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

Capital Punishment; The Question watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Should capital punishment be integrated into UK law?
    Yes
    30.72%
    No
    69.28%

    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Seeing as we recently had a bill along this line, I would be interested to hear everyone's thoughts on CP. There are some whom are very pro, and some who are very anti.

    What do you all believe in and why?

    EDIT; for those who have ended up here via the sidebar, welcome to the TSR Model House of Commons! We are a community of TSR users who run a chamber of parliament to decide laws and economic policy, because we naturally do it better than the RL government. All the information you need can be found here!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Anti.

    Mistakes get made and death cannot be undone.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    I'm personally anti, as I don't think the state has the right to end the life of its citizens.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    Seeing as we recently had a bill along this line, I would be interested to hear everyone's thoughts on CP. There are some whom are very pro, and some who are very anti.

    What do you all believe in and why?
    Pro
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Anti. It's just barbaric and has no place in modern society.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Simes)
    Anti.

    Mistakes get made and death cannot be undone.
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I'm personally anti, as I don't think the state has the right to end the life of its citizens.
    I'm inclined to agree with the above, you certainly can't provide adequate compensation for death.

    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Pro
    Why so?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Practically speaking, I'd say pro purely for cases where the criminal has shown no remorse for his/her actions (serious crimes only, murder, serial rapist, etc), and is going to use up jail space/taxpayers money by being alive.

    Morally, however, I find it very hard, if not impossible, to stand by that statement for reasons other posters have already given.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    I'm inclined to agree with the above, you certainly can't provide adequate compensation for death.



    Why so?
    Serial murderers/sex offenders do not deserve a second chance
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    In principal I have no issue with a murderer being hung for his crime. In practice, I don't trust the state not to convict an innocent man.

    I'd probably allow those who plead guilty to be given a death rather than life sentence although life should mean life.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cherryred90s)
    Serial murderers/sex offenders do not deserve a second chance
    This is logical, but would you not agree that the 'reasonable doubt' of twelve jurors is insufficient to send someone to their death? Isn't the whole system undermined when one person is wrongly executed?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I'm personally anti, as I don't think the state has the right to end the life of its citizens.
    The state is only an extension (or reduction, if you will) of the people themselves. Members of the society who are against such measures are free to abandon it so it's not like we would be forcing it upon them either.

    Why should ‘the state have the right to’ imprison someone for life or confiscate all of his belongings, but not to end his life?! Even more importantly, why can't at least people who end someone else's life be punished in the same way?

    You are only feeling, not thinking.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    In principal I have no issue with a murderer being hung for his crime. In practice, I don't trust the state not to convict an innocent man.

    I'd probably allow those who plead guilty to be given a death rather than life sentence although life should mean life.
    Not sure what the point of that is - anyone who doesn't want a death sentence is going to plead not guilty however strong the evidence. Equally someone with strong evidence against them who happens to actually be innocent and falsely accused may well plead guilty if they'd rather die than suffer life imprisonment. You'd only create incentives to enter a false plea.

    Personally I'm completely against it. Partly informed by my Christian beliefs in all honesty, but I don't believe any of us have the right or indeed the ability to judge that someone is beyond redemption or rehabilitation.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by aliendays)
    Anti. It's just barbaric and has no place in modern society.
    Does the eye for an eye model not wash?
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    In principal I have no issue with a murderer being hung for his crime. In practice, I don't trust the state not to convict an innocent man.

    I'd probably allow those who plead guilty to be given a death rather than life sentence although life should mean life.
    ^Why do I always find myself in agreement with you, Rakas? The only problem I can potentially see is it being contrary to the idea of giving credit for pleading guilty. Surely no one wishes to lose their life?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I can understand WHY people would be pro

    But I am anti

    And there are only 3 reasons why I oppose CP

    1. If a type 1 error is made, then an innocent person is killed. Death is irreversible. This has happened way too many times already.

    2. In the particular example of murder- why do we kill killers to show that killing is wrong? You are punishing a murderer by murdering them. Yeah and eye for an eye etc but isn't that just hypocricy? It makes no sense.

    3.Many criminals can be taught and changed.

    So I think CP is not beneficial to society.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    Does the eye for an eye model not wash?

    ^Why do I always find myself in agreement with you, Rakas? The only problem I can potentially see is it being contrary to the idea of giving credit for pleading guilty. Surely no one wishes to lose their life?
    If you gave me the choice, I may well pick death over 70 years in prison followed by death. Depends somewhat on what the prison system is like I guess. In any case, I don't believe in life imprisonment either.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    The state is only an extension (or reduction, if you will) of the people themselves. Members of the society who are against such measures are free to abandon it so it's not like we would be forcing it upon them either.

    Why should ‘the state have the right to’ imprison someone for life or confiscate all of his belongings, but not to end his life?! Even more importantly, why can't at least people who end someone else's life be punished in the same way?

    You are only feeling, not thinking.
    An eye for an eye makes the whole world monocular...

    I'm not quite sure what I agree with here, whilst convicted criminals of crimes of barbaric nature deserve a severe punishment, it is difficult to have 100% accuracy with conviction. As soon as one innocent man is put to death, the state becomes no better than the convicts that it is claiming to bring to justice.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    If you gave me the choice, I may well pick death over 70 years in prison followed by death. Depends somewhat on what the prison system is like I guess. In any case, I don't believe in life imprisonment either.
    It also very much depends what the person fears most. I don't think I would have it in me to choose death. Why not life imprisonment?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    The state is only an extension (or reduction, if you will) of the people themselves.
    If the state is only an extension of the people, and the people are not permitted to kill one another, then the state cannot be permitted to kill people either.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thehistorybore)
    It also very much depends what the person fears most. I don't think I would have it in me to choose death. Why not life imprisonment?
    Well for me, we're all going to die anyway like it or not - what point is there to a life with no hope or joy in it? There's also the factor for me that at this stage I'd quite possibly be thrown in an all-male prison, never interact with someone of my gender again and be massively likely to suffer constant sexual harassment, abuse and rape. No thanks.

    Again, because I don't think people should be written off. Our main focus should be on rehabilitation, albeit over a very long period of time in the worst cases. But I don't believe either life or death sentences are an effective deterrent. Who exactly is going to think "You know what, I won't do this because there could be a life sentence if I'm caught - but I'll risk it if it's only 20 years in a cell!"? These crimes are committed mainly be people who either aren't thinking at the time, or don't care about the consequences. If you at believe in people and at least give them the hope they can recover and re-integrate, you not only improve the chances of it being successful for most prisoners but you also improve prison behavior and make it a much more conductive environment to rehabilitation rather than a violent hellhole.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Even more importantly, why can't at least people who end someone else's life be punished in the same way?
    Because we decided that tit-for-tat or eye-for-an-eye revenge is not justice.

    If someone is to be punished in a way that matches the crime, what do you do about a serial killer? Kill their family?

    What do you do with someone who starves their children to death? Starve them and their siblings to death?

    If a gang of lads give someone a kicking and that person dies, which of the gang should be kicked to death?

    Punishment by revenge in the same way as the crime is not practical (and would be considered fairly horrific by many people). It is certainly not 'civilised'.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?

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.