Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    01 Aug '10 04:38
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10785131

    A total of 107 inmates remain on death row in Japan. Prisoners are usually executed two or three at a time.

    Last year, a report from rights group Amnesty International called for an immediate moratorium on executions in Japan, saying that harsh conditions on death row were driving inmates insane.

    Prisoners are not told when they will be executed and their relatives are told only after the sentence has been carried out.


    Does the part at the end in bold text strike anyone as overly austere?
  2. 01 Aug '10 05:25
    Originally posted by FMF
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10785131

    A total of 107 inmates remain on death row in Japan. Prisoners are usually executed two or three at a time.

    Last year, a report from rights group Amnesty International called for an immediate moratorium on executions in Japan, saying that harsh conditions on death row were driving inmates insane. ...[text shortened]... ried out.


    Does the part at the end in bold text strike anyone as overly austere?[/b]
    It seems a bit cruel. No time to prepare or come to terms w/it.
  3. 01 Aug '10 11:01
    Originally posted by FMF
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10785131

    A total of 107 inmates remain on death row in Japan. Prisoners are usually executed two or three at a time.

    Last year, a report from rights group Amnesty International called for an immediate moratorium on executions in Japan, saying that harsh conditions on death row were driving inmates insane. ...[text shortened]... ried out.


    Does the part at the end in bold text strike anyone as overly austere?[/b]
    It depends on the sort of crimimals the Japanese typically sentence to execution.
  4. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    01 Aug '10 11:15
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    It depends on the sort of crimimals the Japanese typically sentence to execution.
    In what way does it "depend"?
  5. 01 Aug '10 12:39
    Originally posted by FMF
    In what way does it "depend"?
    Oh dear, to ask such a question you must be even thicker than I had thought.
  6. Subscriber FMF
    a.k.a. John W Booth
    01 Aug '10 12:55
    Originally posted by Sartor Resartus
    Oh dear, to ask such a question you must be even thicker than I had thought.
    Not so. According to the OP article, "[the executed person's] relatives are told only after the sentence has been carried out". That is arguably an unreasonable 'punishment' visited upon the family, which is - after all - not guilty of anything. The OP basically asked: Isn't it rather unfair? You responded by saying "It depends on the sort of criminals the Japanese typically sentence to execution". Why should the treatment of the family "depend on the sort of criminal" that their member is? And why - indeed - should it depend on the sort of criminals that Japan "typically" executes? On this further analysis, in fact, your retort seems to be nonsensical.
  7. Subscriber Rajk999
    Enjoying
    01 Aug '10 13:06
    Originally posted by FMF
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10785131

    A total of 107 inmates remain on death row in Japan. Prisoners are usually executed two or three at a time.

    Last year, a report from rights group Amnesty International called for an immediate moratorium on executions in Japan, saying that harsh conditions on death row were driving inmates insane. ...[text shortened]... ried out.


    Does the part at the end in bold text strike anyone as overly austere?[/b]
    I think all countries should have the death penalty for the following people:

    1. Convicted pedophiles
    2. Child abusers (including priests)
    3. Drug pushers and drug Lords
    4. Convicted murderers - cold blooded ones (not crimes of passion).

    By 'convicted' I mean there is an almost 100% certainty that the crime was committed by the offender eg in the case where there are many witnesses and photographic and DNA evidence.

    In cases where there is no 100% certainty the punishment should be life in prison without parole.

    The method used should be quick, painless and cheap... eg a bullet to the head.
  8. 01 Aug '10 13:18
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    I think all countries should have the death penalty for the following people:

    1. Convicted pedophiles
    2. Child abusers (including priests)
    3. Drug pushers and drug Lords
    4. Convicted murderers - cold blooded ones (not crimes of passion).

    By 'convicted' I mean there is an almost 100% certainty that the crime was committed by the offender eg in the ca ...[text shortened]... out parole.

    The method used should be quick, painless and cheap... eg a bullet to the head.
    I agree the death penalty should be expanded, the modern concept that it should only apply to murder strikes me as childish.

    Prior to the 19th century, if someone developed a history of violent offenses over a period of time had proven that he was never going to change and always be a threat to everyone's safety and property, hanging was deemed justifiable out of simple self preservation of the community.

    I don't see anything wrong with that.
  9. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    01 Aug '10 13:50
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    I agree the death penalty should be expanded, the modern concept that it should only apply to murder strikes me as childish.

    Prior to the 19th century, if someone developed a history of violent offenses over a period of time had proven that he was never going to change and always be a threat to everyone's safety and property, hanging was deemed jus ...[text shortened]... le out of simple self preservation of the community.

    I don't see anything wrong with that.
    You dont see anything wrong with taking a life?

    Thankfully some people do.
  10. 01 Aug '10 13:53
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    You dont see anything wrong with taking a life?

    Not if the person is dangerous to others.

    No worse than killing any other dumb animal.
  11. 01 Aug '10 14:42 / 1 edit
    But if we have a safe community without totally screwed up people, there woudn't be a need for social programs. We need to keep things screwed up if we are going to have a need for something to be fixed.

    So what if what is being done will never fix the problem? It is the fact that we are trying that makes things wonderful and expands what government can do for us. Or should I say to us?
  12. Donation bbarr
    Chief Justice
    01 Aug '10 14:55
    Originally posted by Sam The Sham
    I agree the death penalty should be expanded, the modern concept that it should only apply to murder strikes me as childish.

    Prior to the 19th century, if someone developed a history of violent offenses over a period of time had proven that he was never going to change and always be a threat to everyone's safety and property, hanging was deemed jus ...[text shortened]... le out of simple self preservation of the community.

    I don't see anything wrong with that.
    It's too bad all the land is taken, since exile is an attractive alternative.
  13. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    01 Aug '10 14:58
    Originally posted by bbarr
    It's too bad all the land is taken, since exile is an attractive alternative.
    There's always the Escape from New York solution (though Escape from LA seems unworkable if the suckiness of that movie is any guide).
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    01 Aug '10 15:08
    Originally posted by FMF
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-10785131

    A total of 107 inmates remain on death row in Japan. Prisoners are usually executed two or three at a time.

    Last year, a report from rights group Amnesty International called for an immediate moratorium on executions in Japan, saying that harsh conditions on death row were driving inmates insane. ...[text shortened]... ried out.


    Does the part at the end in bold text strike anyone as overly austere?[/b]
    "Like a dog!"

    Josef K
  15. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    01 Aug '10 15:18
    Originally posted by Rajk999
    I think all countries should have the death penalty for the following people:

    1. Convicted pedophiles
    2. Child abusers (including priests)
    3. Drug pushers and drug Lords
    4. Convicted murderers - cold blooded ones (not crimes of passion).

    By 'convicted' I mean there is an almost 100% certainty that the crime was committed by the offender eg in the ca ...[text shortened]... out parole.

    The method used should be quick, painless and cheap... eg a bullet to the head.
    How is your view compatible with the teachings of Jesus Christ?

    You are a Christian.