NationStates Jolt Archive

I just submitted a ban on the death penalty. It is toward the back of proposals. I truly believe that civilization has advanced beyond the point of capital punishment, and that it is truly barbaric. I believe that no government has the right to execute their citizens under any circumstances. We must learn to treat each other properly, and the government should set the example.

Please post a copy of the proposal here and note that it has failed before.

Rose,
Acting UN representative,
The Black New World

Article 1- All member nations of the UN shall ban capital punishment in their nations.
Article 2- The UN recognizes the cruelty of captial punishment

This is the proposal. I would like to try to garner as much support as possible for this desirable cause.

Thanks.

Rose,
Acting UN representative,
The Black New World

I know I never use this phrase, and it's not beyond reason about twenty nations are going to point and laugh at me in a moment, but I really think this should be a national issue as it does intrude too much on the governing of a country.

Don't get me wrong - TilEnca banned the death penalty after The Liberation, and there is no desire to bring it back. So this doesn't interfere in my nation at all. I just think that, given there are 37,000 (ish) nations that are members of the UN, a blanket death penalty ban would cause more chaos and harm than good.

1) I'd suggest a justification for why the death penalty is cruel and why it should be prevented.

2) A mechanism for enforcing the ban.

3) A suggested alternative to capital punishment.

Further, I dissagree with the idea. I think this should be specified per nation because the suitability of capital punishment depends on the culture and on the method of punishment and justice.

I believe that we must make an attempt to uphold the right of all humans. A blanket death penalty ban will uphold rights for citizens in all nations. It would not cause complete chaos, because like any other United Nations resolution, it will be implemented in all nations. While this act will have far from complete support, if the majority of the nations feel that the death penalty should be banned, then it should. Like any other resolution that has been passed, the losing side still has to abide by the decision. Some people (not me) viewed the sex worker act as immoral and promoting a seemingly preposterous act. Here i believe we have the same issue. A blanket ban would represent the majority view and the majority rules in the United Nations.

In response to the last post not by me- I would say that the death penalty is completely immoral. The government is literally murdering a prisoner. While that person is convicted of murder, the government is taking the life of another being. This, I view as completely immoral. The government is asserting the right to execute its own citizens. All humans have a right to live despite their actions. The government should not terminate a life, and a blanket ban would ensure that life is preserved throughout all member nations of the UN.

There is really no mechanism to enforce the ban. Member nations would simply be prohibited from using it. Otherwise they would be in violation of United Nations Law.

The usual choice for juries is between life in jail or death. We are eliminating one of the choices, so the other one is obvious.

I agree that all humans have the right to live no matter what, but as well, sometimes the death penalty is better than life in jail, if you are going to spend the rest of your life in jail would you not rather die? I think i would. I don't think it is a good idea.

This simply is not an issue for the United Nations. This is has nothing to do with international issues and, as long as the trials are fair, it is not a severe human rights abuse. Punishment of criminals should be the business of a nation, not the international community.

Article 1- All member nations of the UN shall ban capital punishment in their nations.
Article 2- The UN recognizes the cruelty of captial punishment

This is the proposal. I would like to try to garner as much support as possible for this desirable cause.
Article 2 should be part of the preamble.

*loaded question*
Uh, what would the penalty be for nations found to be using capital punishment after it's banned?

This simply is not an issue for the United Nations. This is has nothing to do with international issues and, as long as the trials are fair, it is not a severe human rights abuse. Punishment of criminals should be the business of a nation, not the international community.
I have to disagree with you on this one.

Governments killing their citizens is a major rights issue.
It's certainly a more weighty issue than most of the things discussed as resolutions.

I find it hard to oppose the death penalty in specific cases of serial killers and sexual cannibals, but then I look at the real world (this is OOC) and 25% of the people put on death row are found to be factually innocent. It is statistically impossible that innocent people are not being killed by state governments every year in the United States. (back IC)

As a general principle, it seems pretty clear to me.
No government should ever be given the authority to kill its citizens.

This is a human rights issue. Like genocide is a human rights issue; you don't hear people saying genocide should be left up to individual nationstates. Yes, that's an extreme example, but qualitatively the issues are similar.

The only arguement i have is the expense of life in prison. It costs $43,000 a prisoner a year to keep a person in prison. The tax payers have to support this. Is it really justified that a man or woman who has commited such a crime to be lock away from society forever is syphoning 43k a year away from education or other worthy causes?

I have lots of issues with the death penalty, and I know there's a lot of good argumentation out there. However, I have a strong interest in seeing resolutions that are strong and powerful, that actually move the nations of the U.N. to realize "Hey, this is a cool thing we're doing here." Two bullet points in a proposal just doesn't sum up the debate on capital punishment. And I don't support resolutions on ideals alone.

I have to disagree with you on this one.

Governments killing their citizens is a major rights issue.
It's certainly a more weighty issue than most of the things discussed as resolutions.

I find it hard to oppose the death penalty in specific cases of serial killers and sexual cannibals, but then I look at the real world (this is OOC) and 25% of the people put on death row are found to be factually innocent. It is statistically impossible that innocent people are not being killed by state governments every year in the United States. (back IC)

As a general principle, it seems pretty clear to me.
No government should ever be given the authority to kill its citizens.

This is a human rights issue. Like genocide is a human rights issue; you don't hear people saying genocide should be left up to individual nationstates. Yes, that's an extreme example, but qualitatively the issues are similar.
Oh My. I'm actually in agreement with Asshelmetta. Never thought I'd see the day. I wonder how the ice-skating down in Hell's going?

The only arguement i have is the expense of life in prison. It costs $43,000 a prisoner a year to keep a person in prison. The tax payers have to support this. Is it really justified that a man or woman who has commited such a crime to be lock away from society forever is syphoning 43k a year away from education or other worthy causes?
Actually, for the cost of one execution, the government can keep three convicts in a maximum security prison for life. The drugs, the trial, the sentencing hearing are all incredibly expensive.

Would the representative from Darkwater9 please enlighten us onto the meaning of "captial punishment"?

Although capital punishment has long been unlawful in Goobergunchia, the resolution as presently drafted is simply too vague in our opinion to be either enforceable or desirable. However, we could support a more thought-out, well-drafted resolution with the same ends in mind.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador

Would the representative from Darkwater9 please enlighten us onto the meaning of "captial punishment"?

Although capital punishment has long been unlawful in Goobergunchia, the resolution as presently drafted is simply too vague in our opinion to be either enforceable or desirable. However, we could support a more thought-out, well-drafted resolution with the same ends in mind.

[Lord] Michael Evif
Goobergunchian UN Ambassador
Excellent. I've long planned on proposing a death penalty ban. Not to steal Darkwater9's thunder, maybe we could collaborate.

Need discussion about this proposal itself continue?

Why doesn't someone draft a proposal and then we can discuss it? Someone made an excellent suggestion earlier about what the proposal should include. I shall reiterate.

a) Definition of capital punishment.
b) Rationale for the banning.
c) Suggested alternatives.

The Rogue Nation of Flibbleites will never support a ban of the death penalty, nor will we support any resolution forcing UN members to implement it as we feel that this issue is best left up to the individual nations to deal with how they see fit.

Nor will AP support this proposal.

Where do you jget 25% from Asshelmet. Being very liberal the highest percentage I can manufacture is 18.8% (Innocent v. Executed).

I've tried twice now to impose death penalty and life sentencing proposals on all nations. It doesn't work.

I have to join with Flibbleites and say I can never support this. I think the death penalty is horribly wrong, morally, logically and ethically flawed in the worst way, but that might just be because my nation used to use it and it was abused horribly by those in power. If we had never had it, and crime was running rampant, with released criminals murdering, raping and pilliging all over the place I might feel differently.

TilEnca doesn't want the death penalty, but it won't enforce the ban on everyone else.

I have to join with Flibbleites and say I can never support this. I think the death penalty is horribly wrong, morally, logically and ethically flawed in the worst way, but that might just be because my nation used to use it and it was abused horribly by those in power. If we had never had it, and crime was running rampant, with released criminals murdering, raping and pilliging all over the place I might feel differently.

TilEnca doesn't want the death penalty, but it won't enforce the ban on everyone else.
I can't get you.
You tried it and failed. why you want that other countries (that was like your countrey in the past situation) will make the same mistake?
this logic show strongly that you need to support it. It is just like someone who know about future crime and don't prevent it.

Although this particular ban doesn't do that, the purpose of a death penalty ban should be to replace the death penalty with alternative forms of punishment. There are so many more creative ways of dealing with those who have committed heinous crimes than to just kill them.

I can't get you.
You tried it and failed. why you want that other countries (that was like your countrey in the past situation) will make the same mistake?
this logic show strongly that you need to support it. It is just like someone who know about future crime and don't prevent it.

You don't think that other nations (younger and older) should be allowed to make up their own minds? Learn their own lessons?

And the death penalty was enforced for all sorts of crimes, some of which were politically motivated rather than for the good of society (blasphemy for example). That was why it was repealed. Not because it was wrong, but that it was a tool of The Church to force people in to line, and it had been abused for that. The Liberation was an attempt to remove all the corruption, and one of the things that had to go was the executions, because even if it were just (which a lot of people agreed with) there was still the suspicion that it was being abused for governmental purposes.

And what if, in fifteen years time, TilEnca finds out that it should execute people, because the number of black magic users who don't reform is growing out of control? It would mean that I was mistaken now, based on a very specific set of circumstances.

The UN has a role to play in various things, but I honestly believe that this is not one of them. Not because it interferes in my nation, but because this is something that is internal to a country. Maybe one of the only things that is.

You don't think that other nations (younger and older) should be allowed to make up their own minds? Learn their own lessons?

And the death penalty was enforced for all sorts of crimes, some of which were politically motivated rather than for the good of society (blasphemy for example). That was why it was repealed. Not because it was wrong, but that it was a tool of The Church to force people in to line, and it had been abused for that. The Liberation was an attempt to remove all the corruption, and one of the things that had to go was the executions, because even if it were just (which a lot of people agreed with) there was still the suspicion that it was being abused for governmental purposes.

And what if, in fifteen years time, TilEnca finds out that it should execute people, because the number of black magic users who don't reform is growing out of control? It would mean that I was mistaken now, based on a very specific set of circumstances.

The UN has a role to play in various things, but I honestly believe that this is not one of them. Not because it interferes in my nation, but because this is something that is internal to a country. Maybe one of the only things that is.

You obviously didn't think that nations should be able to make up their minds with regards to other issues :P As I recall, you're on the side of those who say that national sovereignty violations are more justified than not.

Anyhow, did you not even READ my post :P There are much more creative ways of punishing criminals than killing them..... and why would you apply the death penalty to people who are just practicing a way of life (i.e. black magic users). Doesn't that smack of oppression to you? Not letting people do as they choose? Doesn't this go against the very arguments you were using against me in earlier discussions we had?

If they're causing harm, then send them to work camps, or make them do somethign productive in a controlled environment.

You don't think that other nations (younger and older) should be allowed to make up their own minds? Learn their own lessons?

And the death penalty was enforced for all sorts of crimes, some of which were politically motivated rather than for the good of society (blasphemy for example). That was why it was repealed. Not because it was wrong, but that it was a tool of The Church to force people in to line, and it had been abused for that. The Liberation was an attempt to remove all the corruption, and one of the things that had to go was the executions, because even if it were just (which a lot of people agreed with) there was still the suspicion that it was being abused for governmental purposes.

And what if, in fifteen years time, TilEnca finds out that it should execute people, because the number of black magic users who don't reform is growing out of control? It would mean that I was mistaken now, based on a very specific set of circumstances.

The UN has a role to play in various things, but I honestly believe that this is not one of them. Not because it interferes in my nation, but because this is something that is internal to a country. Maybe one of the only things that is.
well, there is a sentence that say: "smart learn from his mistakes, but clever learn from mistakes of others". I think it is the idea I based my arguments on.
if countrey know that something could make problem, the least he could do is to recommand other do it differently (by ban or by better regulation and terms).
also, I will add that death penalty is "open door" for all the ones who want to abuse the rights of others (church in your case). stalin said once: "no man, no problem". this mean you could just kill everybody you hate, and eliminate the opposition.
in addition, I can't get your point about future criminals (or black magic user who don't reform). you see a problem, you try solution and failed. than you find other solution who work at the start and failed (probaly by some part of him that need improvement if it worked so long). now, you need to find new solution. trying again one of the solutions that failed wouldn't be good idea.
at last, I think the UN has the right (and the need) to advise his members about more benefitical solution (or limits they should keep for the benefits of their popolution, or the other people on the known galaxy. stats show that the death penalty is worse than most of the other solutions, and the small benfits it bring come with too much harm in rights and justice.
you personally stood with the anti-sorveignety countries (and I can't see nothing wrong in that). how you can move here to the opposite, when it's clear that prevention of mass executions, prevention of death of innocent people (in large amount of cases, the number dosen't mind), and ban of evil act that used against the opposition in dictatorships are much more important than the woman's right on her body?

PS-again I support your acts for prostitution, and I am soory if it looked too much offensive.

Although this particular ban doesn't do that, the purpose of a death penalty ban should be to replace the death penalty with alternative forms of punishment. There are so many more creative ways of dealing with those who have committed heinous crimes than to just kill them.

Creative ways of dealing with psychopath mass murderers? What is the effective hollistic approach for treating such a lifestyle? Therapeutic fingerpainting?

Creative ways of dealing with psychopath mass murderers? What is the effective hollistic approach for treating such a lifestyle? Therapeutic fingerpainting?
Sounds like fun. :D

Giordano,
Acting Senior UN representative,
The Black New World

well, there is a sentence that say: "smart learn from his mistakes, but clever learn from mistakes of others". I think it is the idea I based my arguments on.


And I am all for people learning from TilEnca's past. But why should I shove that learning down their throat?

If people are truly going to learn from mistakes, they have to learn from their own mistakes.

For example I could tell you that if you stick your tounge to a cold piece of metal, it will become stuck there and it will hurt like buggery when you pull it off. And you might believe me, and no do it. So you learn from me. But if you do it and have the skin ripped off your tounge after you do it, the lesson will stay with you longer.

I realise that means lots of nations will execute lots of people, but they will (hopefully) learn that the death penalty doesn't work, and they will learn it all the better for doing it themselves.



if countrey know that something could make problem, the least he could do is to recommand other do it differently (by ban or by better regulation and terms).


That is what I am doing - I am saying that the death penalty is bad, and it shouldn't be used. If people are not going to listen to me, why should I go out of my way to help them? We all believe we are sensible people here, so if they can't follow my simple arguement, what am I to do?


also, I will add that death penalty is "open door" for all the ones who want to abuse the rights of others (church in your case). stalin said once: "no man, no problem". this mean you could just kill everybody you hate, and eliminate the opposition.


Which might work for some people. The Church (and it is ALWAYS capitlised to indicate we have no problems with churches as they stand now) used it to great effect by wiping out everyone who would suspect what they were up to. It made them almost unassailable in terms of power. So if you are a petty dictator who wants to rule by fear, I can see why it would be helpful. I don't really approve of petty dictators, but I am not their mother. (I hope)


in addition, I can't get your point about future criminals (or black magic user who don't reform). you see a problem, you try solution and failed. than you find other solution who work at the start and failed (probaly by some part of him that need improvement if it worked so long). now, you need to find new solution. trying again one of the solutions that failed wouldn't be good idea.


My point is that, at the moment, no one in TilEnca wants the death penatly. But none of us live forever. In a century or so, everyone who is alive now will be dead, and a whole new government will be in place. And maybe they will find a need for the death penalty that I have not considered, because I can only base my opinions on what I know. And right now I know that no one wants the Death Penalty because we believe it serves no purpose.


at last, I think the UN has the right (and the need) to advise his members about more benefitical solution (or limits they should keep for the benefits of their popolution, or the other people on the known galaxy. stats show that the death penalty is worse than most of the other solutions, and the small benfits it bring come with too much harm in rights and justice.


And yet nations who have the death penalty have no crime, and nations who don't have lots of crime. We have no crime and no death penalty, and GeminiLand has the death penalty and lots of crime.
I don't think that the death penalty has much of a relation to crime, and if it does it is minimal in comparrison to other things - the way the nation is run, the social side of things etc.


you personally stood with the anti-sorveignety countries (and I can't see nothing wrong in that). how you can move here to the opposite, when it's clear that prevention of mass executions, prevention of death of innocent people (in large amount of cases, the number dosen't mind), and ban of evil act that used against the opposition in dictatorships are much more important than the woman's right on her body?


Two things. First - I have never hid the fact I think the death penalty is a national issue, not an international one. Every debate it is has come up, this has been my position. Even in the prostitution debates it was my position. This is not a new arguement - not a sudden conversion to the defence of national sovereignty. I have always said that regardless of whether the proposal is for mandatory executions or banning it completely it is a national issue, and one that should not be mandated by the UN in either direction.

Second - I really do believe the UN should be there to secure rights for individuals rather than nations. Gay rights, abortion rights, prostitution rights (for want of a better phrase) - these are all individual choices that a person can make without interfering with anyone else. Some of the other UN things - the more international things (good samiritan, epidemic protocols etc) are equally important because they do deal with multi-national issues.
The death penalty - one person being executed (generally) for the choice he made to commit a crime - is not a matter of individual choice. If you commit a crime, you are chosing to do that, knowing what the consequences are. And your crime generally impacts on someone else, where gay rights and so on do not. I can't deny it can be abused, but with the various fair trial resolutions bouncing about it is pretty hard to do that within the UN. (And if people are ignoring the resolutions, then banning the death penalty would have no effect anyway!).

The death penalty is something the nation does to a person, and generally they have a good reason. Gay rights, abortion, prostitution - these are all choices on the individual level and so the UN should be protecting them.


PS-again I support your acts for prostitution, and I am soory if it looked too much offensive.

Nah. In comparrison to some this is full of love :}

Creative ways of dealing with psychopath mass murderers? What is the effective hollistic approach for treating such a lifestyle? Therapeutic fingerpainting?

Hehe, what a great idea! I don't know whY I didn't think of it myself.

But on a more serious note, if you sit down and think about it, there are many more cost effective ways of dealing with psychopaths than just killing them (unless you execute your prisoners by summarily shooting them).

Stick them in a room all by themselves and then drop water on their head til they go even further insane and let them kill themselves.

Hang them upside down and watch their faces turn interesting shades of blue before they pass out from too much blood to the head. Leave them there. If your certain their psychopaths, why even worry about them?

And as it was said b4, there are many cases of people waiting to be punished (some nations call them death row I believe) who a) did not commit the crime or b) will never commit such a crime again given the opportunity to reintegrate back into society.

The proportion of mass pyschopathic killers in prisons is actually a very small number... in most cases. Your nation may be different.

Be creative... think outside of the box.

I always think of Animal Farm.

Thou shall not kill...unless society says so.

This has 14 approvals so far.

It's a nice idea in principle. I'm going to vote my Amnesty membership and say yes if this gets to the floor, but I don't think it will pass.

well, TilEnca, I think I could agree with that, but I still have some problems
I don't trust about the sensiblity of all the leaders, and I think that death penalty can't bring good, but maybe it really dosen't influence me.

There are certain crimes for which restitution cannot be made. As long as restitution is not made, such people are of no use to society. If they are of no use to society, I see no reason to keep them around and wasting space.

I have an interplanetary empire to run, and I don't have resources to waste on keeping mass murderers locked up because some bleeding-heart can't handle the idea that life is not a right and that some people are best dealt with by killing them, all the while thinking the system of rehabilitation actually works.

I have an interplanetary empire to run, and I don't have resources to waste on keeping mass murderers locked up because some bleeding-heart can't handle the idea that life is not a right and that some people are best dealt with by killing them, all the while thinking the system of rehabilitation actually works.
Tell me again why you're in the UN?

Tell me again why you're in the UN?

Because someone asked me to represent their views on the forum, then decided to quit the game and give me their nation. By the time they quit, I had already gotten a taste for arguing on here.

Because someone asked me to represent their views on the forum, then decided to quit the game and give me their nation. By the time they quit, I had already gotten a taste for arguing on here.
So are you representing their views now or your own?

So are you representing their views now or your own?

My IC opinions the entire time. They never bothered to tell me what their views were.

I propose that we turn execution into profit. All nations will take their criminals worthy of execution and form them into an army and we'll form an international league of gladiatorial fights. These gladiators will never be given guns however, as that would be dangerous. We'll keep them armed with swords and shields or spears, whatever weapons are of the tradition of the nation, except in the case of guns, vehicles, or anything with projectile or explosive power. Every nation taking part would make money on advertising. To insure no nation expands the death penalty in order to fill vacancies ;) we should also allow volunteers. Someone with more experience should make this into a proposal.

That would be an interesting idea, except that not all nations are of the same class of creature and certain nations include magic, which means that criminal with the sword may fireball the guards and then escape.

Oh My. I'm actually in agreement with Asshelmetta. Never thought I'd see the day. I wonder how the ice-skating down in Hell's going?
Sorry 'bout that.

wait a minute...

There are certain crimes for which restitution cannot be made. As long as restitution is not made, such people are of no use to society. If they are of no use to society, I see no reason to keep them around and wasting space.

I have an interplanetary empire to run, and I don't have resources to waste on keeping mass murderers locked up because some bleeding-heart can't handle the idea that life is not a right and that some people are best dealt with by killing them, all the while thinking the system of rehabilitation actually works.
Big surprise.

Your nationstate is full of cannibals and vampires. Capital punishment in DLE is like giving out speeding tickets at the Indy 500!

That would be an interesting idea, except that not all nations are of the same class of creature and certain nations include magic, which means that criminal with the sword may fireball the guards and then escape.

I'm sure that it would not take much to ensure that the guards of such criminials have the capabilities to enact counterspells.

Big surprise.

Your nationstate is full of cannibals and vampires. Capital punishment in DLE is like giving out speeding tickets at the Indy 500!

Cannibalism only applies if you are eating someone of the same species. Humans and Sarkarasetans are not the same species. They can't even interbreed, despite the fact they are more closely related on the genetic level than humans and chimps.

I'm sure that it would not take much to ensure that the guards of such criminials have the capabilities to enact counterspells.

Which creates other problems when you bring psionics into play. In some magic systems, magic and psionics are the same thing. In others, they interact but are not the same thing. And in others, they are not the same thing and don't interact.

Basically, just use psionic inhibitors and antimagic fields. Easy to set up.

Basically, just use psionic inhibitors and antimagic fields. Easy to set up.

True! your enlightenment on such matters never ceases to amaze me.

See asshelmetta... that's what I meant about being creative. I'm sure you can figure something out :D

...can't handle the idea that life is not a right and that some people are best dealt with by killing them...

Isn't that the reasoning that gets people on death Row in the first place?


If the Governments think this way...why can't the said people of that NationState?

Oh the "do as we say not as we do" theory...

Isn't that the reasoning that gets people on death Row in the first place?

Depends. Sometimes, it gets them a slap on the wrist and a "Don't do that again." Circumstances are everything.

If the Governments think this way...why can't the said people of that NationState?

Said people do think this way. Before governments popped up recently among Sarkarasetans, the typical method of dealing with a mass murderer involved things too graphic to post on NS and resulted in the convict's death. And my favorite is when they burned a terrorist alive and I had to order police tanks to break the crowd up in order to have some chance of getting to the terrorist while they were still alive (of course, they died before the police got to them).

That is part of why the restitution system exists in DLE.

Oh the "do as we say not as we do" theory...

More like introducing civilization, one ideal at a time.

16 Approvals so far.

The death penalty is stupid. Whats it for? Better to let convicted criminals rot in jail. Furthermore killing them wont give back the victims anything except the feeling of revenge but that doesnt compensate for anything. Its a barberous practice. Im in favour of this proposal.

The death penalty is stupid. Whats it for?.
It prevents the criminal from reoffending, unless your nation has a zombie problem.

The death penalty is stupid. Whats it for? Better to let convicted criminals rot in jail. Furthermore killing them wont give back the victims anything except the feeling of revenge but that doesnt compensate for anything. Its a barberous practice. Im in favour of this proposal.

Not to disagree about the stupid part, but nothing gives back the victims anything. You can execute someone, you can leave them in jail forever, you can let them out the next day. Nothing takes away the feeling of having someone you loved murdered.

Which is why the justice system doesn't involve the victims, if it has any sense.

It prevents the criminal from reoffending, unless your nation has a zombie problem.

Actually we sometimes do, but not because of this :}

Depends. Sometimes, it gets them a slap on the wrist and a "Don't do that again." Circumstances are everything.



Said people do think this way. Before governments popped up recently among Sarkarasetans, the typical method of dealing with a mass murderer involved things too graphic to post on NS and resulted in the convict's death. And my favorite is when they burned a terrorist alive and I had to order police tanks to break the crowd up in order to have some chance of getting to the terrorist while they were still alive (of course, they died before the police got to them).

That is part of why the restitution system exists in DLE.



More like introducing civilization, one ideal at a time.

Murder regardless of guise (albeit be done by society) is never civil.

If the government shows callous disregard towards life, how can they expect their citizens to feel any differently?

Murder regardless of guise (albeit be done by society) is never civil.

If the government shows callous disregard towards life, how can they expect their citizens to feel any differently?

Define a "callous disregard".

Some might say that letting a man rape and murder a five year old child, then spent ten years in prison (where he gets housed, clothed, fed three times a day and generally has a better life than some of the people on the streets, all at the expesnse of the tax payers) is showing a remarkable disregard for the fact he killed a child and probably ruined the child's family's lives as well.

And some might also say that if life is so important - if it is indeed sacrosanct like some people would argue - then someone taking that life should not be permitted to live out the rest of their days in relative comfort, because that does not seem like a suitable punishment for a crime of such enormity.

The Republic of Williamus gleefully hangs murders and traitors and as such, would not support this proposal.

Even if we were not a state which happily offs the scum what deserve it, we would not support this resolution. It is a matter for each nation to determine on its own.

The death penalty is stupid. Whats it for? Better to let convicted criminals rot in jail. Furthermore killing them wont give back the victims anything except the feeling of revenge but that doesnt compensate for anything. Its a barberous practice. Im in favour of this proposal.

Killing them removes someone who cannot make restitution for the crime they have committed. After all, you can't give your life to the dead.

Murder regardless of guise (albeit be done by society) is never civil.

I have yet to find a real civilization by which to judge what is and what isn't civil. Until you can provide one that isn't barbarianism in a dress, you have no case.

If the government shows callous disregard towards life, how can they expect their citizens to feel any differently?

DLE is a militaristic nation. Death is part of life, and part of what you can expect. The only use someone has is the benefit they can provide society as a whole. Even the mentally-ill have benefits, as they can help teach how the brain works and give people who need it someone dependent on them and a reason to go on. But if a person commits a crime, they need to make restitution for it to the victim, as they have harmed the society as a whole with their crime. And I don't know about you, but I have no way to restore life to the dead or simply erase the physical and mental results of a child being raped. While there are mitigating circumstances in some cases, the system still remains the same for all.

The citizens not only know this, but expect the system. The society as a whole must survive. It's the last chance for the entire species.

Being killed for a crime you have committed is the easy way out i think, it is more of a punishment to spend the rest of your life in jail than to be killed!! but being killed would probably give the victim or the victim's family peace of mind.

but being killed would probably give the victim or the victim's family peace of mind.

You would be surprised how untrue that actually is.

I would have to agree with TilEnca... after all, revenge never got anyone anywhere.

The purpose of the death penalty should not be to bring closure, but to get rid of those memberes of society that will not be worth keeping around.

And if you're so concerned about justice, then just hang em by their toes or something. They'll die eventually... or find some other way to do it for those species with different physiologies.

I would have to agree with TilEnca... after all, revenge never got anyone anywhere.

The purpose of the death penalty should not be to bring closure, but to get rid of those memberes of society that will not be worth keeping around.

And if you're so concerned about justice, then just hang em by their toes or something. They'll die eventually... or find some other way to do it for those species with different physiologies.

Just so as we are clear - I am not in favour of the death penalty. And since I, and all my ministers and people, are mortals and therefore not blessed with complete precognition, none of us would ever presume to judge someone as "not worthy keeping around". Executing someone for a crime is a waste of one more life, something we totally disapprove of.