Viewing Thread:
"Capital Punishment"

Is it right to take the life of a man who has taken a life?
Is it right to take the life of a man who has taken 10 lives?
Is it right to take the life of a man who had taken teh lives of over 100 hundred people?

Should capital punishment be brought back?
Personally i belive its only fair that if someone terminates
another humans exist in a cold and calculated way in the case of a terroist or a psycho nutter then the same should happen to them.

Also is it fair that peoples beliefs become swayed by the situation. If the killer killed a child for example some people start to lose there moral high ground.
A life is a life no less.
(dont get me wrong i spose i know why tehy do but still is it fair?)

Iguana wrote:
> Prisons may be too comfortable, but there's not alot of freedom. You can't just decide
> to go out with your mates on a friday night. Can you? It is a
> punishment in a way, but how do you expect to help people if you
> treat them badly?

I don't mean that they should be treated badly, but luxuries like pool tables and PlayStation's are completely out of order. The people shouting about prisoners rights are also wrong, in my opinion. These people never considered the rights of the people involved in their crime, so why should they expect to receive special treatment? They shouldn't be mistreated, but prison is supposed to act as a deterrent, not a reward.

If I was homeless, sleeping on the streets, freezing my nads off in the winter, and unable to get a break, it'd be almost worth my while to do away with some helpless old lady walking home from the shops and get a nice comfy stretch inside with exercise, TV and three meals a day.


> If they're being released, doesn't that suggest that
> being in prison has managed to sort these
> two boy's lives?

Not to me, I'm afraid. They knew exactly what they were doing, as evidenced by the way they led the toddler from the shopping centre. A spur-of-the-moment killing, such as self defence is another matter - but this was pre-meditated.

You can serve longer sentences for lesser crimes. Drink-drive and you can go away for years. Kill someone in the name of a para-military group, and you can be out in months.

My main point in all of this is that our legal system is a complete mess. Even if capital punishment is not brought back, the laws themselves need to be brought out of the dark ages, and we as people need to stop being 'nice' to criminals in the hope that it will convince them to be nice to other people - it just doesn't work. The punishment should fit the crime, and at the very least, life should mean life.

Capital punishment should be in a way between Texas and the UK.

The UK only has the death penalty for High Treason, and the last person executed for that was Guy Faukes. The taking of a life as punishment is solely used as a deterrent for others, however as Texas shows, this doesn't work.

Texas executes people for first degree murder, however the lynching style of its ex-governor, now, more worryingly, president Bush.

I agree that the termination of life is the most extreme punishment available, however punishment is supposed to serve as reform as well.

Execution is also fatally flawed in the fact that it is not reversible. This sounds stupid, but what happens if it proved that a person executed is innocent. The death penalty should be brought back into the UK, but only for crimes that have been proven, and also in cases where there is no chance whatsoever of the crimianl reforming.

Wòókiee Møn§†€R wrote:

I'd agree with that if
> it actually worked. Sadly, these days prison is far too soft, and
> people seem far too concerned that someone who has - for example -
> murdered a person lives in comfort, with pool tables, televisions
> and PlayStations, and three square meals a day.

Prisons are now
> so comfortable that it would probably actually be an advantage for
> some people to get put away for an extended period. Prison should
> be cold, hard, and unwelcoming - not a life of luxury.

Prisons may be too comfortable, but there's not alot of freedom. You can't just decide to go out with your mates on a friday night. Can you? It is a punishment in a way, but how do you expect to help people if you treat them badly? Besides that, going from one extreme to the other? I'd rather prison's be the way they are now then the capital punishment being brought back.


>
Can't agree with that either, I'm afraid. The law
> should be changed so that young people are held equally accountable
> for their actions. Young kids today aren't as clueless as they once
> were, and many of them know exactly what they can get away with.
> They are not frightened of the law or punishment, because they know
> they can't be touched, and that their record will be wiped clean
> when they reach a certain age.

Fair enough and I agree, children aren't as naive as they once were, but this brings me back to my point of prison being rehabilitation. If they're being released, doesn't that suggest that being in prison has managed to sort these two boy's lives?


I would agree to capital punishment if there was
> absolute proof that a person had committed a serious crime. Why?
> Simply because it's cheaper than locking them up. I object to my
> taxes being used to keep these people fed, clothed and warm while
> there are decent people like OAP's and war veterans struggling to
> make ends meet on useless pensions.

It's a thin line and I'm not sure how to make an argument against the Death Penalty here, except I still don't think that any human life should be valued using money.

I can see your point,
> but I know that had it been my relatives, I wouldn't just want to
> see it, I'd want to be the one throwing the switch.

Understandable and I'm almost sure I'd feel the same way, but as it stands taking a Human life as revenge for another's just seems.. wrong.

Iguana wrote:
> I believe that prison is for rehabilitation more then anything else, an
> opportunity to make the offender a useful member of the public
> again.

I'd agree with that if it actually worked. Sadly, these days prison is far too soft, and people seem far too concerned that someone who has - for example - murdered a person lives in comfort, with pool tables, televisions and PlayStations, and three square meals a day.

Prisons are now so comfortable that it would probably actually be an advantage for some people to get put away for an extended period. Prison should be cold, hard, and unwelcoming - not a life of luxury.


> Like in the James Bulger case and the two boys being
> released, I think that is correct
> but they were young and I don’t think they should be
> punished for what they did then for the rest of their lives and I
> certainly don’t believe they should be “destroyed”.

Can't agree with that either, I'm afraid. The law should be changed so that young people are held equally accountable for their actions. Young kids today aren't as clueless as they once were, and many of them know exactly what they can get away with. They are not frightened of the law or punishment, because they know they can't be touched, and that their record will be wiped clean when they reach a certain age.


> It shocks me that Capital Punishment can be seen as “Justice”. It’s not
> justice, it’s revenge.

I would agree to capital punishment if there was absolute proof that a person had committed a serious crime. Why? Simply because it's cheaper than locking them up. I object to my taxes being used to keep these people fed, clothed and warm while there are decent people like OAP's and war veterans struggling to make ends meet on useless pensions.

> Like the case of the Oklahoma bomber where
> certain representatives of the Oklahoma victims were allowed to see
> the execution “live”, because they wanted to see revenge. Not
> justice.

I can see your point, but I know that had it been my relatives, I wouldn't just want to see it, I'd want to be the one throwing the switch.

The punishment for escape attempts is being put into solitary confinement. This involves staying in a seperated cell, on your own, with meals in your cell, with no socialising time, only a short period of supervised exercise on your own. To many prisoners this is not appealing and can demoralise someone very quickly.
The types of people that would not bother are very depressed inmates who simply can not cope with life inside, and these people are watched very carefully.

The thing is that it is hard to escape and beacuse they are getting out in a few years they do not try. But if you knew you were going to be in prison for the rest of your life then maybee your'd try. What would you have to lose?

Oh yeah i agree - criminals in for rape or murder having their sentenced reduced for 'good behaviour' is a joke! It's hardly as if their good behaviour in prison is going to reflect what they are like when they get back into society at large. Life imprisonment should mean what it says.

And as for prisoners escaping - it is extremely rare nowadays that a prisoner escapes from a class a prison. Maybe we should build 'Alcatraz' style prisons - we could use one of those Scottish islands like in that TV programme Castaway. Or maybe just use Jersey. Or Wales.

Has anyone seen the film 'No Escape' starring Ray Liotta?

SnoopDoggyDan wrote:
> Capital Punishment should not be brought back.

Criminals that are
> given a life sentence for the most serious crimes such as
> pre-meditated murder should have to serve their entire life in
> prison, but serve a very hard life.
They should be put to work in
> ways that benefit society such as hard labour and other tasks such
> as doing laundry and making clothes for the military (but obviously
> not making guns!).


This is the problem. A life sentance means 20 years and you can get out in 10-12. Life should mean life, no parole no chance to get out. The only problem with this is that if you are never going to get out you will try to break out.

Capital Punishment should not be brought back.

Criminals that are given a life sentence for the most serious crimes such as pre-meditated murder should have to serve their entire life in prison, but serve a very hard life.
They should be put to work in ways that benefit society such as hard labour and other tasks such as doing laundry and making clothes for the military (but obviously not making guns!). Make them give back a little for what they have taken away from society.
If they are not to be released, then who cares about reabilitation? I know it sounds harsh, but they should suffer.
Also, there is the problem of people wrongfully committed to prison. If they are killed then later found innocent just think what it would do to the families and to the reputation of the justice system.

However, there is another side. Many families who are the victims of murderers and rapists can't live with the fact that the person who committed the crimes is still out there, in whatever capacity. They can never feel closure until they know they can safely sleep in their beds once more knowing the person who wronged them is dead.

Society is becoming more lenient and the public are becoming more endagered. It doesn;t make sense that by maing the law more lenient the criminals will learn their mistakes. Be strict, alot more stricter, this will decrease the amount of people committing crimes. If you get a smack on the had for stealing a wallet, might as well take another risk, it could be £300 you pocket. But if you are fine £20,000 who would have the balls to do it. Even jail, 2 years for nicking a wallet, a bit crazy but at leaast the number of offenders will deteriorate.

So yes. Capital Punishment now, and the castration punichment seems really good. Seriously,

'Sorry sir you've offended the law with you're salami so we have to take it away from you, but don't worry, you could have it back if you don't commit any more crime in the next 5 years'