Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Altai

Long term jail sentence is the violation of human rights

Recommended Posts

You can share any informations related with the issue and you can post your logical conclusions based on informations. Please share a website link for the information you share or share a website link for the information that your logical conclusions depends on, you dont have to share a website link when you quote another poster. We can avoid trolling only in this way.

Putting people in jails for long time periods is the violation of human rights because it has no proven benefits while its just a kind of torture and have many damages.

Humankind and many other living things are fond to freedom from the birth and putting them in a long term situation which is contrary to their nature will worsen their own life and will worsen public life in many different aspects. 

These people should just be treated and maybe trained and should be punished for a while. 

The ones which commits some major crimes, such as murder or treason should be directly executed or should be given a second opportunity if they show any symptoms of improvement. 



An example source for where my logical conclusions would be based on : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my mind, jails are there to protect the innocent.  The rights of the guilty are secondary to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is long term, where do we draw the line? Should we have executed James Richardson, Daryl Burton, Stephen Phillips, Charles Chatman, William Dillon, David Milgaard, Guy Paul Morin, and countless others?


Yes incarceration is bad, but what alternatives are there to protect society? In Canada we supposedly have a correctional system as opposed to a warehousing system, there are still lots of problems with it but should we not work on the problems instead of drawing some arbitrary line and executing people?

Edited by ?Impact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

So what is long term, where do we draw the line? Should we have executed James Richardson, Daryl Burton, Stephen Phillips, Charles Chatman, William Dillon, David Milgaard, Guy Paul Morin, and countless others?


Yes incarceration is bad, but what alternatives are there to protect society? In Canada we supposedly have a correctional system as opposed to a warehousing system, there are still lots of problems with it but should we not work on the problems instead of drawing some arbitrary line and executing people?


Draw the line where it starts to be inhuman. 

Execute anyone who insist to commit criminal actions or who do not show any symptoms of improvement. 

Putting them in jail for long time may be protecting people from any potential harms but this is not an absolute solution. They are just tortured by waiting in a prison for long years.


I will delete your next posts if you keep repeating the same things over and over again. For example I said in the first post that they should be treated first and you replied saying "should we not try to work on problems instead of executing them ?"  ^_^

Edited by Altai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Altai said:

Execute anyone who insist to commit criminal actions or who do not show any symptoms of improvement. 

I guess you didn't bother to read the list of names I supplied. They were all innocent people who were incarcerated for many years.

11 minutes ago, Altai said:

I will delete your next posts if you keep repeating the same things over and over again. 

No problem, if you are not interested in dialog then bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

I guess you didn't bother to read the list of names I supplied. They were all innocent people who were incarcerated for many years.

No problem, if you are not interested in dialog then bye.

 So they would not be jailed for years if what I suggest was done. They would be kept under surveillance for a while and would be freed under some conditions or no conditions at all.

Edited by Altai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Altai said:

 So they would not be jailed for years if what I suggest was done. They would be kept under surveillance for a while and would be freed under some conditions or no conditions at all.

Many of those on the list were convicted of murder, only to be proven as wrong years later. In some cases it was the development of new technologies like DNA matching that proved their innocence, in other cases it was the determination of others ho believed in them and finally turned up evidence of their wrongful conviction. Are you suggesting that even murder convictions be monitored for a while? Remember many people convicted of murder are also first time offenders.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

 Remember many people convicted of murder are also first time offenders.  

So ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

Many of those on the list were convicted of murder, only to be proven as wrong years later. In some cases it was the development of new technologies like DNA matching that proved their innocence, in other cases it was the determination of others ho believed in them and finally turned up evidence of their wrongful conviction. Are you suggesting that even murder convictions be monitored for a while? Remember many people convicted of murder are also first time offenders.  

I don't have it at my fingertips just now but I recall reading an article that listed the numbers of convicts on death row who, when DNA evidence became acceptable, were found to be innocent. The highest numbers were in Florida and Texas and of course guess who they were, yes, indigent Blacks. One wonders how many were put to death prior to that who had some state appointed lawyer who just got out of law school. I don't call it a death penalty, I refer to it as state sponsored murder. There are of course cases where you think you could take a baseball bat to the perpetrator, but I'll settle for lock them up to protect the public. In a lot of those cases it's a much cheaper approach, even if they eventually come out of jail in a box.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...