English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean look at the Muslims they have that Sharia Law, which seems brutal, inhuman, and barbaric. Somehow the point of a justice system got more focused on Reformation of individuals which is the biggest crock ever. Anyone that really beleives a prison will make a man less of a criminal is a fool. The only reason for a justice system is to punish, not correct. The only way to deter crime, which should be the ultimate goal of a justice system is through fear. Chop a thieve's hand off in public and we would see the biggest drop in crime ever. Legalize drugs and crack down on real crimes with harsh brutal punishments. who is with me?

2007-08-31 05:44:40 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

I have gotten several responses saying how chopping a hand off is against the constitution. I disagree, on the same grounds that you could say putting a person in prison is essentially kidnapping and prolonged mental torture, which could be construed as cruel and unusal. Cutting off a hand or as someone else said a horsewhipping would be a quick punishment. It would not be considered unusual if it was the norm and would be less cruel to society in which you would have a less likely repeat offender who isn't punching your 95 year old grandma. I don't see how cutting off a hand is considered more cruel than electroucting a person to death, so I beleive it would not be categorized as cruel and unusual. Cutting off a persons fingers one by one and then cutting his hand off would be classified as cruel and unusual.

2007-08-31 06:14:52 · update #1

15 answers

Iam with you

Public castration for sex offenders
Public on the spot exicution for murder attempted
murder & Drunk Driving
The only need for prison would be for sombody who refuses to go to school

2007-08-31 05:54:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Our punishments are too harsh as it is, to the point that if I ever sit on a jury, I might be tempted to exercise jury nullification left and right.

What we need to do is to expand our prisons and convert them to single cell isolation, reduce prison terms by a factor of 5, and make folks sit out their stay in solitary confinement.

Do a crime which would get you 15 years, in my system you'd end up spending 3 years in solitary. Prisoners HATE solitary confinement, and 3 years is long enough to punish someone, but not so long that their life is half over when they get out.

Besides, there'd be no way for prisoners to abuse one another or become worse criminals.

And best of all, the prisoners would have two choices:

1) Sit and stare at a blank wall.
2) Correct their behavior and study for self-betterment.

It'd almost be a forced rehabilitation in a sense.

Oh, and I also think that once you serve your time, your record is no one's business. Now certain criminals may be barred (without explanation to the public) from certain occupations. Wouldn't want a sex criminal working in a daycare or an embezzler working in a bank.

2007-08-31 12:56:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You know I was just discussing this same thing the other day, I was thinking about if you just shot people in the head that killed or molested an innocent child problem solved you would have a big drop in the rate of crime against innocent children after all we can't stop the wrong people from breeding or making poor choices in confidants but at least you can rid the world of this type of senselessness. So I agree once you find a child molester or murderer bam shoot them outside the court room on the spot. You can't reform everyone, and this bullcrap of letting these hollywood stars get off with everything is making me even angrier. You find any other person with drugs in their car, and they have been drinking and driving they get a sentence of like a month maybe more for possession. You find lindsey lohan, she gets a whopping 45 minutes in jail. I'm honest to god tired of my tax money going to pay for some child molester/murderer to live in a jail with food, clothing, and housing.

2007-08-31 12:52:35 · answer #3 · answered by crymeariver 5 · 0 0

Well first off, this is the USA and we have rights. Second, although not nearly enough, prisoners have opportunities to further their education while in prison or jail. There are programs in prisons that help prisoners learn trades and allow them to get a GED. Again like I said earlier there are not nearly enough programs like this, but there are some. There is something called cruel and unusual punishment, under which the chopping off of hands falls.

2007-08-31 12:54:04 · answer #4 · answered by BigJay33 1 · 0 0

You might be right that physical punishment of criminals is more deterring than jail. And that 'reformation' is absurd; if someone attacked my wife I'd punch him in the face like the rest of us would and I'd probably be jailed - doesn't mean I need 'reformation'.
But chopping off hands etc has the same effect as branding: it makes it hard for the offender to get honest work once released.
There remains the problem of the approx 15% of those convicted who happen to be innocent.

2007-08-31 13:04:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

To a point I am with you.

I don't believe in legalizing drugs simply because most people who commit crimes are doing so because of drugs or alcohol.

I also agree that public punishment would do as good as prison. A good old horse whipping in some cases might deter better than years in prison. Definetely cheaper than prison.

I also do believe in forgiveness and probation for 1st time offenders unless it is a really horrible crime.

2007-08-31 12:53:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If you chop a man's hand off for stealing a loaf of bread you only create a one handed hungry man. Look how well the guillotine worked for Louis the 14th in France. That's pretty brutal, and he ended up on his own chopping block.

2007-08-31 12:53:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Our constitution doesn't allow it. If we start rewriting it, then there would be no point to it anymore. Eventually it will be replaced. ;) Why would you want to go down to their level? People still commit crimes in those countries....Apparently fear doesn't always work. If we are so busy fearing, then that opens us up to attacks from within. We would become a war torn country...Just like everybody else. ;) We have enough problems to handle already.

2007-08-31 12:54:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

i am for it though not for petty thieving.
Chop hands off only for violent robberies in which victim es get hurt.
For other crimes bring back flogging but only in case of hard evidence like on vedio. Terrorists---chop heads off even for sympathisers.

2007-08-31 13:30:50 · answer #9 · answered by lunistan 2 · 0 0

That sounds good. Why don't we throw away freedom of speach, freedom of religion or the whole constitution while we are at it.

The price of freedom is worth not living in a crime free society.

2007-08-31 12:50:55 · answer #10 · answered by hensleyclaw 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers