| Welcome to Coffeetalk. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Penalties for Murder; What is Just? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 11 2008, 04:10 PM (407 Views) | |
| lara | Jun 22 2008, 02:31 AM Post #26 |
|
Kopi Luwak
|
Well, yeah. |
![]() |
|
| Krazy | Jun 22 2008, 02:46 PM Post #27 |
|
I haz powah!
|
By not murdering people in the first place.
Exactly, so why not save a fortune of tax payers money which can be funnelled into things like education by beheading these criminals on Axe TV! and even get some revenue from it? Make the criminals pay for the expenses! |
| "Well, ‘course dis one’s betta! It’s lotz ‘eavier, and gots dem spikey bitz on de ends. " | |
![]() |
|
| Regullus | Jun 22 2008, 04:30 PM Post #28 |
|
Reliant
|
Expense is an argument in the US but the long and short is by the time the appeals and years in prison the expense, I think, is 6 of one and 1/2 a dozen of the other. It's probably cheaper to have someone in prison for life. Not to mention possibly you learn why they did what they did and possible intervention. I spoke to a psychologist and he said, predatorial pedophiles were very unlikely to either stop or be cured. I'm not against the death penalty in certain cases. Certainly a serial/mass killer, the man who abused his girlfriend's daughter would be a good candidate, but I think the guilt should be beyond doubt. On the other hand, possibly and I don't know a lot about this but there have been cases were convicted criminals have volunteered for scientific experiments and that I think gives the perpetrator the possibility of a being of some worth and showing some redemption. In WW2, pacifists volunteered for a variety of experiments, such as, the effects of starvation, in lieu of military service. There was a case in US of a woman who committed a vicious double murder. She was a drug addict, she was quite appalling during her confession, she was unrepetent and she admitted to "orgasming" as she beat someone's head in with an axe. She given the death sentence. In prison, she got off drugs, she educated herself and became helpful to other prison inmates, and by all accounts became truly reformed. Efforts were made and failed to pardon her from the death penalty. She was executed. I think it was mistake to execute her. Not because she was innocent but because she had reformed and was helping other people and she could have continued to be an asset. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Eral | Jun 22 2008, 11:56 PM Post #29 |
|
Kopi Luwak
|
Krazy, I don't want you to stop, because Simming a thread is good for everyone - it entertains and fights the good fight against Seriosity: but there's a not a lot to say in response to it. :lol:
I believe this is a paradox. Or something. :rolleyes: I agree that there are crimes that deserve 40 years in prison, or even the death penalty. But deciding a penalty in response to a crime is a dangerous way to hand out penalties. Perceptions are not infallible. The system is meant to be just. I think our system is mired by legal technicalities, which I would like to see thrown away: but then I wonder what worse things could happen. I don't know. :( If we treat evil people unjustly, is that good for our society? |
![]() |
|
| lara | Jun 23 2008, 12:03 AM Post #30 |
|
Kopi Luwak
|
No. |
![]() |
|
| Krazy | Jun 23 2008, 09:41 AM Post #31 |
|
I haz powah!
|
Society already treats good people unjustly, treating a few evil ones unjustly is hardly going to make things worse. Society is imperfect, injustices occur all the time - just look at how having money skews the system.
Erm, you'll have to explain this one to me as that is how penalties to crimes are dished out. Person commits crime, person is sentenced at trial - the sentence usually according to the severity of the crime as dictated by law, or am I missing something? |
| "Well, ‘course dis one’s betta! It’s lotz ‘eavier, and gots dem spikey bitz on de ends. " | |
![]() |
|
| Eral | Jun 23 2008, 12:05 PM Post #32 |
|
Kopi Luwak
|
I mean allowing personal feelings of revulsion dictate the punishment. "I don't find this crime repulsive, so you get a lighter sentence." |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Table 32 · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







4:31 PM Jul 13