An eye for an eye would only make the world blind.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
If someone kills a murderer, aren't you as bad as them? You're commiting the same act, therefore it's a never ending cycle?
Printable View
An eye for an eye would only make the world blind.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
If someone kills a murderer, aren't you as bad as them? You're commiting the same act, therefore it's a never ending cycle?
America and various other countries have the death penalty in place, but their murder/crime rates haven't gone down.
We can't say that the death penalty will act as a deterrent. If someone is caught illegally downloading music and films, they can get an unlimited fine and possibly a prison sentence. Does that stop anyone? No.
In that case if you follow that quote, we'd still have both eyes but we'd be ruled by Nazi Germany.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardemax
..and no, because they forfeited there right to live. A state execution is totally different to a murder.
Well no it kinda stops once the criminal's deadQuote:
Originally Posted by GommeInc
No it would make two people with 1 less eyeQuote:
Originally Posted by Ardemax
No-one's suggesting vigilante attacks on murderers should be allowed except maybe Dan might because he's a bit weird but a controlled punishment system that involves the death sentence does not make the state liable to punishment in return. Going by your idea we should never discipline anyone in any way - oh and by locking up criminals the jailor ought also to be locked up for his breach of the other's human rights of course, and his jailor also and so on. It just makes no senseQuote:
Originally Posted by Ardemax
No but it could be argued that it's substantially less than it would be without. I'm not going to say that because no-one knows for sure, but you can't make up facts like thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Japan
Actually it does stop a lot of people even if it doesn't fix the problem. If that weren't so no-one in the world would pay for music and filmsQuote:
Originally Posted by Japan
It shouldn't act just as a 'deterrant' as many argue, its also called justice.
A deterrent is the most important thing. Justice just for the sake of it is for bitter people. If someone in my family was murdered and the murderer was executed, I'd be scared of the "guilt" coming back to haunt me, as if I had some control over whether they lived or died. I've heard lots of stories where family members have forgiven such criminals so it could easily have a bad effect on you if "you had them killed" as it were. However I would never feel any sympathy for them if they were just sent to prison for their life so why risk punishing yourself with the psychological effects?Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Well I suppose there's other arguments for not to have the death pentalty because if you think about it, would you want to spend 25 years in a cell, 23 hours a day doing nothing but sitting down, 1 hour to go outside, or would you rather 5 minutes in an electric chair, or be drugged, which is harmless?Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingJesus
Yeah, it's a factor again. Like some religions would never dream of killing anyone for the wrong doing's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio
I think anyone sent to prison, and gloats about it should be shot.
if somone has murdered, and has admitted to it, should be executed, why should they live if they have taken an inocent mans life
i don't think that execution is really justice. justice for who? the murdered? they haven't got their life back.. the family of the victim? they don't get their family member back... the murderer? they don't have a real punishment, they escape a life of imprisonment, anxiety and having to live with the guilt of it.
justice for murder can never be achieved.