[lostalex]

If i was innocent of the crime i was being accused of, i'd prefer life in prison, so i'd have time to try and exonerate myself.

If i was guilty of such a crime, i'd prefer the death penalty. I'd obviously have serious psychological issues to be capable of such crimes, and would prefer to be put to death, so that i couldn't harm anyone else.

[Tom]

A lot of people who commit murders are psychopathic and feel no remorse so having them spend their life in prison is just a waste of resources. but on the other hand if capital punishment was legalised, people who want to commit suicide would abuse it and could lead to more murders

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by lostalex

If i was innocent of the crime i was being accused of, i'd prefer life in prison, so i'd have time to try and exonerate myself.

If i was guilty of such a crime, i'd prefer the death penalty. I'd obviously have serious psychological issues to be capable of such crimes, and would prefer to be put to death, so that i couldn't harm anyone else.

Yeah, this is exactly how I feel..

[Niamh.]

Life in prison as long as Life was actually LIFE as in until you are dead.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by DeejayAJ

Wow didn't think so many people would choose capital punishment. Capital punishment is pretty disgusting imo no matter what the crime, what happened to two wrongs don't make a right? I don't think any rationally thinking man should be able to choose whether someone else lives or dies.

isn't that what doctors do everyday?

Some would argue that no man CAN choose whether a man lives or dies. Some would say that decision is made by a higher power. Whether by bullet or scalpel, does any man really decide who lives and dies?

Let's get deep. :P

Some would say no matter the means or circumstances, what IS was meant to be.

Some would say, who are we to presume we have any say in it whatsoever?

Perhaps what happens is exactly what was meant to happen.

[M X]

Life, because that way you have to deal with what you've done. Capital punishment just gives people an easy way out.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by InOne

It all depends. If I didn't have a Conscience, I wouldn't care anyway and would just chill in jail. But if I felt remorse and it would eat away at me for the rest of my living days, then death.

Good point.

I wonder though what the response would have been on here had this question been, should capital punshment or a life sentence be the maximum penalty in the UK for others not ourselves.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Good point.

I wonder though what the response would have been on here had this question been, should capital punshment or a life sentence be the maximum penalty in the UK for others not ourselves.

wouldn't it be interesting if they chose to have more compasion for others than they'd have for themselves.

i think it's incredibly self-serving and self-righteous when people try to defend child molestors and murders, because i think showing mercy is very self-righteous.

A lot of british people seem to think that by showing mercy to horrible people, it means that THEY themselves are better people. They pardon horrible people in an attempt to seem more merciful themselves. it's so self-serving, and shows that they have no compassion at all for the actual victims of crimes.

It's so self righteous, it's sickening.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by MichaelSpears

Life, because that way you have to deal with what you've done. Capital punishment just gives people an easy way out.

But some people can't feel bad for what they've done because of their mental make up

[lostalex]

Some people are animals. They have no respect for anything or anyone but themselves. There are true sociopaths. Destroying them is an act of mercy.

imo.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by lostalex

wouldn't it be interesting if they chose to have more compasion for others than they'd have for themselves.

i think it's incredibly self-serving and self-righteous when people try to defend child molestors and murders, because i think showing mercy is very self-righteous.

A lot of british people seem to think that by showing mercy to horrible people, it means that THEY themselves are better people. They pardon horrible people in an attempt to seem more merciful themselves. it's so self-serving, and shows that they have no compassion at all for the actual victims of crimes.

It's so self righteous, it's sickening.

This is so true...

You talk sense

[setanta]

Originally Posted by lostalex

wouldn't it be interesting if they chose to have more compasion for others than they'd have for themselves.

i think it's incredibly self-serving and self-righteous when people try to defend child molestors and murders, because i think showing mercy is very self-righteous.

A lot of british people seem to think that by showing mercy to horrible people, it means that THEY themselves are better people. They pardon horrible people in an attempt to seem more merciful themselves. it's so self-serving, and shows that they have no compassion at all for the actual victims of crimes.

It's so self righteous, it's sickening.

Again, it has nothing to do with compassion or mercy - the law has a responsibility to protect people from themselves sometimes because, in my opinion anyway, killing another human being, whether they're beyond help or not, never changes anything and only adds to the collective fear and anger that a society feels.

[lostalex]

Originally Posted by setanta

Again, it has nothing to do with compassion or mercy - the law has a responsibility to protect people from themselves sometimes because, in my opinion anyway, killing another human being, whether they're beyond help or not, never changes anything and only adds to the collective fear and anger that a society feels.

i think there are 2 major mistakes you make in your opinion.

1st mistake - that keeping someone alive is the default. Being alive is not a default, in fact the vast majority of life on this planet is dead, so death is the default, not life.

2nd mistake - Assuming that any kind of social or governmental program can "reform" anyone. where is the research for this reformation? is there any kind of program on the planet that has shown any significant success rate in reforming criminals??? no thre isn't. infact in every ingle country, from canada to new zealand, no country has shown any truelly sucessful rehabilitation program what we see in every country, is that criminals go on to commit more crimes.

there is NO SUCH THING as REHABILITATION. it doesn't exist.

i am a man of science, and there is no science that supports rehabilitation. IT DOESN'T WORK.

All of the research done about crime around the world shows that no program of rehabilitation has worked. Criminals tend to remain criminals, forever.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by lostalex

i think there are 2 major mistakes you make in your opinion.

1st mistake - that keeping someone alive is the default. Being alive is not a default, in fact the vast majority of life on this planet is dead, so death is the default, not life.

2nd mistake - Assuming that any kind of social or governmental program can "reform" anyone. where is the research for this reformation? is there any kind of program on the planet that has shown any significant success rate in reforming criminals??? no thre isn't. infact in every ingle country, from canada to new zealand, no country has shown any truelly sucessful rehabilitation program what we see in every country, is that criminals go on to commit more crimes.

there is NO SUCH THING as REHABILITATION. it doesn't exist.

i am a man of science, and there is no science that supports rehabilitation. IT DOESN'T WORK.

I agree with this. I mean I'm all for trying to reform thieves etc. But murderers and paedophiles? No, No, No, as I have said in that other thread the only way of testing if this rehabilitation works is by putting these people back into society and risking innocent people and that to me is unacceptable. Either lock them up and throw away the key or capital punishment.

[setanta]

Originally Posted by lostalex

i think there are 2 major mistakes you make in your opinion.

1st mistake - that keeping someone alive is the default. Being alive is not a default, in fact the vast majority of life on this planet is dead, so death is the default, not life.

2nd mistake - Assuming that any kind of social or governmental program can "reform" anyone. where is the research for this reformation? is there any kind of program on the planet that has shown any significant success rate in reforming criminals??? no thre isn't. infact in every ingle country, from canada to new zealand, no country has shown any truelly sucessful rehabilitation program what we see in every country, is that criminals go on to commit more crimes.

there is NO SUCH THING as REHABILITATION. it doesn't exist.

i am a man of science, and there is no science that supports rehabilitation. IT DOESN'T WORK.

I'm not talking about the criminal here: I'm talking about society in general and the repercussions the lawful killing of another human being can have on it. It never relieves the pain. Like I said before, the law is there to protect everyone and once you allow death and killing into your heart, well then you learn to devalue life. It's the brutalizing effect.

As for no rehabilitation - I don't believe that at all.

[lostalex]

we have a greater responsibilty to protect the INNOCENT people.

People like you seem more interested in protecting the criminals than the innocent people.

There is no effective rehabilitation process, so how can you be more interested in protecting the criminal than protecting the general public?

the re-offending statistics are startling.

We are all born with all the rights in the world. if you commit a crime, you voluntarily GIVE AWAY those rights.

People need to be held accountable for their decisions. You are GIVEN rights, that doesn't mean they can't be TAKEN away if necessary.

If you TAKE another person's life, you have NO right to life.

How many have been let out of jail and taken more lives because judges wanted to be self-righteous, and wanted to seem "merciful"?

imo, those judges should be held accountable for everything done by the criminals they let out of jail.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by lostalex

we have a greater responsibilty to protect the INNOCENT people.

People like you seem more interested in protecting the criminals than the innocent people.

There is no effective rehabilitation process, so how can you be more interested in protecting the criminal than protecting the general public?

the re-offending statistics are startling.

yep, I agree 100% here. Criminals seem to have more rights than anyone else these days. Where is the second chance for the children that paedophiles abuse? And where is the second chance for the people who have been murdered???

[setanta]

Originally Posted by lostalex

we have a greater responsibilty to protect the INNOCENT people.

People like you seem more interested in protecting the criminals than the innocent people.

There is no effective rehabilitation process, so how can you be more interested in protecting the criminal than protecting the general public?

the re-offending statistics are startling.

We are all born with all the rights in the world. if you commit a crime, you voluntarily GIVE AWAY those rights.

You aren't listening to me here. I'm talking about protecting people from themselves. Nothing about the criminals.

And rehabilitation can work.... you can't be investing yourself in such sweeping statements like that.

[Tom]

Rehabilitation works for some people, but not for the majority. Its still worth doing for the minority of people that are helped because its still putting a positive effect on someones life. No 2 criminals are the same.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Tom

Rehabilitation works for some people, but not for the majority. Its still worth doing for the minority of people that are helped because its still putting a positive effect on someones life. No 2 criminals are the same.

yes but like I said would you risk putting a murderer or paedophile back on the street in the hope that the rehabilitation has worked?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Niamhxo

yes but like I said would you risk putting a murderer or paedophile back on the street in the hope that the rehabilitation has worked?

Paedophiles and in some cases murderers can't be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation tends to work for lesser crimes (theft, criminal damage etc). Its all in your psychological make up

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Tom

Paedophiles and in some cases murderers can't be rehabilitated. Rehabilitation tends to work for lesser crimes (theft, criminal damage etc). Its all in your psychological make up

well, I'm all for trying it out on those lesser crimes

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Niamhxo

well, I'm all for trying it out on those lesser crimes

I think thats the best option. A lot of the time if criminals are just left after commiting small crimes, their offences will get gradually bigger and bigger until they're beyond help. They need to get there early

[lostalex]

how many innocent victims are we willing to sacrifice for the chance that rehabilitation works for one criminal?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Tom

I think thats the best option. A lot of the time if criminals are just left after commiting small crimes, their offences will get gradually bigger and bigger until they're beyond help. They need to get there early

yes, trying to work with these people is a good thing imo.