When it comes to the law, everyone has their personal opinion on a suitable punishment for criminals, writes our Teen Blogger Rhian.
People have been discussing whether or not to bring back the death penalty while others think they should test chemicals on criminals instead of animals.
It’s complicated work the law, the punishment is based on the crime which is understandable but not everyone agrees on the punishment choosen. But what is right or wrong?
I’m sure a lot of people think it’s satisfying when they see a murderer get sent down for life while others would rather see them have chemicals tested on them for the rest of their lives.
The law thinks it is inhumane, like the death penalty, whereas many would argue it’s inhumane what they do to their victims.
What I don’t agree with is seeing thieves walk away with a slap on the wrist and a warning, where’s the justice in that? And how some criminals do just get away with the crimes they’ve commited.
Justice can be either be a win-win situation or a no win situation. What I want to know is, bringing back th e death penalty, does it make us just as bad or even? And has the law thought of the right punishments for criminals or more to the point hasn’t?
What do you think? Is there any justice?
7 Comments
We need a better deterrent (If that’s how you spell it.
Report abuse
What our justice system needs to decide is if it is there to punish or there to rehabilitate. Its too difficult to succeed doing both and clearly doesn’t work.
In my opinion, the death penalty should be left where it is in history and not even considered as a viable option.
And as for testing chemicals on prisoners – that is a definate no-no.
Report abuse
Until the Human Rights Act is serioulsy re-written, I dont think prison is much of a deterrent as prisoners either have a cushy living or if something happens that they dont like, its an instant breach of their human rights. Until this changes, the justice system will 9/10 fail to support the victims of crime, whether it be a person or society!
Report abuse
An eye for an eye, you kill you be killed, you steal, you lose a finger, you rape or murder or interfere with minors you should be sent to a ring of lions and tortured by the spectators with spears until death
Report abuse
This may seem very obvious but the best deterrent is for society to install virtues that causes individuals or organisations not to want to loose something valuable.
This is deterrent already is apparent in Britain with majority of the population abiding the law. It thereby works as an underlying threat and it naturally controls people who own property and or are a close family relying on respect and work to keep to their standards. Punishment is therefore simple and can be focussed.
The law of the jungle also prevails with Parents naturally choosing to have only two or three children because it is all they can afford.
The social state has undermined this common law. There are high numbers of dysfunctional families with more children than the law of the jungle would allow.
I believe that social benefit is a good temporary measure for sudden unemployment and illness but now they have now been hijacked by generations of families in a trap.
This needs to be addressed before you can decide on proper punishment. Until then offenders only have two things valuable to them to remove. Benefits and freedom!!!
Report abuse
It’s fairly well established that the best deterrent is certainty of detection. But criminals can rely on their families, friends and even casual acquaintances not to “grass”. People walk away, don’t report crime, don’t act, “It’s nothing to do with me”. But it is. Anyone who does not support what is right is effectively supporting what is the wrong.
Once detected, the penalty should be restitution plus compensation, wherever possible. (Some offenders might spend years paying off, but that’s their fault. Just let the victim borrow the money up front on the security of the payment order.)
And in general I don’t favour “get tough” approaches, but where someone is a repeat offender who shows no sign of wishing to reform, let’s put the rights of the community ahead of those of the offender. Curfew, tagging, supervision, and if all else fails, lock ‘em up out or harm’s way.
Report abuse
I take your points Telfordfox, but what is the point of compensation orders being made to those on benefits? If payments are deducted at source from benefits isn’t it just the case that the state (tax payers money) that are making payments to the victims on behalf of the offenders???
Report abuse