Should we bring back the death penalty?

[Ozzieshunni]

He keeps getting reelected because people are stupid. It does nothing to lessen recividism or deter future criminals. I wish I could remember the name of a documentary I watched on that Arizona jail as I'd recommend you watch it.

That was the same sheriff.

 

[TwilightAgain]

Personally I think it fully depends on the circumstance. Its not a one size fits all situation.

Victims of domestic abuse finally snapping and striking is different - in self defence. Getting into a fight and accidentally killing someone without the intent is different. But the people which I would fully support facing the death penalty are those who deliberately set out to cause and torture on another individual. Like that nutter in Colerado for example, he knew exactly what he was doing and he set out to kill those people deliberately.

I actually he is ill, so whilst he may look like he knew what he was doing, I dont think it would be right to give someone with mental health problems the death penalty.

But then where do you draw the line between being 'mentally ill' or just plain cruel and evil?

Generally the line is drawn at the diagnosis of mental illness...

Is there such a thing as mental illness in these cases though? Maybe. Maybe in some cases its just an excuse or a desperate case of reason.

If there is, what about those who are wrongly diagnosed? I don't know much about the tests done to be honest, but what if they're not ill and they're mis diagnosed but they get off lightly for it?

Theres too many what ifs surrounding this topic. It is very interesting though.

Yes there is. According to one study, a huge proportion of inmates suffer from some form of mental illness.

Being forced into an institution for the rest of your life (as I expect a mental ill mass murderer would be) isn't exactly getting off lightly. And it would be wrong to kill someone because they were failed by society and not treated for their illness.

Of course those studies will say this. But i'm sure if you searched you'll find studies which contradict those theories and perhaps claim that a mental illness is more of an excuse than a cause of a criminal act. Thats what i'm saying, its interesting and definitely something which could be explored in greater detail. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to be honest.

 

[Natsku]

He keeps getting reelected because people are stupid. It does nothing to lessen recividism or deter future criminals. I wish I could remember the name of a documentary I watched on that Arizona jail as I'd recommend you watch it.

That was the same sheriff.

I know.

 

[Natsku]

Personally I think it fully depends on the circumstance. Its not a one size fits all situation.

Victims of domestic abuse finally snapping and striking is different - in self defence. Getting into a fight and accidentally killing someone without the intent is different. But the people which I would fully support facing the death penalty are those who deliberately set out to cause and torture on another individual. Like that nutter in Colerado for example, he knew exactly what he was doing and he set out to kill those people deliberately.

I actually he is ill, so whilst he may look like he knew what he was doing, I dont think it would be right to give someone with mental health problems the death penalty.

But then where do you draw the line between being 'mentally ill' or just plain cruel and evil?

Generally the line is drawn at the diagnosis of mental illness...

Is there such a thing as mental illness in these cases though? Maybe. Maybe in some cases its just an excuse or a desperate case of reason.

If there is, what about those who are wrongly diagnosed? I don't know much about the tests done to be honest, but what if they're not ill and they're mis diagnosed but they get off lightly for it?

Theres too many what ifs surrounding this topic. It is very interesting though.

Yes there is. According to one study, a huge proportion of inmates suffer from some form of mental illness.

Being forced into an institution for the rest of your life (as I expect a mental ill mass murderer would be) isn't exactly getting off lightly. And it would be wrong to kill someone because they were failed by society and not treated for their illness.

Of course those studies will say this. But i'm sure if you searched you'll find studies which contradict those theories and perhaps claim that a mental illness is more of an excuse than a cause of a criminal act. Thats what i'm saying, its interesting and definitely something which could be explored in greater detail. I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to be honest.

I suppose its possible to fake mental illness well enough to convince some doctors but I'm still inclined to believe the medical diagnosises

 

[Ozzieshunni]

He keeps getting reelected because people are stupid. It does nothing to lessen recividism or deter future criminals. I wish I could remember the name of a documentary I watched on that Arizona jail as I'd recommend you watch it.

That was the same sheriff.

I know.

Why are people stupid though for electing a sheriff that has a tent city? I think all prisons/jails should be in the Arizona desert. It's mental! A person dying of HIV/AIDS sometimes can't afford their medication, but if they are in prison, it's all paid for? Mental!

 

[Natsku]

He keeps getting reelected because people are stupid. It does nothing to lessen recividism or deter future criminals. I wish I could remember the name of a documentary I watched on that Arizona jail as I'd recommend you watch it.

That was the same sheriff.

I know.

Why are people stupid though for electing a sheriff that has a tent city? I think all prisons/jails should be in the Arizona desert. It's mental! A person dying of HIV/AIDS sometimes can't afford their medication, but if they are in prison, it's all paid for? Mental!

Because it doesn't do any good. It doesn't make people stop committing crime. Its just inhumane and stupid. I despair of the US criminal justice system and the people that think its good.




(disclaimer: I'm in a really bad mood right now and taking it out on here, so sorry)

 

[Ozzieshunni]

Ah, okay. I'm glad you don't actually despair me.

 

[Natsku]

I despair of everyone. Humanity fucking sucks. Not just the criminals either.

 

[Ozzieshunni]

I despair of everyone. Humanity fucking sucks. Not just the criminals either.

?

 

[sarah1726]

I dont agree with the death peanlty because so many mistakes could me made and an innocent person killed for a crime they actually didnt commit!

I do however, think it should be hard labour like it used to be. Breaking up bricks and all that stuff.

They shouldnt be allowed internet access, phone contact..mail yes but thats it. No TV's in their rooms of xboxes or anything like that! xxx

 

[Redhead84]

Yet again, not allowing TV is a recipe for disaster, and as for no phone contact, are you kidding me?

Try having the most important person in your life go to prison for one mistake and not being able to speak to them so they can let you know they're ok.. Try that for size and then come back and give me an answer. Should visits be banned too and families of the offender be punished by proxy?

 

[jenniferttc1]

I'm sorry, but in some cases I think death should be an option.
I'm not talking about getting death for robbery, I'm taking about serial killers, child molesters, rapiest etc.
I also would only want someone to get the death penalty for something that was proven to be them. Like the guy that went into the theater and killed innocent people. I don't think anyone should get it unless they know 100% it was that person. The whole idea of not knowing if someone is guilty and a jury of people decide if you were does not sit right with me. Many people go to jail innocent.

 

[JASMAK]

I think they should let the victim's families 'take care of the murderer'...cheaper.

 

[JASMAK]

Yet again, not allowing TV is a recipe for disaster, and as for no phone contact, are you kidding me?

Try having the most important person in your life go to prison for one mistake and not being able to speak to them so they can let you know they're ok.. Try that for size and then come back and give me an answer. Should visits be banned too and families of the offender be punished by proxy?

I know it must be hard for you...but what about crminals taking responsibility and paying for their crimes? It's punishment...not disneyland.

 

[mummy3]

I'm torn on this, in some cases yes I think the death penalty would be appropriate but there is the worry it would become open to abuse. Serial killers, for example, take Jeffery Dahmer, he was caught literally corpse in fridge and diagnosed psychopathic I believe, there is no cure for this and serial killers like him can literally never be rehabilitated, they will always want to kill and torture, I feel for them the death penalty is the best outcome both financially and for the victims families and population safety. As for mental illness being a contridiction, how will that combat the differences in medically insane but legally sane?

And, the colorado shooter, I dont know what to make of that, not totally convinced he's mentally ill. For a start from what I can gather he's been collecting ammunition and planning for a month, that doesnt suggest a sudden snap and loss of control. Plus he studied neuroscience making him an expert at demonstrating insanity

 

[smelly07]

No to the death penalty without a doubt....... how its legal still in some places is beyond me....... this doesnt make the justice system any better than the criminal imo.

As for the whole prisons tougher etc......again............. prison should be about rehabilitation, would you rather a prisoner come back out in to society more damage than when they went in? prison should be about rehabilitaion, training, gaining skills, therapy, being given links via tv telephone, family visits to keep in touch with the outside world.

In the UK the serial/serious prisoners would be in a CAT A prison where they are locked up 23 hours a day....... most likely these prisoners wont be let out if they ever do not for a very very long time..........do i care if they have a tv.........NO.........just as long as they are locked up.

My only issue is peodaphiles as i dont think any amount of therapy/medication/whatever will change the way they are wired.......how most get such a little prison sentance is crazy, i think once they have offended then they should be kept on some island indefinitely..........dont care how nice the island is as long as they are never around children again.

 

[Natsku]

It always amazes me that people want prisons to be harsh and horrible, knowing that its not going to do anything except make the criminals even more fucked up than before they went in. The last thing we need is more fucked up people but people just don't look at the bigger picture, all they see is someone who done something wrong and needs to be punished, they don't think about the effect that has on society as a whole.

Does anyone know anything about victims rights in the UK? Like how involved can they be with the prosecution process etc and do they always get compensation?

 

[Ozzieshunni]

It always amazes me that people want prisons to be harsh and horrible, knowing that its not going to do anything except make the criminals even more fucked up than before they went in. The last thing we need is more fucked up people but people just don't look at the bigger picture, all they see is someone who done something wrong and needs to be punished, they don't think about the effect that has on society as a whole.

Does anyone know anything about victims rights in the UK? Like how involved can they be with the prosecution process etc and do they always get compensation?

:wave:

You know I volunteer with Victim Support Scotland. Victims are not typically involved with the prosecution process aside from being called as witnesses by the PF (procurator fiscal). In certain cases, like murder, a victim's family is allowed to submit a victim impact statement to the court. This is different in the US. A victim in ANY crime is allowed an impact statement and they are allowed to read it in court. However, an impact statement has no bearing on the verdict and is usually read before a judge orders sentencing.

In regards to compensation, no, a victim does not always get compensation. In some cases where a victim has been injured, they can file a criminal injuries claim. Again, this does not always promise compensation.

 

[Natsku]

Cheers for the info. I think thats something that should be changed, better rights for the victims. Here the victims can be involved with the whole process, they can submit evidence and comment on it and suggest questions to be asked during the investigation or in court and can seek compensation for any offence.

 

[Ozzieshunni]

Cheers for the info. I think thats something that should be changed, better rights for the victims. Here the victims can be involved with the whole process, they can submit evidence and comment on it and suggest questions to be asked during the investigation or in court and can seek compensation for any offence.

It does depend on the case in regards to compensation. A victim who is robbed for example can request compensation, but they might not always get it if the offender has no money.

It's a fine line to walk with victim/offender rights. You can't give too many rights to a victim because the offender will get upset and you can give too many rights to an offender or the victim becomes upset. It's because of the Common Law system. What type of system do they run on over there, Nats?