This isn’t a topic that I’d normally blog about but I was very intrigued by it.
Recently in the news, there is a case about a condemmed man in Utah who chose death by firing. This is unusual as this will be the first time in 14 years that a person in the USA will be executed that way.
And in all honesty before hearing about this, I wasn’t aware that the condemned could choose the way that they are executed. I’ve always assumed that it would be by injection since some archaic methods such as the electric chair was phased out. Personally I think that its a grotesque way to go anyway.
In any case, what’s also interesting that I’ve learnt recently is that there is no death penalty in Italy, as well as all of Europe despite the severity of the crime. That made me very surprised as growing up, I’ve always thought that it would be natural to have each crime have its punishment in accordance. Every action would have a reaction, right? And for every thing that you do, there will be consequences. Regardless of how big or how small the action is.
And thus, that is why we have rules to keep us in check. A form of prevention and deterrence as well as apt punishment. Such as fines for petty crimes and jail for frauds.
Although now as an adult, some of these punishment seems overly excessive. For example, the death penalty for possession of 15 grammes of marijuana, which by the way, has scientific evidences that it is helpful in medicinal uses. And recently, the news in regards to a Swiss national charged over graffiti in a Singapore train. While I don’t condone what he did, I don’t believe that what he did justifies an arrest. That sort of thing seems trivial to me and needs to be dealt with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
But to me, I’m willing to go ahead with the punishment. Seems a fair deal, don’t you think? Since in the end, all these severe rules leads to Singapore having the lowest crime rate in the world. And personally, I believe in the effectiveness of corporal punishment.
Hence for the longest time, I grew up believing that death penalty was natural. And in a way, I still do. If you murder someone, you pay for it. You know, an eye for an eye. Seems fair. Thus, I was very surprised when Cart explained to me that there are no such thing as a death penalty in Italy. Even if a person has committed the highest crime, he will not be condemned to death and instead be jailed, possibly for life.
Cart does not believe in the eye for an eye analogy. Instead, he believes that a human does not have the right over the life of another human. He thinks that death is not a solution and there are better ways in dealing in this situation such as rehabilitation. This is probably one big topic in regards to parenting that we should discuss too, since I am for corporal punishment for our future kid while he is against the idea.
Suddenly this comes to mind, a little out of topic though.
If you refrain someone from something, and have a rule of abstinence, though it might be effective for a percentage, there is a big possibility that the act will be done. Many religious countries having high cases of sex related crimes, even with the high amount of taxes for cigarettes, there are still a large demand for it, and despite the tough punishment, there are several countries with crime rate highest among the world.
Its a food for thought.
Sidenote : Doing a bit of changes to the blog. Will probably reinstall wordpress over the weekend. Hopefully I don’t do anything to break this blog -_-
I’m for the death penalty. I’m also for tough discipline for my future children. Perhaps not to the extent of hitting the child, unless absolutely necessary, but real discipline (none of those “you’re grounded” or “go to your room” business). Maybe it’s got to do with the way I was raised, and the environment I grew up in. But I haven’t heard of a good argument against the death penalty. “[…] a human does not have the right over the life of another human” statement, to me, doesn’t apply because that’s not what the death penalty is about. Neither is it about an eye for an eye. It’s about something bigger than just the crime, the guilty party, the victim.
But maybe that’s just me. =)
Yeah, what’s up with that? “You’re grounded” and “Go to your room” It just doesn’t do anything especially now that kids have computers and the telley in their room!
Not to get personal, but you seem to be equating tough discipline with the ending of someone’s life. I don’t think verbally disciplining or even corporal punishment of a child can be compared to the execution of a person. A human being by the way, someone’s child/mother/uncle/lover. We feel incredible guilt and remorse when we have to put a dog down, why can’t we feel the same when it comes to a human being?
Let me make this argument to you: It’s wrong. Simple as that. How do two wrongs make a right? How can we say don’t murder people, when the state is allowed to do precisely that to you? It’s hypocritical to say the least. Should the murderer not be given a chance to reform himself, or even the drug dealer? We have to end his life and never give him a chance to make amends?
For some, they’re trying too hard to be politically correct. The death penalty is precisely the reason why Singapore does not face the kind of drug problems in America. I believe, the death penalty is merely a deterrence but there will always be a small handful whom decided to test the system, they paid for it with their life. We can’t exactly reverse and say “I am merely trying to scare you with that law”. Instead, we want to be saying “I mean business. Don’t try me!”
Abolishing death penalty is not that easy too. When you sentence a person to life imprisonment, it simply means the prison system got to feed him until he dies. Who pays for all these? The Government which get its money from us – the taxpayers of course. Talking to me about the rights of drug traffickers is like trying to convince me that peddling drugs and destroying hundreds of lives is a personal right. Is it really so?
But then again in our modern society, this is one of the classic examples of how we are constantly shirking responsibilities. We are constantly looking for excuses to commit sins and mistakes and yet, expect to get away with it lightly. No wonder so many young kids are behaving like spoilt brats nowadays.
And oh ya, the prison chief who gave the order for execution of Gardner was actually updating the process from the time he gave his nod until Gardner was certified dead – on Twitter. Interesting ya? I bet you never get this in Singapore.
Woah, I’d never thought that this could be a topic that would be given live updates via twitter.
The topic of the death penalty is not only related to the relation between crime and punishment. Or, better, there can be a big difference between countries in which kind of crime deserve to be punished with death. Some countries sentence to death penalty homosexuals..in others countries people can be sentenced to death only because they are against the government, with fake accusations.
So the big question is ethic, moral: if we accept the istitution of death penalty, this can be used no matter when and how, for all kind of crime. Who will decide when a crime is serious enough for people to be sentenced to death? Is it to stole an apple from a greengrocer a crime serious enough to be sentenced to death? Why not?
So, to be against death penalty, it means to be against the use that death penalty has in many countries, as an instrument of terror and as a powerful element of consent that politicians use to legitimate their power. And of course, to be against it doesn’t means no to think that crimes have to be punished!
Singapore, for sure, has one of the lowest rates of crimes in the world, and this is a great thing. But in my opinion this is due mainly to two reason: first, the dimension of the country, that allow an easier control of the territoty by the security forces; second the economic development and the level of common welfare: a very little share of people will be tempted to commit crimes if everyone have what they need for living.
Many states of the US still have the death penalty, and the US themselves are often regarded as a bad example in terms of crimes rates (they have a bigger rate of crimes than Canada, where death penalty is not applied)..so it could be enough to doubt of the relation between the presence of death penaly and crime rates.
I’m against the death penalty, because I believe a state should not execute people. Imprison yes, kill no. We had too many problems regarding that in Europe and I’m glad we abolished it. So many innocent men were killed in the USA due to the death penalty. That should never had happened. And who guarantees, that in Singapore innocent people were or will be executed? After all, Singapore is not a democracy, it’s a one party state for many decades, the freedom of press is one of the lowest in the developed world. Who knows, what’s going on behind the “neat and clean” image of Singapore. Of course, I’m not implying that there are bad things happening in Singapore in this regard, but it’s always good to see some “checks and balances”, a vigorous debate before elections would always be good. And issues like you debate here on your blog, could be debated in public. I think that’s essential for a nation to advance. I believe that US states will slowly abolish the death penalty as well. It’s already happening, if you compare it with decades ago.
Regarding corporal punishment, I believe it’s wrong. I have been punished like that by my father and today I have no respect for him and I think he was physically abusing me. But that’s just me. I know some other people may have seen everything differently. But then again, to each their own. We’re after all different and we can’t always agree on everything, right? 🙂
I agree wholeheartedly with death penalty. It’s not a matter of an eye for an eye. It’s a matter of breaking the rule. THink about it… the rule is there, and the penalty is clear. U traffic drugs, or u murder someone, u die. simple as that. If u dont wan to die, then don’t traffic drugs etc!
I do not support death penalty. It is against the law of God. Although, some states or countries exercise it; still, it does not change criminals. People should think of other ways to penalize criminals without taking life as way of justice.
Nations, such as SIngapore, are secular in nature. Therefore, the contention of ‘law of god’ does not exist I think! It certainly does not change criminals. But as my previous comment goes, the penalty is clear. U know the penalty is death, then the question to ask is why do people still commit crimes punishable by death when they jolly well know that it is likely to lead them to be hung etc? If they themselve simply don’t care about their own life and go ahead to kill someone for instance, then we shouldn’t care about their life either.
By your logic, if a teenager kills his father because the father has been abusing both him and his mother, he should be put on the death row. You say that because someone knows the law, he should be subject to it. But the law is supposed to be blind, and will apply whether he knows or does not know it, one of the fundamental principles of the law is that it will apply to everyone and a lack of knowledge of said law is NOT an excuse.
It’s a simplification to say that everyone knows the law and should be subject to it with no regard for individual circumstance. Where is the justice in the person placed under duress who traffics drugs? You say that he knows what he’s getting himself into and so he can be placed under the death penalty, but that’s silly, I know there’s such a thing as a speed limit, does that mean I never go over 90kph? Ever? Where is the compassion that we should feel for someone placed in a desperate situation?
My perspective is definitely skewed because of where I’m studying Law and how I’m studying it as well, but as much as my personal belief is that the death penalty is an effective deterrent, I’m beginning to wonder if the evidence actually swings the other way. I’m sure anyone who is even moderately sensible agrees that the Death Penalty should ONLY ever be applied to the most heinous and extreme of crimes, i.e Murder, Torture. *this should then leave out drug trafficking imho, and let’s remind ourselves that those who are executed are NOT the ones who make money off the drugs but the lowest level grunts* So travelling on this line of thinking – by placing a prisoner on death row, you subject him/her to the certainty of death for whatever period of time, isn’t this on some level a form of torture?
Also – by executing the person, you remove any chance at all that this person would have found some form of remorse, or has seen the error of his ways. Now if he was a serial killer and mass murderer, I’m ALL for the Death Penalty, because you KNOW he has no capacity for remorse.
But, what about the marginal cases – the wife who kills after being abused for many years. *R v Ahluwalia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiranjit_Ahluwalia, imagine what would happen if she was convicted and then executed? Would this not be the greatest injustice?* The definition for murder is that it should be premeditated, that it wasn’t merely accidental, or that there was no provocation. But sometimes, it’s just not that easy to find out even with a legal system, to determine where and when the death penalty should be meted out.
Messy comment. but Yeah I have quite a few points to make 😛
No matter what the argument is I no longer support nor believe in capital punishment by deat in any way. It puts the authority the same level as the murderer. It’s against basic human rights, the end result is death, no matter who did it.
regarding corporal punishment for young children, i am all for it. Children are simply too innocent to understand the severity of their actions untill they are older, having understood that their actions affect their fellows. Thats where corporal punishment comes in, the pain becomes a deterrent so that they will not repeat their mistakes. Of course, just whacking your child before explaining to them just what they did wrong could have them growing up with issues.
This is because i believe in disciplining my own children before that responsibility is pushed to other strangers. What kind of pathetic parent would that make you, that you are unable to control, and shape your children to become good adults?
I see the singapore judicial system in the same light. Singaporeans are brought up to think primarily for themselves. Which is why they cannot be given the responsibility of being in a team of jurors to decide on the punishment of a criminal.
If a team of singaporean jurors would decide on the fate of a fellow facing the death penalty, they could very well declare him guilty just so there would be more hdb flats available for one less singaporean.
Morbid, yes. But thats just how lowly i rate the typical singaporean, even though i am a singaporean myself.
for me, those against the death penalty stating intangible things like “it is against god’s will for man to deprive another man of his life” need to fully examine the alternatives. Set a murderer free so he can murder more people when he is released? Or let him rot in a prison where everyone else pay taxes so he could be fed and clothed and sheltered? If not these two, then what?