Society/Culture Should Australia Reinstate a The Death Penalty?

Should the death penalty be reintroduced in Australia?


  • Total voters
    104

Remove this Banner Ad

But basically, it's state sanctioned murder. The state is (rightly) effectively saying you cannot do x, y and z, but then turning around and doing it themselves. Given that the state purports to be government by the people, it's highly hypocritical. It sometimes executes innocent people, and it's also damned costly.


I'm against the death penalty too, but the problem I have with the above argument is that it can be applied equally to imprisonment. The government tells us we cannot hold people against their will, but then they turn around and do it by putting them in gaol.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm against the death penalty too, but the problem I have with the above argument is that it can be applied equally to imprisonment. The government tells us we cannot hold people against their will, but then they turn around and do it by putting them in gaol.

Taking a dangerous person from free society by keeping them away from free society isn't the same as taking a dangerous person from free society by ending their life either.
 
I'm against the death penalty too, but the problem I have with the above argument is that it can be applied equally to imprisonment. The government tells us we cannot hold people against their will, but then they turn around and do it by putting them in gaol.

we simply have to do our best with an imperfect system.


At the end of the day 99% of people who commit crimes have a mental health issue. So moving away from a punishment system to a specialised health system is the way to go.

Our biggest issue is failing the prisoners after detention as if by magic the mental health issue has gone away. Perhaps we need to consider this is a life long process rather than a lock up and release.
 
The dictionary definition of the word.
When I searched it just then it was:
the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

The US system breaks murder into two groups;
  • First-degree murder is any intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought. Felony murder is typically first-degree.[6]
  • Second-degree murder is an intentional murder with malice aforethought, but is not premeditated or planned in advance.[7]

As you can see, the premeditated qualifier has been removed for second degree murder. That is why I asked what you consider murder, because the law might call something murder that doesn't match the definition and I question whether the punishment should be applied uniform to both since both are called murder.

Such is the subtleties of the politically influenced law system.
 
When I searched it just then it was:


The US system breaks murder into two groups;


As you can see, the premeditated qualifier has been removed for second degree murder. That is why I asked what you consider murder, because the law might call something murder that doesn't match the definition and I question whether the punishment should be applied uniform to both since both are called murder.

Such is the subtleties of the politically influenced law system.
First degree murder then.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yep. Don't murder don't get killed. Not hard.
Now we have a problem where someone can plead guilty to a crime carrying the death penalty, without the circumstances or condition of that person being taken into consideration. That includes whether they are guilty or innocent.

You have created a system where someone without sound mind or understanding of their situation can be put to death.

I snookered you on the wording on purpose, perhaps if you don't appreciate the enormity of your statements you should keep them to yourself.
 
Now we have a problem where someone can plead guilty to a crime carrying the death penalty, without the circumstances or condition of that person being taken into consideration. That includes whether they are guilty or innocent.

You have created a system where someone without sound mind or understanding of their situation can be put to death.

I snookered you on the wording on purpose, perhaps if you don't appreciate the enormity of your statements you should keep them to yourself.
The enormity of the situation is they've just taken someone's life. If someone close to you was murdered would you want the murderer let out? Why do they deserve a second chance? Is a pointless existence in prison for the rest of their lives really any better than the death penalty?
 
The enormity of the situation is they've just taken someone's life. If someone close to you was murdered would you want the murderer let out? Why do they deserve a second chance? Is a pointless existence in prison for the rest of their lives really any better than the death penalty?
And the world isn't as simple as you perceive it.
 
Say you don't murder ..but a Cop or prosecutor stuffs up and you get wrongly convicted ...would you be the one inserting the Bullet and murdering an innocent person ?
The only case I'd have against it. If there is some doubt in the case then a life in prison sentence instead.
 
Definite yes to the death penalty, although it will never come back....when someone can get under 10 years for manslaughter, just shows you how soft the Australian judicial system is.
 
Definite yes to the death penalty, although it will never come back....when someone can get under 10 years for manslaughter, just shows you how soft the Australian judicial system is.

manslaughter or murder?
 
The only case I'd have against it. If there is some doubt in the case then a life in prison sentence instead.
If there is some doubt then it should be not guilty.

That is literally the fundamental principle of the judicial system.

Beyond reasonable doubt
 
Back
Top