^ I really think it depends on if they are still dangerous. Some people will always pose an immense risk to society - in prison or not - those who will spend their life in jail, are a enourmous danger to others, and have no possibility of being rehabilitated may justify considering capital punishment. I'm thinking along the lines of terrorists, and serial killers. I find it hard to rationalise killing someone for drug smuggling - which doesn't make them a danger to others - or even single murders for the most part.
Lee Rigby's killers are different - they are terrorists, and quite frankly, psychopaths, who show no remorse. They will likely always be dangerous, as will Ian Brady, the Boston Bomber and so many other mass-killers. But the two Australian guys killed yesterday - that seems difficult to justify.
(Also, while we're on the topic of living never door to someone, where do we draw the line? 75% of under 25's in jail grew up in care. They're just damaged kids that society failed. How can we judge them for our failings?).
It doesn't matter where you come from; it matters where you go.
No-one gets remembered for the things they didn't do.
We won't all be here this time next year,
so while you can take a picture of us.
We're definitely going to hell,
but we'll have all the best stories to tell.
so what about mules who are sometimes tricked and even forced into smuggling?? what good does it do having them executed or even rotting in jail when the cartels and the dealers at the top are still plying their trade and profiting?? and many officials in these countries are corrupt and often paid off by the cartels to look the other way and the ones who aren't are too scared to do anything from fear of violence.
Granted the two austraiians of the bali 2 were guilty and said so themselves but there is a French guy awaiting the firing squad who was only fitting machinery into a factory which he didn't know was going to be a drug lab, how does executing him help prevent drug smuggling?? the only message it sends me is don't go abroad :-P
I agree with much of the thrust of your post talaiporia, but surely someone smuggling drugs for their own selfish financial reward bears some responsibility for the eventual use of those drugs, which can result in the death of others?
And I cannot accept the release of those convicted and gaoled for murder unless those recommending release are prepared to have them living next door!
I've seen myself through the voluntary work I do how people can reform and change, the charity I volunteer with deals with people who've been in trouble with the law as well as those with addiction issues.
As someone who wants to work with offenders I am quite shocked at some attitudes on here towards convicts.
I don't really know what to say. I think offenders should have a chance at rehabilitation, and if they're deemed fit to be released then I wouldn't have a problem living in the same community as them.
When I was doing A level psychology 2 murderers who had been rehabilitated and released came to give us a talk. It was really interesting, and they spoke of the prejudice they experienced on release and how for the rest of their live they have to declare their crime every time they want to get a job, move somewhere new and so on. They can never properly move on even though they showed a lot of remorse for what they did.
Some of you on here would have executed them.
Isn’t it funny how day by day nothing changes but when you look back, everything is different…
you once called your brain a hard drive, well say hello to the virus.
I have to be honest here, I used to have the "lock em and throw away the key mentality" and in many cases I still do (having been a victim of crime and anti social behaviour) but since being on the program at the place I volunteer for before becoming a volunteer I had to rethink a lot of what I thought I knew about crime and punishment and addiction and stuff, I'm definitely a lot more sold on the idea of rehabilitation now but rehabilitation does only work if people want to be rehabilitated, that's would I've figured out from my experiences anyway.
A tad off topic, but why are terrorists lumped in with other types of criminal? I really don't see much difference between a "terrorist" and gang members. Both can change their perspective on society and both can commit quite terrible crimes for their beliefs. Or even members of groups such as the EDL, National Front, or sectarian groups.
Last edited by The One Who : 29-04-2015 at 09:54 PM.
A tad off topic, but why are terrorists lumped in with other types of criminal? I really don't see much difference between a "terrorist" and gang members. Both can change their perspective on society and both can commit quite terrible crimes for their beliefs. Or even members of groups such as the EDL, National Front, or sectarian groups.
if you cant see a difference between the boston marathon bomber and a murder like james holmes ( shooter at the auror theatre in colorado ) is they both killed alot more people and method.. both should recieve the death penatly but for the terrorist who bombed the marathon i think his death should be nasty like put in a box with a bunch of flesh eating bugs or something....
and how for the rest of their live they have to declare their crime every time they want to get a job, move somewhere new and so on. They can never properly move on
The person they murdered can never move on either. Or their family, friends etc. And yes, they have to declare what they did for the rest of their lives, but they have a life, they took away someone else's!!
Execute. All the way. The planet is full enough without those kinds of people.
Even as the stone of the fruit must break
that its heart may stand in the sun,
so must you know pain.
There are only two ways in which one can live their life. One is as though nothing is a miracle, the other is as though everything is.
The person they murdered can never move on either. Or their family, friends etc. And yes, they have to declare what they did for the rest of their lives, but they have a life, they took away someone else's!!
I agree with this.
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
I am really undecided on the death penalty, more against because innocent people have been put to death previously.
The recent executions in Indonesia made my blood run cold. These men had been on death row for 10 years and were rehabilitated. The chances of them repeating their offences after release were very low after that experience. I have also just read that one of the men were schizophrenic and didn't know he was being executed until they were on their way....I could not imagine the terror they went through.
However, terrorists and mass murderers are not capable of living in society and therefore, should they spend a lifetime in jail or be executed for their crimes? I don't know to be honest....who should have the right to decide? Those whom are jailed for life should be made to work though, not sit comfortably in a cell with all they need handed to them on a plate.
The recent executions in Indonesia made my blood run cold. These men had been on death row for 10 years and were rehabilitated. The chances of them repeating their offences after release were very low after that experience. I have also just read that one of the men were schizophrenic and didn't know he was being executed until they were on their way....I could not imagine the terror they went through.
It's also been revealed that the Philipno woman who was facing execution only got a reprieve at the last minute because someone has come forward an admitted they duped her.
Also one of the Nigerian guys had initially been sentenced to life without parole and had served years of that before being told he'd be getting the death penalty instead.
I am completely against capital punishment too. I do not think it can be part of a civilised society.
I agree with this. I don't believe you can ever justify killing someone as a suitable punishment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harley's Dad
Nor, Foxtrot Oscar, is taking another person's life part of a civilised society. Why should a murderer continue with their own life when their victim's has been wiped out by them?
So should we all go rape the rapists? Go kidnap those loved by people who kidnap? Go rob the robbers?
I'm sorry but if we can punish these crimes by jail time and rehabilitation (which, yes I do know, does not always work) then it should also work that a murderer should also be given the opportunity to rehabilitate.
Sorry, Iamcatbug, but I believe that murder is in a class of its own. It is snuffing someone out, with all their hopes and dreams (and perhaps those of their family), and consigning them to a coffin or cremation in an instant. In my book murder is almost always unforgivable and while I accept that capital punishment won't always act as a deterrent it is in many cases the "reward" that the murderer deserves. That said, I of course wish that there never murders to spark this sort of controversy, but sadly life (or death!) ain't like that ...
And rape and kidnap can't do the same as murder? People and families can have their lives ruined by any type of crime.
Sorry Tony I completely disagree with you on this.
That said, I respect your viewpoint and understand where you are coming from, but for me I just can't accept it being acceptable to kill someone for being a murderer.
OK, Catmanbug, so what are you going to do with him or her? Applaud them, or say "poor little disadvantaged fellow - it was all society's fault." Murder is murder, the deliberate taking of someone else's life is totally unforgiveable, and the penalty for murder should surely reflect the enormity of the crime ...
Tony (I hate the whole subject here, but think too about the victim's family and all the immense trauma suffered by them. How dare can some mindless unthinking person snuff out another person's life and enjoy the rest of their own lives, whether in prison or not.)
