Printable View
I think it should be life for life, but only i the evidence actually 100% says you killed soemone on purpose, if someone knocks someone down be accident as they ran in the road and they died then thats different but acutally shooting someone or stabbign them etc then imo life for life.
But for example in the case of derek bently over 50 years ago the evidence isnt always taken in to consideration and people could be wrongly hung so in that sence no.
That thought made me laugh. It would never happen but it's a fantastic idea on my opinion :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Virgin Mary
Make a prison with a factory. Have the inmates work rather than sit in their cells. I know some ''big'' and famous prisons allow their prisioners tohave massive parties and play on playstations etc. Thats no life for killers. It's like the issues with the yobs stabbing people: Theres no real punishment. They can get away with it easy.
i'm against capital punishment. i think life imprisonment is fine - however the laws placed throughout the thailand/indonesian countries which say that drug trafficking is a top offence really boggles my mind..
The law can be very horrible thing. In my opinion, executing people for drug offences, unless outrageously carried out, is something I don't agree with either. But different countries have different laws and different beliefs, I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alwayshard
Personally, I dont think two wrongs make a right.
I think these people should be made to serve life in prison (and by life I mean until the day they die), no luxeries, only a bed, a toilet and 3 basic meals a day. They should be made to stop in the same small cell 24/7 aswell.
i agree to an extent. For alot of people prison is an easy way out, an easy life that'd be better than being free, they're guarenteed warmth, meals and alot of them have friends inside. I don't think execution should be allowed but a sort of worse form of prison, solitary confinement? if that still exists. Oh and making life sentences actually life rather than 25 years or whatever it is nowadays.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frodo13.
Now that there is something I agree with. A lot of courts can't define 'Life' properly when sentencing. It sounds a little imperceptive, but if they're going to put someone away for life, than they should put them away for life. However, on a more conversable point, they say '25 years' because that would be like much of the good life gone. Let's say if you went to say when you were 18 or 20. Spending 25 years is a huge chunk out of the good life. But you make a good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramones
Wrong completely.
What do they accomplish from killing someone?
They are just killing someone to show that killing someone is wrong..
I'm sure someone would rather die then spend a lifetime in prison.
If there is enough proof and the person deserves to be executed, then yes.
I'm all for executions.
If someone would rather die than spend a lifetime in prison then whats the problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidAciid
Prisons are getting filled up and people need to be executed instead of getting life sentences to make room!
I'm on both sides. I think yes, because if someone killed someone and you were 100% sure that they did it and had enough evidence and proof to prove they did, then sure. But then, sometimes people are wrongly convicted and executed for a crime they didn't commit. That's where I would say no.