Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Should a murderer get a whole-life sentence?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

StrayCat
StrayCat e2 Member 1014919 forum postsStrayCat vcard Canada2 Constructive Critique Points
10 Jul 2013 - 10:45 PM


Quote: The problem arises when you start executing innocent people wrongly convicted.

And that is why the death penalty should not exist anywhere.

Imprisonment, in some circles, is thought to be just the removal of a dangerous person from society. Then, theoretically, if the person can be rehabilitated, they would be returned to society. The problem with this perspective is human error, and in some cases, indifference. We have all seen where convicts have been released, and immediately begin preying on the public again. In fact, nobody can say what another will, or won't do. The cost of incarceration should not be a reason to release prisoners, as happened in California a couple years ago. I believe that life in prison with no hope of release should be used for some cases, and life in prison with reviews conducted at set times in some others. Today it is common for the police to warn a community that a prisoner who is expected to commit the same offence is being released into their area, and to be warned. How crazy is that; to release a person who is almost guaranteed to re-offend? We need more safe-guards.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
10 Jul 2013 - 10:45 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

lemmy
lemmy  71939 forum posts United Kingdom
11 Jul 2013 - 9:05 AM


Quote: You can embolden all you like to make your point but it serves no other pint other than making you go down in my estimation!

It seemed that no matter what I said, you ploughed on with the same grandstanding of your liberal credentials. Bold was a way to make sure you read my written words and not the ones you seemed to want me to have said. And it succeeded!

Whether I go up or down in your estimation has no meaning for me and I expect vice versa. I have never met you, never will, so we are both shouting down a well really, all for entertainment, sound and fury signifying nothing. Just out of interest, do you always argue points you believe? I often argue against my own views, it's very enjoyable and forces you to understand another point of view.

Quoting twice, I just worked out how to do it when you mentioned it and there's an extra one for luck. You just type in the HTML tags manually with the second one containing the terminator.


Quote: However I have never worked out how to quote 2 people on a forum!


Quote: I read somewhere that thiopentone sodium is the first element of the US lethal cocktail


Quote: No it is not right, they should do 7 years then hanged.

Evertonian
11 Jul 2013 - 12:29 PM


Quote: Watch the documentary, then comment. When the Sadam regime were being hung, many lost their heads as the drop was wrong. Also, a short drop execution, effectively slow strangulation, isn't quick.
But this isn't the original point of the topic.

That wasn't the humane way that Albert Pierrepoint and others did it, that was Iraqis.

Albert Pierrepoint and his assistants also performed the rights at Nuremburg, but because of US and Russian intervention, they were not quite as fast, but in British jails 8 seconds was the norm. No heads were ever lost, a calculated drop was worked out in accordance with the weight of the person and how strong his neck was. Albert Pierrepoint would observe through a spy hole, the night before (Hangmen slept in the prison the night before) and do the necessary calculations. The position of the knot on the rope was also important and when the drop occurred, the condemned man's neck fractured causing instant death.
If you have an interest I urge you to read his and his assistants books on the subject.

thewilliam
11 Jul 2013 - 1:02 PM


Quote: Watch the documentary, then comment. When the Sadam regime were being hung, many lost their heads as the drop was wrong. Also, a short drop execution, effectively slow strangulation, isn't quick.
But this isn't the original point of the topic.

That wasn't the humane way that Albert Pierrepoint and others did it, that was Iraqis.

Albert Pierrepoint and his assistants also performed the rights at Nuremburg, but because of US and Russian intervention, they were not quite as fast, but in British jails 8 seconds was the norm. No heads were ever lost, a calculated drop was worked out in accordance with the weight of the person and how strong his neck was. Albert Pierrepoint would observe through a spy hole, the night before (Hangmen slept in the prison the night before) and do the necessary calculations. The position of the knot on the rope was also important and when the drop occurred, the condemned man's neck fractured causing instant death.
If you have an interest I urge you to read his and his assistants books on the subject.

When I think about the death that various departed friends and family had suffered, the UK hanging was incredibly merciful!

gcarth
gcarth e2 Member 102293 forum postsgcarth vcard United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
11 Jul 2013 - 1:24 PM

Yes, it's a very tricky and emotive issue isn't it?
Whatever the pros and cons, I reckon any murderer who murders again, or tries to murder again after being given parole, should never ever be released again.
That said, I suppose we have to consider the likely increase in threats to the prison staff who have to deal with these increasingly frustrated and dangerous inmates.
One part of me tells me to keep these killers locked up for ever - another part of me says: they're literally a waste of space, they're a waste to the taxpayer, they're totally or almost totally evil and they will never be rehabilitated - so execute them.
These are my honest gut reactions and so that doesn't mean to say that I'm right.Sad I am on balance, against the death penalty because as has been said earlier, there's always the high risk of executing an innocent person - even with DNA evidence - which can be contaminated or used to "fit someone up".

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.