The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
At present all 'offenders' have their human rights protected by European and UK law.
For those who have taken away other people's human rights in abuse, murder or other serious offences, is this right?
There are several arguements for and against which constantly crop up in these sort of discussions:
FOR Human Rights
If we act as the offender has acted then we are as bad as the offender. Likewise, a death penalty would condone killing for a murderer.
It doesn't matter if the offence is serious or not, all prisoners should be treated the same and there is always the chance that they have been wrongly convicted.
AGAINST Human Rights
If prison is not harsh enough then offenders will not have a reason to stop offending, they know that they are going to somewhere that will be comfortable and guarantee a hot meal. In fact, some may offend just to get in to prison and provide a better life.
The grey area:
The biggest grey area here is probably the mental, and to some extents the physical status of the offender. Should we look closer at where they are 'in their right mind' and then what should happen to those serious offenders who are a danger or (even more of a grey area) may later provide a danger to the public.
For those who have taken away other people's human rights in abuse, murder or other serious offences, is this right?
There are several arguements for and against which constantly crop up in these sort of discussions:
FOR Human Rights
If we act as the offender has acted then we are as bad as the offender. Likewise, a death penalty would condone killing for a murderer.
It doesn't matter if the offence is serious or not, all prisoners should be treated the same and there is always the chance that they have been wrongly convicted.
AGAINST Human Rights
If prison is not harsh enough then offenders will not have a reason to stop offending, they know that they are going to somewhere that will be comfortable and guarantee a hot meal. In fact, some may offend just to get in to prison and provide a better life.
The grey area:
The biggest grey area here is probably the mental, and to some extents the physical status of the offender. Should we look closer at where they are 'in their right mind' and then what should happen to those serious offenders who are a danger or (even more of a grey area) may later provide a danger to the public.
Page:
It would have to be a designated man/lady (the executioner) and in a set room. And for the death of that one particular prisoner. What happens in that room for that set period is outside the law.
HM wrote:
> It would have to be a designated man/lady (the executioner) and
> in a set room. And for the death of that one particular
> prisoner. What happens in that room for that set period is
> outside the law.
You can't have something decided in law outside of the law, it just doesn't make sense. You set laws to make a guideline for ALL to live by, not for some.
There are other flaws. Often people have found that the prisoner is unremitting during the time they are killed (I'm not using 'put to death' because technically they are being killed, however you want to dress it up) and this means that the victim or their family is often left without the feeling of closure or even justice (it's an often documented side-effect).
In theory it would be more logical to let the victim or their family kill the prisoner if you are suggesting that this is the correct punishment for the crime, but it's far too easy to let someone else do it and wash their hands of the event.
> It would have to be a designated man/lady (the executioner) and
> in a set room. And for the death of that one particular
> prisoner. What happens in that room for that set period is
> outside the law.
You can't have something decided in law outside of the law, it just doesn't make sense. You set laws to make a guideline for ALL to live by, not for some.
There are other flaws. Often people have found that the prisoner is unremitting during the time they are killed (I'm not using 'put to death' because technically they are being killed, however you want to dress it up) and this means that the victim or their family is often left without the feeling of closure or even justice (it's an often documented side-effect).
In theory it would be more logical to let the victim or their family kill the prisoner if you are suggesting that this is the correct punishment for the crime, but it's far too easy to let someone else do it and wash their hands of the event.
A room outside the law? What a novel idea. :)
If you have the death penalty, naturally you have provisions for the lawful executions of individuals.
If you have the death penalty, naturally you have provisions for the lawful executions of individuals.
Garin wrote:
> A room outside the law? What a novel idea. :)
>
> If you have the death penalty, naturally you have provisions for
> the lawful executions of individuals.
Think you've summed up what I meant - those natural provisions for the lawful executions are made to go with the death penalty. I'm sure Garin cottoned on to what I meant about the "room outside the law" being those provisions.
EDIT: And there will always be the argument around the death penalty. At the moment I guess we don't need it, but if it was brought back in, then there would be little opposition from me. Stay on the right side of the law and there will be no need to worry!
> A room outside the law? What a novel idea. :)
>
> If you have the death penalty, naturally you have provisions for
> the lawful executions of individuals.
Think you've summed up what I meant - those natural provisions for the lawful executions are made to go with the death penalty. I'm sure Garin cottoned on to what I meant about the "room outside the law" being those provisions.
EDIT: And there will always be the argument around the death penalty. At the moment I guess we don't need it, but if it was brought back in, then there would be little opposition from me. Stay on the right side of the law and there will be no need to worry!
Don't you feel people will avoid doing crimes out of fear rather than respect though? In such a modern day society, I think the death penalty is a step backwards, and you'd be surprised by how many people would be against it.
Anyway, the main line from prisons now is that prison isn't a punishment, it's rehabilitation into society. If you can't beat a prisoner, I doubt you'd be allowed to kill one.
Anyway, the main line from prisons now is that prison isn't a punishment, it's rehabilitation into society. If you can't beat a prisoner, I doubt you'd be allowed to kill one.
Sonic Chris wrote:
> Don't you feel people will avoid doing crimes out of fear rather
> than respect though?
I just generally think that if anything deters a crime it can only be a good thing. At school, I was quiet and shy. I was kept in line through the fear of a detention. Similar idea. Although I would say if I was to be executed due to me talking in class I think it would be a little harsh. It would have it's uses. Still, it's interesting to see everyone's ideas.
> Don't you feel people will avoid doing crimes out of fear rather
> than respect though?
I just generally think that if anything deters a crime it can only be a good thing. At school, I was quiet and shy. I was kept in line through the fear of a detention. Similar idea. Although I would say if I was to be executed due to me talking in class I think it would be a little harsh. It would have it's uses. Still, it's interesting to see everyone's ideas.
HM wrote:
> Sonic Chris wrote:
> Don't you feel people will avoid doing crimes out of fear
> rather
> than respect though?
>
> I just generally think that if anything deters a crime it can
> only be a good thing. At school, I was quiet and shy. I was kept
> in line through the fear of a detention.
So that stopped all the others too who would normally be unruly in class? Fear rarely works on those you really need to target. You just need to look at all the canings that went on in the past and how many children still acted up despite this.
Ask yourself this; if the Death Penalty works to deter people, why are there still so many people on death row?
> Sonic Chris wrote:
> Don't you feel people will avoid doing crimes out of fear
> rather
> than respect though?
>
> I just generally think that if anything deters a crime it can
> only be a good thing. At school, I was quiet and shy. I was kept
> in line through the fear of a detention.
So that stopped all the others too who would normally be unruly in class? Fear rarely works on those you really need to target. You just need to look at all the canings that went on in the past and how many children still acted up despite this.
Ask yourself this; if the Death Penalty works to deter people, why are there still so many people on death row?
There aren't that many people on death row if taken as a percentage of the overall prison figures. Being put on death row isn't a deterent and there are only so many executions carried out each year because of all the appeals that are filed.
As you don't agree with the death penalty can we at least agree that a life sentence should mean life with no release on parole or for good behaviour?
Imprisonment for life with only basic human rights available to them.
I'm done :)
As you don't agree with the death penalty can we at least agree that a life sentence should mean life with no release on parole or for good behaviour?
Imprisonment for life with only basic human rights available to them.
I'm done :)
I agree that life imprisonment should be what it says on the tin. How can you be forgiven for taking a person's life by being good in an iron cell for 20 years? And the thing that annoys me more than anything else is new identities!
Take the James Bulger case. Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were released from prison after 8 years... 8 years for murdering and mutilating a small child. They get new identities that are payed for by us. In other words, we're paying for them to come back into our society. They got alot of luxuries such as double prison wages and one of them even got his own personal trainer!
They should be locked up and treated for what they are. I'm glad they get death threats. Will save us having to pay for their deaths....
Take the James Bulger case. Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were released from prison after 8 years... 8 years for murdering and mutilating a small child. They get new identities that are payed for by us. In other words, we're paying for them to come back into our society. They got alot of luxuries such as double prison wages and one of them even got his own personal trainer!
They should be locked up and treated for what they are. I'm glad they get death threats. Will save us having to pay for their deaths....
In regards to the death penalty:
If it was me and I was on the 'chopping block', I would actually be happier with that thought, than having to spend 50 or so years locked up, fearing a beating and god knows what else every day.
I think life in prisonment, and I do mean LIFE, would be a much better deterant than the death penalty.
If it was me and I was on the 'chopping block', I would actually be happier with that thought, than having to spend 50 or so years locked up, fearing a beating and god knows what else every day.
I think life in prisonment, and I do mean LIFE, would be a much better deterant than the death penalty.
Page: