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

Death Penalty watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BloodyValentine)
    ummm what would you define malice as? and what's the Queen's peace?
    Malice aforethought is the mental element for the crime - http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~joash...orethought.htm

    Queen's peace is when we are not at war.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NDGAARONDI)
    Usually when people talk about this topic it's easier to establish what is murder before going on to discuss it further. I have asked this question earlier and all I had was this, " :eek: ".

    I would consider it as this:

    Murder is when a man of sound memory, and of the age of discretion, unlawfully killeth within any country of the realm any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the King's peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by the party or implied by law, so as the party wounded, or hurt, etc. die of the wound or hurt, etc. within a year and a day after the same.

    For the purposes of convenience, we can say that murder is the unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace with malice aforethought. However, death no longer need occur within a year and a day.

    Anyone like to differ?
    lol, I hope you find someone who knows more about law than you do! I am in desperate need of someone proving you wrong!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sashh)
    OK I won't tell anyone
    lol, , appreciated!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Not bloody likely.
    And if you think that murdering someone is simply an error and people could be rehabilitated after.. you're mental.
    An error of judgement my friend. And yes they can be rehabilitated. I know this because I've read a couple of books written by men who served their time after committing murder. I rest my case.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I didn't realise the one year and a day thing still applied. What of the case where someone deliberately gave someone that cancer by breaking a board of asbestos in front of them? This caused the person to inhale the asbestos fibres and guarantee them a cancer which will kill them and certainly shorten their life span. It takes longer than 366 days for the cancer caused by asbestos to kill, but a man was still charged with manslaughter.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    The death penalty.. Justified... or injust?
    only inhuman people punish with such a harsh punishement...notice how its only the undemocratic, savage, war mongering countries that still have it in place!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    oh my gay. ok.. lets rehabilitate the worst killer where you live. Then lets free him. THEN lets see if he comes to your house or the house of another and kills them. AGAIN! I wouldn't want to have a person with murder on their record roaming free.
    And whats your take on serial-killers? Would you want to rehabilitate someone who'se so F'd in the mind that they keep killing and killing! Would YOU want to live next door to a person who keeps human fingers in their fridge because they are like trophies to them..Personally.. I wouldn't.
    Then surely they weren't rehabilitated, and would still be in the prison system. But please keep in mind that it is generally referred to as a 'corrective services' system pretty much anywhere you go. Emphasis on 'corrective'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThornsnRoses)
    only inhuman people punish with such a harsh punishement...notice how its only the undemocratic, savage, war mongering countries that still have it in place!
    What? Like the United States? lol. Good ole George Dubya Bush signed the death warrants, so to speak, on no less than 150 individuals during his time as a Governor. No less than 27 of which were later proven innocent.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThornsnRoses)
    only inhuman people punish with such a harsh punishement...notice how its only the undemocratic, savage, war mongering countries that still have it in place!
    umm.. hi hun.. some US states still have the death penalty. :rolleyes:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    Then surely they weren't rehabilitated, and would still be in the prison system. But please keep in mind that it is generally referred to as a 'corrective services' system pretty much anywhere you go. Emphasis on 'corrective'
    lol, emphasis on the word.. "DEAD"
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    An error of judgement my friend. And yes they can be rehabilitated. I know this because I've read a couple of books written by men who served their time after committing murder. I rest my case.
    You can't rest your case.. not based on a "couple of books" no no no no. Some can be rehabilitated.. MAYBE.. but not all.. definitly not all. Do you really think a person who is crazy enough to go on killing spree's really has the right to be rehabilitated? No, expecially not after they've taken the life of another individual.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    In some extreme cases.. serial killers.. people should be put to death.
    In the less extreme cases, fine, I give, people don't have to be put to death.. but you know.. we should change the taxes. People who are for letting people rot away in prison all their lives, THEY should pay the taxes, let THEM support the killers. Those of us who don't, we can continue to pay every other tax there is. hmm.. yeah.. that'll work.
    What about those people who see the Defence Budget as a waste of time in modern times? Should they no longer have to pay that tax? Also, please explain to me the difference between George W. Bush and a serial killer such as Bundy. Both men decided that others should die for a specific reason. Both men are murderers are they not? Forget the fact that Bush was a Governor and that Bundy was a nobody. Look at it in black and white. Oh, and before you say that George W. Bush was just enforcing the decisions of a Judge, remember that according to the U.S. constitution, all Governments of the United States have the power to overrule any such decision at their discretion.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    What about those people who see the Defence Budget as a waste of time in modern times? Should they no longer have to pay that tax? Also, please explain to me the difference between George W. Bush and a serial killer such as Bundy. Both men decided that others should die for a specific reason. Both men are murderers are they not? Forget the fact that Bush was a Governor and that Bundy was a nobody. Look at it in black and white. Oh, and before you say that George W. Bush was just enforcing the decisions of a Judge, remember that according to the U.S. constitution, all Governments of the United States have the power to overrule any such decision at their discretion.
    Considering I'm a Bush supporter.. thats not the kind of question you should be asking me.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    umm.. hi hun.. some US states still have the death penalty. :rolleyes:

    i realise that...maybe its an anomoly...because the USA is VERY peaceful, and democratic. Its not at all savage, especially when they attack tired, and weak countries
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    You can't rest your case.. not based on a "couple of books" no no no no. Some can be rehabilitated.. MAYBE.. but not all.. definitly not all. Do you really think a person who is crazy enough to go on killing spree's really has the right to be rehabilitated? No, expecially not after they've taken the life of another individual.
    Yes I do. It was an error of judgement on their part. If you condone the death penalty, then you condone murder in general. The death penalty is supposed to be a deterrent, but it fails to live up to this role. Those who receive the death penalty do not think about it prior to, or when committing the appropriate crime. Thus, they can't be deterred by the death penalty. However, as to your argument about rehabilitating someone who 'is crazy enough to go on a killing spree'... Who is to say that they have to get released from gaol? They could die in the attempt to become rehabilitated, and nobody would think less of them for failing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThornsnRoses)
    i realise that...maybe its an anomoly...because the USA is VERY peaceful, and democratic. Its not at all savage, especially when they attack tired, and weak countries
    I hope that was sarcasm.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    Considering I'm a Bush supporter.. thats not the kind of question you should be asking me.
    Actually, now that I know you're a Bush supporter. I put the question to you again. Perhaps you're supporting the wrong man after all.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    lol, emphasis on the word.. "DEAD"
    In that case, I emphatically put to you the word 'ignorant'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    Yes I do. It was an error of judgement on their part. If you condone the death penalty, then you condone murder in general. The death penalty is supposed to be a deterrent, but it fails to live up to this role. Those who receive the death penalty do not think about it prior to, or when committing the appropriate crime. Thus, they can't be deterred by the death penalty. However, as to your argument about rehabilitating someone who 'is crazy enough to go on a killing spree'... Who is to say that they have to get released from gaol? They could die in the attempt to become rehabilitated, and nobody would think less of them for failing.
    The death penalty is supposed to be a deterrant.. just as the police force is supposed to be a deterrant to crime in general? nuh uh.. if you look at it that way.. you can just do away with law in general.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by drago di giada)
    I hope that was sarcasm.
    I doubt it was. Truth and sarcasm are seldom used in the same sentence ya see.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
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.