| Product: |
Capital punishment |
| Date: |
18/08/01 (1157 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Gets rid of the criminal from our soceity permanantly
Disadvantages: Easy way out
Capital punishment, a form of punishing a person for a henious crime committed by putting them to death. Justice or Babarric? The question is, should we re-introduce Capital Punishment in Britain after 36 years without it? Personally I don't think the death penalty should be re-introduced. In my eyes, it is not effective, it does not deter people from commiting the crimes in the first place - take America for instance, they have hundreds of people of 'death row' and more people get murdered every day. I view it as an easy way out, why let them die and get away from their lives and the consequences of their actions? Think about it... A crimanal in a small prison cell, with four blank walls, a uncomfy bed and a toilet. Before long he'll be going out of his head, like a caged animal, being confined in a small place, away from the world. That is punishment. If it isn't, why do prisoners, who even have access to large grounds and other priviliges around the prison still top themselves? Because they are being mentally punished. So instead of letting it get to the point where they commit suicide themselves, people who are campaigning for this to be legalised are suggesting we should help them out by giving them a quick painless injection and letting them die with more dignaty then many terminally ill people campaigning for euthanasia to be legalised. Even the Bulgar killers have been treated like royalty, they have been released after 8 measly years, 8 years that they took away from poor little Jamie Bulgar. They now have new identities, new houses, their whole lives back, everything they could possibly want. But nobody thinks about the homeless man at the end of the street, he hasn't hurt a fly and yet the murderers of a defenceless toddler get treated with more respect. The only fit punishment for these people is to lock them in a small padded cell, with a bed, a wash basin and a toi
let, a large metal door and a single bulb in the ceiling. They should have no privaliges and their only contact with other people would be guards handing them food through a flap on the door. Making them live like this, on constant 24 hour suicide watch for the rest of their lives would be the best punishment possible. Being forced to live without luxuries and communication, spending the rest of their days dwelling on their past and spending every mintue of every day regretting the crime they have commited 'til the day they die. That is what would happen in my ideal world, but then again, in an ideal world people wouldn't need to be punished as they wouldn't commit these crimes in the first place.
Summary:
|
Last comments:
|
- 22/08/01 An interesting op, but I can't go above U for a rating for several reasons. Firstly, there are just too many mistakes in the English - I find using a spellchecker helps enormously, as people can't see all my errors! Second, you've fallen into the common trap (put about by the likes of The Sun) of saying James (he was never called Jamie) Bulger's killers have been "treated like royalty". Rubbish; they've been treated in the way most likely to stop them offending again once they get out. What works for society is the important thing. And thirdly, you haven't specified what sort of crimes your "isolation cell" punishment would be reserved for - I take it not paying your TV licence wouldn't be amongst them... |
|
- 18/08/01 Point taken |
|
- 18/08/01 Interesting viewpoint - are you suggesting that killers as young as 10 yrs old should be locked up and punished forever (in a padded white cell I think you said). What would this achieve? Yes punish them, but should we also not be helping them? |
View all
4
comments
|