@Omerthe efficiency of the death sentence is not something I doubt; its the fact that the criminal will not get the chance to repent; Yea fine hesa bad bad man for killing someone, but why do we have to stoop down to his level? lengthy prison sentences will surely take deteriorate his soul; prison is not a "short ride" you go there, taste some of the worst food thats only enough to help you survive but not necessarily with adequate nutrition, whats going to be the result when the sentence is over? One, he could have learned his lesson and repented, or two, he could be back to his ways, but remember, its not like hes gonna go ahead and kill the first person he sees; most murders are premeditated , I am sure there is more than enough means to prevent him
"Stoop down to his level"... Ordinary citizens are not going to take an axe and behead him. The law will do the necessary. Punishment should be at the
same level that the crime is. If the crime is below your nose, I don't find anything wrong if the law bows to give a similar punishment. If the crime is below your waist, still there is nothing wrong if the law kneels for the only sake of punishment. Similarly, if the crime goes beneath your knees, I don't find it demeaning for the law to even lie down if it has to give a punishment at the same level. THAT is justice. If the law "stoops down to his level", there is absolutely nothing belittling--- then only will there be a balance between
crime and
punishment.
"When the sentence is over"? When what sentence is over? If capital punishment is banned, the longest sentence--- the worst punishment--- would be imprisonment lasting for a
lifetime. The criminal is going to rot in jail TILL DEATH. So instead of spending resources to keep him alive till he
dies, isn't it more cost efficient to give him death once and for all? He MAY repent. But even if he does, of what use will it be to the country? Who will even know whether he's repenting or not? "To prevent him"... Who is even going to prevent him? How is he going to be prevented? Do you think before committing his next crime, he's going to announce it publicly in the newspapers?
An eye for an eye.... makes the whole world blind; it MYTE prevent other crimes from occurring, but most probably it won't. Murderers have causes to kill, once they killed that victim and accomplished their goal, there will not be much reason to go on a "pyscho-rampage" (and if he does, then hes a mental case, i.e. he should be referred to a mental hospital
"Most probably it won't"? Most probably, it
will. I've already explained the 4 elements necessary for a crime to occur: criminal, victim, opportunity, courage. Kindly refer.
That becomes very easy then. A criminal kills and then goes on a "psycho-rampage". Instead of going to jail, he's sent to the mental hospital. Good strategy to avoid punishment.
Again, the percentage of psychopaths and serial killers do not account for the majority of murderers, most murders occurr as a result of love/jealous or revenge; and in both cases I do not see how killing him will reduce the number of future killings, he's already accomplished his goal, he's just gonna try to move on with his life after he's out. Life sentences will rob a lot of his age and probably his fortune too, he will not be able to resume his life, at least now he has a chance to repent and do well.
Also, as you're a Muslim you probably know that already; a lot of countries (mainly Muslim) offers the chance for the murderer or the murderer's family to pay blood money to the victim; believe me, these sums are NOT little; if such a system can be applied then this way at least the family of the victim can have a more tangible compensation than just the "pleasure" of seeing the criminal killed
"Love, jealousy and revenge"... All of which are mere human whims. I will ask you the same question again: do you think "love", "jealousy", and "revenge" are reasons valid enough to take up somebody's life? If you think they are, then why are humans even bestowed with reasoning power?
Everyone experiences these emotions in life, that's natural. So what? Do they keep killing people because of these emotions? Does the law keep ALL the criminals in jail? Is someone else can kill because of "love", "jealousy" and "revenge", then everybody else in this world population of 6 billion should have an equal right!
"He's already accomplished his goal"... You mean he is never going to be a victim of "love", "jealousy" and "revenge" again? You really think so? Are we really living in such an ideal world? Once somebody has killed, to do so a second time is easier.
Yes true, justice, the golden word of law. But how affective would killing the murderer give to the Family? A robber has to pay back whatever he robs to the victim, thats justice served; a company is ordered to compensate an employee for an accident because of a problem with the company's working area or whatnot, thats justice served. In both cases the victim gained something; what does the family of a killed victim get? Blood money is not gonna resurrect him, but at least the family is able to get some sort of a compensation, a compensation that costs the criminal very dearly financially and age-wise (since hes gonna be lsing a few dozen years in jail).
Yes, blood money...
Oh but I really don't think the criminal himself is going to pay that huge amount of blood money, especially to the relatives of the one he killed. Else he would be a fool to have murdered. If he does that, then you can refer him to your mental hospital.
So, most probably, the burden will fall on the criminal's family and relatives. Now you tell me, in what way is it fair that all these INNOCENT persons pay for what ONE has done? Don't these persons, who have not wronged, have their own lives, their own expenses, their own financial limitations?
On top of that, we all know it very well:
money CANNOT buy life.
How effective can money and taking away years of a criminal's life be compared to the life of a dear one which has been robbed?
Right, thank you for elucidating it.
A robber pays back whatever he robs, he returns the SAME amount--- justice.
A company compensates for an employee's
accident, SAME amount--- justice.
A criminal has to be killed for killing, SAME again--- justice.
I repeat, no amount of money in the whole world, absolutely NO AMOUNT can ever compensate or account for the loss of lives. This is what our MORAL law teaches, leaving aside the judiciary system.
yea i see what you mean, but look at it this way; isnt it the government's duty in the first place to make sure nobody has the need to do so? a jail is supposed to be the one place with the worst standard of living in the entire country! its not supposed to be a hotel, its supposed to be a place where you are forced to learn discipline and possibly have a chance to meditate and repent
It is also the government's duty to diminish poverty. Has it done it
effectively so far? It is also the government's duty to ensure peace and harmony in the world. But I can still see people fighting and dying in masses. Most countries claim to be democracies, should they then rely entirely on the government? Should 'free' nations that do not hesitate to raise a voice be wholly dependent on the government? A government does not make a nation. A nation makes a government.
"
Worst" standard of living?
How true, poverty is a plague one must have endured personally to be able to have even the slightest notion of its torment.
Even if prison food is of the poorest quality in the world, at least, AT LEAST the prisoners DO HAVE SOMETHING to eat. Can you compare a prisoner with the innocent child who has not even had the chance to see a few grains of rice for days? To the people who have endured famine and slept on an empty stomach for the most part of their lives? To you, to me, to us fortunate ones, prison might be a hell, but for them, it's a rescue. For them, it's heaven on Earth.
As i said before, my idea also includes that the prisoners are not ALLOWED to make any profit, farmers can; farmers can have the aid of capital, prisoners won't since they do not have profits and hence can't afford to buy any capital. And no, they do not have to access the outside world, the security can transport the goods for them; prisoners should never leave prison, its a part of the punishment
***You made a mistake while quoting there.***Oh, so what I can deduce here is a hidden form of
slavery, which has been abolished a long time ago. If the prisoners are not allowed to make any profit, is it a productive investment for the country then? It's better to give these resources to others who are allowed to make a profit. Hence growth for the economy at large is assured.
If they cannot buy capital, how will they even make business? Should the government every time spend from its budget to get them capital? If the security starts transporting goods, who will do THEIR job?
"Prisoners should never leave prison". Fine, then the cultivation and harvesting will be done inside prisons. Give dangerous tools like axes, hoes, forks, spades, etc, to a population of threatening criminals, the guards themselves would need security then!
Alright, I'm not saying that your project is absurd. But we have different categories of criminals in jails. The less dangerous ones can be part of your plan, leave the fatal ones to cemeteries.
yea but how will they get out after serving their sentence out
Who said they will get out?
That is ONE type of justice. But as I already said, its too blind, its not totally wrong, but it is not the best choice. Justice myte be served, but thats as far as it goes. Punishments such as the one i mentioned can actually help the country and raise cheaper food (since no profits will be made) for those who need it; and combined with paying blood money, this gives benefit to both the state as well as the family of the victim, not to mention the dear loss of age and finance of the murderer
Well, I am unsure if there can be "types" of justice. Justice is a state of equality, fair treatment. Between two variables like
crime and
punishment, there can be ONLY ONE point of equilibrium. If "that is ONE type of justice", that is the ONLY type of justice.
Punishments such as the ones you've mentioned have flaws:
- Hidden slavery, unproductive investment.
- If food from jail is cheap, farmers' businesses will be affected.
- Money cannot buy lives.
- The "dear loss of age and finance" either cannot equal to the loss of lives.
If you have life, you have everything. If you have everything but don't have life, you don't have anything at all.
