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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The death penalty.. Justified... or injust?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Personally.. I could go either way. People who murder someone should receive the same treatment in return. Although it wouldn't be considered murder. Electric Chair is my vote.. go for it, let them suffer. BUT.. two wrongs don't make a right... right?

    If you were to let the person live, then that person would be sitting in Jail for the rest of his/her life using tax-payers' money, doing nothing.

    I am undecided as of yet. Anyone feel like trying to sway me to either side?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    The death penalty.. Justified... or injust?
    death penalty is harsh, yes it may scare other potential criminals from doing crimes, but my emotional side tells me that it is just too harsh
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    death penalty is harsh, yes it may scare other potential criminals from doing crimes, but my emotional side tells me that it is just too harsh
    Explain how it is too harsh.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Explain how it is too harsh.
    for the guy whos about to be killed by the capital punishment
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheWolf)
    for the guy whos about to be killed by the capital punishment
    lol, no not WHO would consider it harsh.. why do YOU consider it harsh? Would you rather have loads of people sitting in a jail.. with the possible chance of excape.. I might add.. who are also using up our money because they are keeping them alive?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Personally.. I could go either way. People who murder someone should receive the same treatment in return. Although it wouldn't be considered murder. Electric Chair is my vote.. go for it, let them suffer. BUT.. two wrongs don't make a right... right?

    If you were to let the person live, then that person would be sitting in Jail for the rest of his/her life using tax-payers' money, doing nothing.

    I am undecided as of yet. Anyone feel like trying to sway me to either side?
    1) Punishment should not be given based on emotion. A murderer should not be murdered in turn - what kind of message does that give? That it's ok to kill as long as you've got a good reason for it? The death penalty is considered murder by many people

    2) Yes, it costs a lot to keep someone in jail. But it costs a lot to keep anyone in jail, from shoplifters to drug dealers to rapists to murderers. So do we kill them all to save money? No.

    3) What if the person isn't guilty? There are more black people than white people on death row in America - by some ridiculous proportion like 5 to 1 (don't quote me on that). This isn't because they commit 5 times more murders, it's because they can't afford good enough lawyers. Do we want a system that encourages the killing of black people for no reason?

    4) Killing another person is wrong, in any circumstance I can think of apart from self-defense. Revenge is not a good excuse. A system that allows the legal killing of humans is barbaric.

    I have many more arguments, but I'll leave it at that for now. There is another thread about this somewhere, I'm sure...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The only reason I am for the death penalty is because it will save tax payers money. However the main reason it was stopped in the UK is because some times not guilty people were sentanced to death.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amazingtrade)
    The only reason I am for the death penalty is because it will save tax payers money. However the main reason it was stopped in the UK is because some times not guilty people were sentanced to death.
    Tax-payers' money will just go elsewhere if it is not used to maintain the prisons. There are many pointless wastes of money around - we should concentrate on distributing our cash more fairly before we decide to start killing people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trousers)
    1) Punishment should not be given based on emotion. A murderer should not be murdered in turn - what kind of message does that give? That it's ok to kill as long as you've got a good reason for it? The death penalty is considered murder by many people

    2) Yes, it costs a lot to keep someone in jail. But it costs a lot to keep anyone in jail, from shoplifters to drug dealers to rapists to murderers. So do we kill them all to save money? No.

    3) What if the person isn't guilty? There are more black people than white people on death row in America - by some ridiculous proportion like 5 to 1 (don't quote me on that). This isn't because they commit 5 times more murders, it's because they can't afford good enough lawyers. Do we want a system that encourages the killing of black people for no reason?

    4) Killing another person is wrong, in any circumstance I can think of apart from self-defense. Revenge is not a good excuse. A system that allows the legal killing of humans is barbaric.

    I have many more arguments, but I'll leave it at that for now. There is another thread about this somewhere, I'm sure...
    So what would you have us do? Keep the people in jail? Leave them free to kill again (let them lose) OR would you have us kill them?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amazingtrade)
    The only reason I am for the death penalty is because it will save tax payers money. However the main reason it was stopped in the UK is because some times not guilty people were sentanced to death.
    It costs more to go through the whole appeals procress that's needed in a death penalty case than it does to keep a person in prision for the rest of their life. So, it can't be justfied on economic grounds
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amazingtrade)
    The only reason I am for the death penalty is because it will save tax payers money. However the main reason it was stopped in the UK is because some times not guilty people were sentanced to death.
    Then do not sentence them to death right away. Give them every opportunity they can to get a good lawyer and defend themselves. I understand where trousers is on this one.. but I still don't see how someone could want to keep the people alive after they have killed an innocent. Self-defence is justified. But not killing without a purpose or killing for the sake of the act itself.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frances)
    It costs more to go through the whole appeals procress that's needed in a death penalty case than it does to keep a person in prision for the rest of their life. So, it can't be justfied on economic grounds
    Bah.. the only difference is the fact that the tax-payers don't pay for the lawyer that defends said person. SO.. economically.. it is cheaper for us to kill the person. right?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    So what would you have us do? Keep the people in jail? Leave them free to kill again (let them lose) OR would you have us kill them?
    I think you know what my answer is going to be...

    There should be a review of sentencing, to give stricter terms for crimes like murder. Yes, I would keep the people in jail. Of course I wouldn't set them all free to save money - do you think I'm some kind of nutcase?

    In a civilised society, there's no reason to have a death penalty. Keeping murderers in jail is the only practical way to go about it, and although this costs a lot there is no alternative.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trousers)
    I think you know what my answer is going to be...

    There should be a review of sentencing, to give stricter terms for crimes like murder. Yes, I would keep the people in jail. Of course I wouldn't set them all free to save money - do you think I'm some kind of nutcase?

    In a civilised society, there's no reason to have a death penalty. Keeping murderers in jail is the only practical way to go about it, and although this costs a lot there is no alternative.
    Why don't you become an american citizen and find us an alternative? And no that wasn't said sarcastically, that was said in all sencerity.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Then do not sentence them to death right away. Give them every opportunity they can to get a good lawyer and defend themselves. I understand where trousers is on this one.. but I still don't see how someone could want to keep the people alive after they have killed an innocent. Self-defence is justified. But not killing without a purpose or killing for the sake of the act itself.
    To give a person "every opportunity to get a good lawyer" would mean paying for a good lawyer in all cases. If the person or their family can't pay, I suppose the tax-payer will have to. That's going to be a bit steep, isn't it? Let's just cut out the middle-man and kill him if he can't afford to pay for it himself!

    I think you're just playing devil's advocate and you really agree with me.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trousers)
    I think you're just playing devil's advocate and you really agree with me.
    lol, you do, do you? .. I don't think so. I am seriously undecided on this whole matter.. (even though I voted for justified...[don't ask]), If a person commits the ultimate crime.. killing another human being.. shouldn't he pay for that deed with his life? If no.. why not?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Why don't you become an american citizen and find us an alternative? And no that wasn't said sarcastically, that was said in all sencerity.
    The alternative to your system is the British system. Ok, it's not perfect, but at least it's not barbaric.

    America still sees more murders than Britain, relative to the population difference. The death penalty is not a deterrent, as people don't think they're going to get caught.

    I suggest that America gets rid of the death penalty. And if you're worried crime will soar, how about getting rid of the guns at the same time? Everyone's a winner!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trousers)
    The alternative to your system is the British system. Ok, it's not perfect, but at least it's not barbaric.

    America still sees more murders than Britain, relative to the population difference. The death penalty is not a deterrent, as people don't think they're going to get caught.

    I suggest that America gets rid of the death penalty. And if you're worried crime will soar, how about getting rid of the guns at the same time? Everyone's a winner!
    Gun control is a completely different topic.. If we were to get rid of guns.. how would we control the animal population? I've use this on a gun control thread a while ago.. "Where I live.. in the nothern country of the US, there is a continual increase in the deer population, resulting in more car accidents and car/deer related deaths. We need guns here to control that population. Hence hunting season."

    Not to mention.. if we were to get rid of guns.. I believe there would be an increase in the number of gun-related deaths.. because people would 1-retaliate, and 2-do the opposite of what people tell them to do. Also.. what would the police use to protect themselves from irate criminals?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I never said I supported it, just that if they were not in prison it wound;t cost them any money to feed them.

    I think the death penalty is wrong, but go back to middle ages Britian and its very scary. People were being hung for no real reason at all. And 500 years isn't really as long as it seems.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
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.