Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Someone brought this up a while ago. Thought it was interesting. Could the following idea technically work?

    -Capital punishment is brought in
    -Used for extreme cases such as multiple murders, murder of children
    -The amount of appeals and bureaucracy within the court process are reduced
    -The huge amount of money saved is given to charities specialising in e.g. medicine, sanitation, food/water in 3rd world countries
    -1 evil (probably) white guy dies, 10,000 African kids don't die

    I was always against capital-punishment, but tend to take a utilitarian approach to life. I've racked my brains, and I've asked many people, but nobody has ever been able to tell me why the above idea would not work. Some have simply said "it would work, but it wouldn't happen!" which as anyone with a shred of intelligence could tell you, isn't a reason against it. Thus, I converted to a pro-capital punishment stance, given the above situation is true.

    To clarify, if you want to debate the morals of capital punishment, go away, there are a billion threads on the subject. I'm hoping to keep this thread strictly about the above scenario and if it would or not work.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This thread is a waste of bandwidth.

    The people who support capital punishment go purple with apoplectic rage at the thought of our money going to Africa as aid!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well, as a plan yes.

    There's more factors to take into account, however.

    For example, moral factors, standing factors, etc. Granted, it seems like a good plan to kill the people who do murder; Revenge for those linked to the person murdered.

    But there are some serious underlying factors that, also, need to be taken into account.

    I stand for Capital Punishment for extreme crimes, but only just.

    That system, maybe, could work. Again, though, there's more too it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    2nd post reported, keep it on topic.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    So basically we kill someone and give the money we've saved to charity?

    Is anyone else also quite disturbed by that idea?

    Capital punishment is totally unjustifiable.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    So basically we kill someone and give the money we've saved to charity?

    Is anyone else also quite disturbed by that idea?

    Capital punishment is totally unjustifiable.
    Again, this isn't a debate on the morals of the subject. I am simply asking if it would work. I will update OP.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It is said to be a deterrent.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    2nd post reported, keep it on topic.
    It is on topic. The thread is about supporting capital punishment and the comment you apparently reported is about the people who support capital punishment. Hardly a chasm between the subject of the OP and the 2nd comment.

    EDIT: didn't realise you were the thread-starter, ignore the first half of this comment

    Anyway: I think the situation could work logistically and economically, but I personally am somewhat wary of giving the state power over life and death that can be called upon when a citizen of their state does something they don't approve of.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    So basically we kill someone and give the money we've saved to charity?

    Is anyone else also quite disturbed by that idea?

    Capital punishment is totally unjustifiable.
    I'm with Democracy on this one.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    -1 evil (probably) white guy dies,
    so many things wrong with this, i can't even begin.. :facepalm:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    So basically we kill someone and give the money we've saved to charity?

    Is anyone else also quite disturbed by that idea?

    Capital punishment is totally unjustifiable.
    Capital punishment is a cheaper way of dealing with repeat offenders who are unlikely to reform than imprisonment, or deportation, which I would favour. Therefore I think it is justifiable; they do something bad to hinder the efficient function of society, they are removed to prevent further disruptions.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chimaira)
    I'm with Democracy on this one.
    (Original post by SteveCrain)
    Capital punishment is a cheaper way of dealing with repeat offenders who are unlikely to reform than imprisonment, or deportation, which I would favour. Therefore I think it is justifiable; they do something bad to hinder the efficient function of society, they are removed to prevent further disruptions.
    You guys are starting to argue the ins and outs of capital punishment.. Like I said in the OP, it's been done a billion times.. I only made this thread to see if there was a glaring fallacy with the process outlined in the OP. If there is, I am 100% anti-capital punishment, but if there isn't, and it could happen, then I am 100% pro-capital punishment, given the above situation happened.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with Capital Punishment for the most extreme crimes (which are backed up with undeniable evidence) where the criminal will never be fit to be in proper society. I don't think there would be great amounts of money saved though, for trials, warrants for death, appeals, great examination of evidence etc. the money saved would probably be little.

    Also, why would only white guys be committing crimes like that?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How many clear cut cases are they going to be, especially when the defendant's life is on the line? How would money spent on appeals etc be cut? Does a judge and jury decide once and for all that someone is to die? It's only someone's life at stake so let's not bother with any costly appeals process.

    Why does the state have the right to kill someone in the first place and who decides what "worthy" causes this vast fortune of money you wont save will contribute to?

    If you think this is a good idea, I'd hate to see one of your bad one's.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mellie220)
    I agree with Capital Punishment for the most extreme crimes (which are backed up with undeniable evidence) where the criminal will never be fit to be in proper society. I don't think there would be great amounts of money saved though, for trials, warrants for death, appeals, great examination of evidence etc. the money saved would probably be little.

    Also, why would only white guys be committing crimes like that?
    :sigh: I give up, it's pretty obvious that people read the thread title and then immediately decide what they want to say, as opposed to reading the OP.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    You guys are starting to argue the ins and outs of capital punishment.. Like I said in the OP, it's been done a billion times.. I only made this thread to see if there was a glaring fallacy with the process outlined in the OP. If there is, I am 100% anti-capital punishment, but if there isn't, and it could happen, then I am 100% pro-capital punishment, given the above situation happened.
    If the money saved were "hypothetically" given to charity, and only if the money were given to charity, would you be for capital punishment?
    It's a **** argument
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    How many clear cut cases are they going to be, especially when the defendant's life is on the line? How would money spent on appeals etc be cut? Does a judge and jury decide once and for all that someone is to die? It's only someone's life at stake so let's not bother with any costly appeals process.

    Why does the state have the right to kill someone in the first place and who decides what "worthy" causes this vast fortune of money you wont save will contribute to?

    If you think this is a good idea, I'd hate to see one of your bad one's.
    You are asking questions that could easily be answered, and also assuming that I think it's a good idea. Irrelevant post.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    You are asking questions that could easily be answered, and also assuming that I think it's a good idea. Irrelevant post.
    So easily answered, you can't be bothered? You are the one who said you can be persuaded either way, yet your responses to anyone voicing an opinion as to why it is a bad idea seem to attract a negative response from yourself? You seem to be very close minded on a topic you say you are looking for a discussion on.

    "Let's have a discussion on a topic, but any points that don't support one side of the argument are irrelevant."

    Great.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    :sigh: I give up, it's pretty obvious that people read the thread title and then immediately decide what they want to say, as opposed to reading the OP.
    Where does it say anything about white guys in the title? Clearly the poster read your OP or else they wouldn't know you said anything about white guys.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selkarn)
    :sigh: I give up, it's pretty obvious that people read the thread title and then immediately decide what they want to say, as opposed to reading the OP.
    I'm not disagreeing or agreeing. If you can tell me a way which the court procedure can be reformed with little costs I will take your argument seriously.
    I know it's hypothetical. but the idea you have is far too absurd and unrealistic.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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.