Do murderers deserve to die?

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.


so far though any reasonable system (and even that has made errors) costs more than just keeping them locked up forever.

If you want a joke of a system that just kills wrongly convicted people then that's cheap but you're not getting it here.


i guess the most pragmatic way of looking at it would be "rehabilitate", make them useful functioning tax paying crap buying people, the ones we can and lock up the rest for life, doing some job that we don't do in this country any more because it's been sent abroad because it's such low value work, that we could bring back to the country without taking jobs from non criminals.
 
*grumble* first it's impenetrable and immoveable bunkers now bullet proof glass, in my day this was all fields...KILLING FIELDS!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
so far though any reasonable system (and even that has made errors) costs more than just keeping them locked up forever.

If you want a joke of a system that just kills wrongly convicted people then that's cheap but you're not getting it here.

Aye that is very much the issue.

Making prisoners contribute back to society is by far the best course of action, plenty of hands going to waste there.
 
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.

You absolutely have to make it a deterrent and not a punishment. They're almost the same thing but you need to do it for the right reasons.

It's fine to have a deterrent as being a fine, imprisonment, electronic tag - even the death penalty if society agrees it. However it should be done as something to dissuade people from committing a crime, rather than done as something to make the victim/society feel better/exact a punishment/eye for an eye/etc.

I'm disgusted when the media interviews the family of a murder victim and they're calling for the death penalty and anybody takes that seriously. Revenge is disgusting and while it's understandable from the family of a victim, we should not be pandering to it at all.

It's a small distinction, but I think it's vital.
 
If it was one of your family members, or children that was the victim of a murder, you would be ok with them just being jailed?

Lets say that they get out after 10 years for good behavior, returns and kills another of your family members, its ok to just send them to jail again?

Then they somehow manage to escape and kill you. Sure, lets just leave the psycopath in jail.
 
If it was one of your family members, or children that was the victim of a murder, you would be ok with them just being jailed?
Irrelevant, the victim's family have no involvement in deciding how the law is applied, a society that involves the victim's family is disgusting.

Lets say that they get out after 10 years for good behavior, returns and kills another of your family members, its ok to just send them to jail again?

Then they somehow manage to escape and kill you. Sure, lets just leave the psycopath in jail.

Then the fault is that they were not rehabilitated before release. However if it was to happen then it'd be up to a judge and jury to decide.
 
Or they were put through rehabilition and faked good behaviour, but really rehabilitation doesnt work for most criminals.
 
Or they were put through rehabilition and faked good behaviour, but really rehabilitation doesnt work for most criminals.

[Citation needed]

However if you're trying to justify the death penalty here then I don't know that you have an argument with me, in principle I agree with you. However I also believe that rehabilitation might work - although I'm not going to tell a big lie about it and claim it does or doesn't like you have.

If you're trying to say that people should get the death penalty to make the victims of crime feel better then no, I don't think I'll agree.
 
They may deserve it, but it shouldn't be sanctioned by state...and I also believe that everyone has the capacity to change.
 
Most people do have the capacity, but some people will never, ever change. They are genetically wired bad, or have had such an extreme nurturing/experiences that no, never will change.

That's not very shades of grey. That's kind of black and white.
Lol, keep those bland magnolia type comments comming big yin.
 
Liberal far left brainwashing.

Far too many criminals wont change one bit through any rehabilitation scheme.

Brainwashing lol.

You may be right in regards to the fact that some criminals may never change....but who are we to say otherwise. It's not our place to deny them that.

Sometimes I wonder if people like bhavv or kwerk have ever attended a day in school.
 
Back
Top Bottom