

and you can fix a wide range of mental health issues, why not a psychopath.
0
reply
Americaniamh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#167
Report 7 years ago
#167
(Original post by Bulbasaur)
This is the problem. We're going about the justice system all wrong. It shouldn't be done by emotion but by morality.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
For the most part though, morality is dictated by emotion.

And emotion is dictated by prejudice.
0
reply
ForKicks
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#168
Report 7 years ago
#168
(Original post by InternetGangster)
The man deserves to be killed. Anyway, the guy is a psychopath, you can't simply 'fix' him.
Soo, you say he deserves to be killed AND that he has a mental illness? Not a fan of diminished responsibility then?
0
reply
Aoide
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#169
Report 7 years ago
#169
It prevents wasting money keeping him locked up for the rest of his life. What negative effects does killing him have?
Killing a criminal costs as much as locing them up.
If we lock him away for life in top security the chance of escape is tiny.
Do I really need to give you a reason not to kill someone? Is it fine to kill unless we have a reason not to?
0
reply
Joeman560
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#170
Report 7 years ago
#170
(Original post by InternetGangster)
It prevents wasting money keeping him locked up for the rest of his life. What negative effects does killing him have?
You realise keeping a man on death row is more expensive than in the regular prison right?
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#171
Report 7 years ago
#171
(Original post by ForKicks)
Soo, you say he deserves to be killed AND that he has a mental illness? Not a fan of diminished responsibility then?
On second thought, I take that back.
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#172
Report 7 years ago
#172
(Original post by Joeman560)
You realise keeping a man on death row is more expensive than in the regular prison right?
Apparently so. I take back what I said
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#173
Report 7 years ago
#173
(Original post by Aoide)
Killing a criminal costs as much as locing them up.
If we lock him away for life in top security the chance of escape is tiny.
Do I really need to give you a reason not to kill someone? Is it fine to kill unless we have a reason not to?
Fair play.
0
reply
InternetGangster
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#174
Report 7 years ago
#174
(Original post by didgeridoo12uk)
revenge is never a healthy quality in a society, which is why the people affected by a crime aren't the ones who decide the punishment. nobody deserves to die.

and you can fix a wide range of mental health issues, why not a psychopath.
On that thought, what do you think about killing animals? I agree that many people with mental illnesses can be rehabilitated, however it would be too much of a risk to release this man back into society.
0
reply
didgeridoo12uk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#175
Report 7 years ago
#175
(Original post by InternetGangster)
On that thought, what do you think about killing animals? I agree that many people with mental illnesses can be rehabilitated, however it would be too much of a risk to release this man back into society.
if you kill them for food and treat them with respect when they're alive i don't see a problem with killing animals

if it were a risk to release him back into society, he wouldn't be classed as rehabilitated...
0
reply
Liquidise.
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#176
Report 7 years ago
#176
Nah, killing him would be a sign of weakness and an act of revenge. His mental health is also yet to be determined I think, therefore there may be other people who need to be held responsible, ie. the doctors who were supposed to monitor him. Until this case is resolved and it is proven whether everything could have been prevented, there's no need to jump to conclusions. But in the end, I say lock him up for life in a maximum security penitentiary or a lunatic asylum.
0
reply
Charzhino
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#177
Report 7 years ago
#177
No he shouldnt. He should be tortured instead
0
reply
cl_steele
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#178
Report 7 years ago
#178
I dont think he should be killed but in my opinion he is way beyond rehabilitation, either way this scum will never see the light of day again so its fairly academic what is done with him...
Let the victims decide.
0
reply
Tycho
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#179
Report 7 years ago
#179
(Original post by Dalek1099)
It costs so much because they don't execute them straight away-this man could be executed straight away because we know he is guilty.
Do we? The last I checked people were considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. This legal system is the only way of preventing miscarriages of justice. It wouldn't be the first time an innocent person was executed. What makes our legal system better than the likes of China is that we do not make assumptions and rash decisions about peoples' guilt.

The due process must prevail.
0
reply
A level Az
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#180
Report 7 years ago
#180
(Original post by Joeman560)
Would you personally torture him? If given the chance?
Yes.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (26)
7.03%
They might tell the bully (35)
9.46%
I don't think they'd understand (56)
15.14%
It might lead to more bullying (144)
38.92%
There's nothing they could do (109)
29.46%

Watched Threads

View All