Jabo

So, you're saying you want smarter criminals?

Seen Escape from New York? There are lots of islands around, just chuck em all on an island and let them fend for themselves. If they survive their sentence, they are innocent. Put it in God's or Mother Nature's or Destiny's hands.

rwm

No, the prison sentence ALONG with education will encourage them to become a better person.

Thats stupid - whats the rationale?

Duck

Arrrrrrrgh growl !!! I agree with grumpy!

__________________
.

xavier

How small are we talking ? I'm for the death penalty too. But only for extreme cases.

But there should be other degrees of penalty : rape - dick & legs cut off; robbery - nose cut off so you know from a distance a robber.
and so one

__________________
Don't take life too seriously, it's not permanent !

lectricpharaoh

I disagree with this. I've never understood the position that a human life is inherently more important than another life. It's as arbitrary a view as that of the white supremacist who maintains that a white person has more intrinsic worth than a black person. Is one entitled to such a view? Certainly. However, the fact that some (perhaps many) people hold this view does not validate it.
This is my point when it comes to capital punishment, as well as disfiguring corporal punishment, such as the amputation of the hands or genitals. I think a better solution would be prisons composed of very small (big enough to lie down in, and that's about it) cells. Convicted people would serve their full sentences, with no parole or other early release, and a sentence of 'life' would mean 'until death'. I support such a life sentence for perpetrators of culpable homicide and rape.

On the other hand, crimes that cause zero or minimal harm should be decriminalized or (at the least) their penalties reduced sharply. I've always been stunned at the sheer idiocy of locking up someone for 20 years for drug possession, while letting a killer out in 5 years because it was 'manslaughter' and they had 'good behavior' in prison.

Crimes that fall into this latter category include things such as drug possession, use, cultivation/manufacture and prostitution. Before someone says that such acts contribute to increased rates of theft, assault, murder, and other crimes, I should point out that I'm not advocating the decriminalization of these secondary crimes. If one steals to fund their drug habit, they should be treated the same as any other thief. Of course, with the decriminalization of certain acts, associated crime rates drop.

__________________
And once again, Probability proves itself willing to sneak into a back alley and service Drama as would a copper-piece harlot.
- Vaarsuvius, Order of the Stick

Arevos

To each their own. I'd be interested where everybody draws the line - does a bacteria have as much right to live as a human? What about an insect? A fish? A dog? A monkey? An ape?

If humans were rational beings, this might be the case. However, there is not much evidence that suggests that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. Indeed, there is a strong positive correlation between the death penalty and the murder rate of a country - one can generally expect to find a higher murder rate in those places that allow capital punishment, versus those that do not.

Regardless, a system of capital punishment results inevitably results in the state inflicting greater harm upon innocent individuals. If you are wrongly convicted and serving life, the state can release you and compensate you financially - this may be far from sufficient, but it does go some way of limiting the damage done. Capital punishment, on the other hand, cannot be undone; the damage is irreversible.

DaWei

I believe that a human life is inherently more important than any other life. That doesn't make it inviolable under the right circumstances. I'm of the opinion that defining the circumstances is the crux of the debate.

Everything else is most definitely a resource. Resources should be used wisely, and (in my opinion) not cruelly.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Arevos

It's not arbitrary; rather, it's a recursive definition. A human being is self-aware; that is, it is capable of conceptualising its own existence. I believe that human lives are important, because humans think their lives are important, and they can do that only because they are self aware.

An arbitrary collection of molecules, such as a rock, or a puddle of water, has no such capability we know of. Nor is it likely that single-celled organisms are self-aware. Self-awareness seems to require computational devices of a certain complexity.

At what point a creature becomes self-aware is up for debate. I know I am self-aware (Descartes), and through observation and interaction I'm pretty certain that other humans are as well. Beyond this, the line blurs, as humans are the only animal known to have the linguistic facilities to demonstrate self-awareness beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Does a dog know it exists, or does it lack the intelligence to understand the concept? Does a rabbit? A slug? A bacteria? A protein?

Indigno

Every generation is convinced that theirs is the worst because their timeline begins with their birth.

__________________
Perhaps I should have a sticky topic for all of the times I "return" to this forum instead of a new one every time.

DaWei

...and they don't read history....

There's an aphorism regarding that, but I won't repeat it. See my Tic Tac Toe game.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers