Do murderers deserve to die?

Nobody deserves to die. However we can't currently keep everybody alive. It's compassionate towards murders to kill them, and compassionate towards the rest of society not to have to pay for them to be kept in prison for their whole lives. It's far more cruel to keep someone in prison for 50 years than it is to give them a lethal injection.

However until we have a criminal justice system that I have a great deal of confidence in I'm against the state killing.
 
Punishment is barbaric and should have no part at all in our criminal justice system. It should be entirely based on deterrent (which is close to punishment), rehabilitation, and keeping the rest of society safe.
 
I fully believe that murders and paedophiles deserve to die, maybe with severe physical torture beforehand aka Saw style minus the chance to escape.

However I do not believe that it should be enforced by law or allowed in any constituency, because there are too many misrulings and mistakes made by the courts on these issues, people can be framed, there is no 100% conclusive way to determine with 100% accuracy that a person was guilty or not guilty, and under capital punishment innocent people can be too easily sentenced as guilty, and they would likely be executed before their innocence or misjudgement could be proved.
 
bhavv said:
I fully believe that murders and paedophiles deserve to die, maybe with severe physical torture beforehand aka Saw style minus the chance to escape.
Click to expand...

out of curiosity why paedophiles?

a person who is sexually attracted to children but never acts on it (ie never harms a child or tries to have any sexual relationship with one) deserves to be tortured to death?
 
Arnie said:
I used to think that everyone has the capacity to reform themselves and become good people and therefore we should give them a chance
Click to expand...

This is entirely false, we have too many repeat offenders to show that some people just cant be rehabilitated.

Yes I understood the context of your post and that you dont believe that anymore, I'm just quoting it for the message it implied.

Tefal said:
out of curiosity why paedophiles?
a person who is sexually attracted to children but never acts on it (ie never harms a child or tries to have any sexual relationship with one) deserves to be tortured to death?
Click to expand...

Miswording, I mean a paedophile that is guilty of non-consensually raping a child.

As I said, even this can be misjudged by the court and innocent people found guilty so thats why it shouldnt be enforced by the law, but people who do that deserve torture and death.

I also believe that the legal age of consent should be lowered to 12, and only within an age range of 4 years for under 16s.
 
Last edited:
The Halk said:
Punishment is barbaric and should have no part at all in our criminal justice system. It should be entirely based on deterrent (which is close to punishment), rehabilitation, and keeping the rest of society safe.
Click to expand...

but it's only a deterrent if it's a harsh enough punishment to make the crime not worth the risk.


i.e i bet most people in this thread pirate films/music/games in one way or another the only reason they'll stop is if the risk goes up to the point it's not worth it.

also if punishment is barbaric why do we have fines? they don't rehabilitate anyone they serve purely as financial punishment.
 
Pretty grim subject tbh,:( especially for an April Fools day! I just hope nobody ever murders me, if they do i'll bloody kill 'em!:eek::p:o
 
I don't really think words like 'punish' or 'justice' have any real relevance. It's not about making an example of anyone, it's not about making them right their wrongs, it's not about doing what is considered right by some philosophy; it's simply protecting society by removing a dangerous element and minimising the drain on resources that imprisonment is.

To my mind there are two ways to treat people who are capable and/or willing to disregard a persons basic right to live:

Either we keep a system of incarceration, but instead of feeding, clothing and caring for people for their lifetimes (a logistical and financial drain on society) they should be put to use. Workhouses if you like.

Or they should be culled. Dangerous animals are killed with little hesitation, and they do not have the ability to choose to harm or not. Surely the animal that makes a decision to kill or harm another is more dangerous and conversely more qualifying for destruction?

Maybe I'm just too pragmatic about it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom