Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    We can have the death penalty but we'll also harvest their organs after they die so the can benefit people in their death. Should be some form penance for the murderers and rapists.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by reiss24)
    I have recently been studying the Amnesty International campaign in aid of abolishing the death penalty and have since took a keen interest in this issue, as some victims are unfortunate enough to be sentenced with this punishment, for what seem like ridiculous reasons, not worthy of this type of punishment. How can anyone justify the slaying of ones life, as a form of punishment in a modern society? I'd welcome any feedback on the subject, to help build up a picture of how others feel about this topic

    Reiss
    Asking if we really need it implies we already have it: we don't.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    NEVER MIND THE DEATH PENALTY THIS FORUM WILL SELF DESTRUCT IN 4 MINS! MWAH HAHAHAHAHAHA! x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    I like to think that human society has advanced beyond the point where the state believes it has the authority to end the lives of it's own citizens. The death penalty serves no practical purpose - it is equatable with vengeance, not justice.
    I agree, revenge NOT justice, the laws/guidelines on custodial sentences need sorting out though
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I don't agree with the death penalty, however I think that their prison life should be made far worse and that they should live under very basic conditions.

    For example, 4 people should share a cell, there should only be 2 meals per da(which should be brought to their cell) meaning that they're not allowed to leave their cell(invitations are not allowed). The criminals should be in their cell 24/7(even if they need the toilet) and sex offenders and murders should be castrated.

    For many people jail is better than living on the streets, we should make it the complete opposite, jail should be a punishment, criminals should be deprived of every right.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I reiterate my support for the death penalty as a punishment for the worst cases of murder, sexual abuse, torture, and war crimes, given infallible evidence and DNA proof. There should be no possibility of innocence.

    And no, I don't believe that killing a human being is inherently wrong, nor that killing a vicious murderer is stooping to their level. Sure, they don't want to be killed. Neither did their victims, though. If you're prepared to be really cruel and sadistic to innocent people for your own gratification, then you should be prepared to die.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    And no, I don't believe that killing a human being is inherently wrong, nor that killing a vicious murderer is stooping to their level. Sure, they don't want to be killed. Neither did their victims, though.

    You contradict yourself there. You say we aren't stooping to their level. Yet justify execution on the grounds that they killed so we should be allowed to aswell.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infernalcradle)
    would you allow scum like those who kill, rape etc. to live and go on to re-offend...and those boys who tortuted those brothers, the chavs that kill for fun.....do we not have a duty to remove these people from soceity permanently, and since the prisons won't do that...maybe some of them need to die?
    The likelihood is that capitol punishment won't apply to those people. Capitol punishment will NEVER work based on the fact that there will be corruption somewhere. If burgled homeowners get sent to jail and those boys who tortured the brothers face a 4 year prison sentence, what use will the death penalty be.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When a government sends their country to war, many innocent civilians end up dying...Who holds the responsibility? Who should be put to death then?

    Other my own moral objections, I don't believe the death penalty should be put in place unless it can be applied to everyone who is responsible for murder.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I'm fairly certain they're mentally disturbed; normal, healthy human beings don't do that sort of thing.

    But even if they aren't...you support the execution of children? :lolwut:

    the execution of children??? of course not...I used them to show that this society is producing these sorts of people, and undoubtably they cannot be allowed to be in society....children can still be changed and moulded by society, and adult who does such acts...not so much, therefore these people need to be removed as unlike the children, they cannot be changed
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I wish we could trade people like you for all those "illegal" immigrants who are desperate to come to a country like the UK which actually respects human rights.
    that's the problem; before i go onto what i'm going to say, the UK is excellent in treating people well (human rights etc.), BUT (this is a big but :p: ) IMO i think the UK has become way to lenient with sentences etc. especially within the last 10 years.
    What other suggestion would you have to 'reduce' crime in the UK?
    Prison?
    No.
    Why?
    Because normal working class people will end up paying for these criminal's accomadation etc. (higher taxes etc.)
    Nobody wants higher taxes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    I don't agree with the death penalty, however I think that their prison life should be made far worse and that they should live under very basic conditions.

    For example, 4 people should share a cell, there should only be 2 meals per da(which should be brought to their cell) meaning that they're not allowed to leave their cell(invitations are not allowed). The criminals should be in their cell 24/7(even if they need the toilet) and sex offenders and murders should be castrated.

    For many people jail is better than living on the streets, we should make it the complete opposite, jail should be a punishment, criminals should be deprived of every right.
    I believe that jail not only serves the purpose of punishment but also rehabilitation. The fact is the majority of people who are sent to jail will have to intergrate back into society. I don't think people being locked up as animals will do this any good and I feel that it is good that they are offered opportunities to develop skills they can use on the outside world. At the end of the day, we can take away their freedom and remove them from society but is it really up to us or in our rightful power to control the extent in which they suffer.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    There are many charities in America that deal with people who have been living in death because they've been wrongly been sentenced to death for a crime they didn't comit. The fact that theres been a need to set up charities to help these people readjust to life outside bars just shows how frequent wrong convictions are made. If even one person is wrongly executed then the death penalty isn't justified in my mind.

    Murdering someone because they've murdered someone just makes no sense to me. It just breeds hate. How is that any better than what they did?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NicolePickle)
    I believe that jail not only serves the purpose of punishment but also rehabilitation. The fact is the majority of people who are sent to jail will have to intergrate back into society. I don't think people being locked up as animals will do this any good and I feel that it is good that they are offered opportunities to develop skills they can use on the outside world. At the end of the day, we can take away their freedom and remove them from society but is it really up to us or in our rightful power to control the extent in which they suffer.
    You wouldn't say that if someone brutally raped and murdered your mother. You'd want them locked up and deprived of life, you'd want them to suffer and want them to live in subhuman conditions.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    You wouldn't say that if someone brutally raped and murdered your mother. You'd want them locked up and deprived of life, you'd want them to suffer and want them to live in subhuman conditions.
    But does that really benefit society as a whole?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    You contradict yourself there. You say we aren't stooping to their level. Yet justify execution on the grounds that they killed so we should be allowed to aswell.
    :nah:

    Killing isn't the problem here, my problem is with inflicting irreversible, unmendable mortal pain, loss, and suffering upon people who are neither expecting nor deserving of it. I never said that killing justified killing. It's hard to explain in words, as the concept of innocence is hard to define, and subjective. Maybe the explanation lies more in the motives of the killer, the relation of the offender to the victim, and likewise - killing an innocent person for economic gain is different to killing a person who has sexually trafficked and raped you. What of euthanasia?
    Ending human life is just a neutral act, like cutting flesh - you could be performing surgery, or self-harming. I think that the intentions and circumstances are critical.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I find it interesting that a lot of people say that the state hasn't got the right to take life.

    Out of curiosity, just what do you believe the state has the right to do? And, assuming the state has some rights, from where do these rights come?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hy~)
    I find it interesting that a lot of people say that the state hasn't got the right to take life.

    Out of curiosity, just what do you believe the state has the right to do? And, assuming the state has some rights, from where do these rights come?

    The state should protect and serve it's citizens. Protecting them from criminals can be achieved by locking them up. The death penalty, not being essential to protecting life, also puts innocent citizens at risk. Therefore negating it's use as anything other than blood satisfaction for the disconnected massess.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Liquidus Zeromus)
    :nah:

    Killing isn't the problem here, my problem is with inflicting irreversible, unmendable mortal pain, loss, and suffering upon people who are neither expecting nor deserving of it. I never said that killing justified killing. It's hard to explain in words, as the concept of innocence is hard to define, and subjective. Maybe the explanation lies more in the motives of the killer, the relation of the offender to the victim, and likewise - killing an innocent person for economic gain is different to killing a person who has sexually trafficked and raped you. What of euthanasia?
    Ending human life is just a neutral act, like cutting flesh - you could be performing surgery, or self-harming. I think that the intentions and circumstances are critical.

    None of that really adresses my point.


    Your argument before seemed to be. 'Why should we let the murderer live. He didn't let his victim live'.

    Are you saying you do not believe this is any kind of substantial justification for the death penalty?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    The state should protect and serve it's citizens. Protecting them from criminals can be achieved by locking them up. The death penalty, not being essential to protecting life, also puts innocent citizens at risk. Therefore negating it's use as anything other than blood satisfaction for the disconnected massess.
    So are you saying the state has a right to protect "its" citizens? Where does this right come from? And just how far does it extend? Should the state "protect" citizens from themselves? (I agree with you on the death penalty btw).
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

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.