That would help the economy. Especially if the prisoners were really underpaid.
Public Executions - Wrong or Right?
- Thread starter darksidZz
- Start date
That would help the economy. Especially if the prisoners were really underpaid.
Is execution a good deterrent?
I'd say if a criminal is given a choice between execution and life in a prison, it is a no brainer what he/she would choose.
Therein lies the answer - the better deterrent will have the better effect of curtailing crime or the temptation for it.
All indications bear testimony to the fact that in societies where you could be executed publicly for a crime, there is less crime.
It doesn't matter what your political or humanitarian views may be - the INTENT being curtailing crime, executions score heavily over other forms of punishment.
I'd say if a criminal is given a choice between execution and life in a prison, it is a no brainer what he/she would choose.
Therein lies the answer - the better deterrent will have the better effect of curtailing crime or the temptation for it.
All indications bear testimony to the fact that in societies where you could be executed publicly for a crime, there is less crime.
It doesn't matter what your political or humanitarian views may be - the INTENT being curtailing crime, executions score heavily over other forms of punishment.
Life in prison, I assume.
All the evidence suggests that the death penalty has no greater deterrent value than life imprisonment.
The thing is, criminals all think they won't be caught for their crimes... until they are.
In such societies, measures of crime are generally poorer. Less recorded crime isn't the same thing as less crime.
No, they don't.
No, James! Think about it ...a "life imprisonment" does NOT mean that they'll spend their entire lives in prison! It means that they'll get released if they're "good boys" while in prison for a few years.
Thus, not only do we have new criminals coming along, we now RELEASE the old criminals back into society ...with a very high rate of repeat crimes in evidence. Thus, now we have MORE criminals, not less ......and it's due to not gettin' rid of the bastards when we had the chance!
Yeah, exactly! And yet you want to release the fuckers right back out into society even after they're proven to be fuckin' criminals! Amazing!
Baron Max
People focus!!
The question is the public nature of the execution, not the execution itself.
This topic kind of relates to the whiny-pussy generation. 100 years ago kids were watching hangings, today we can't show it because what? People can't take reality?
I say a murderer kicking his last on the rope in the 10 o'clock news is a better deterrent than anthing else. Well, breaking on the wheel also could work...
The question is the public nature of the execution, not the execution itself.
This topic kind of relates to the whiny-pussy generation. 100 years ago kids were watching hangings, today we can't show it because what? People can't take reality?
I say a murderer kicking his last on the rope in the 10 o'clock news is a better deterrent than anthing else. Well, breaking on the wheel also could work...
B
boa
Guest
This poll is incomplete! I can't vote!
James R.:
You accept no evil, then? Nothing is immoral? Or wrong?
You accept no evil, then? Nothing is immoral? Or wrong?
It's always easier to make foolish blanket statements than it is to back them up with any kind of logic or reasoning.
"All violence is bad!" ...yet I'd be willing to bet that he eats meat, which was a cow violently killed and butchered. And my best guess is that he kills fire ants and mosquitos and other annoying bugs.
Baron Max
B
boa
Guest
See post #2...
The only reason we don't have those things now is that special effects allow us to satisfy our bloodlust without anyone really dying.
Nowadays kids can dismember their opponents in quite realistic video games. They can see people being subjected to every kind of brutality on TV, the movies, etc.
I don't think public executions would be any worse and would serve the social good of serving as a greater deterent to crime.
Last edited:
Some people just deserve to die.
However, I oppose the death penalty, for a very simple reason. I don't trust a jury of 12 idiots, along with a judge, to make the correct judgement. Especially since our court system is adversarial, which means that the aim is to 'beat' the other party, NOT necessarily to find the truth.
Innocent men (and women, such as Lindy Chamberlain) have been found guilty of a heinous crime, only to be exonerated at a later date.
However, I oppose the death penalty, for a very simple reason. I don't trust a jury of 12 idiots, along with a judge, to make the correct judgement. Especially since our court system is adversarial, which means that the aim is to 'beat' the other party, NOT necessarily to find the truth.
Innocent men (and women, such as Lindy Chamberlain) have been found guilty of a heinous crime, only to be exonerated at a later date.
It doesn't make any different if it's public or private. If it was happening in the street, then I'd say it's wrong. People need to be able to go about their every day lives without seeing somebody being executed. If it's televised and access is prohibited in the same way porno channels are, then hey ho let's go.
Sounds like a good thing to do - releasing the reformed criminals.
Because it's barbaric, and we want a civilised society these days.
As I mentioned above, all the evidence shows that it's deterrent value is negligible, if it has any deterrent value at all.
Read what I wrote, not what you imagine I wrote.
Something you are very familiar with.
I dunno. People eat shit and worms on reality shows for entertainment, the government starts illegal conquering wars, I don't see much civilization achieved...
Why is a public execution uncivilised?
No, as that is fake.