Hi O Sung Wu,

I'm inclined to agree with you about solitary confinement for life. But perhaps, out of compassion, we could add one proviso: that the guilty party, after considering the chances of a long, healthy life in complete confinement, should have the right to ask for his death, that he/she can apply for a re-consideration of his life sentence to be modified - at his ill - to be somewhat abbreviated.

A court could then spend, say, a year or two, considering the merits of his request, and then grant it, if he is still alive. He would thus have time to re-consider his crimes, and his choice of exit.

Sounds fair.

Joe

'No, I think it was because Singaporeans are as afraid of creation scientists as I am.'

I would of thought they would be more afraid of the evolution myth which concludes they are less evolved than us Mr Opinion.

Misopinionated,

So you've just discovered that there isn't a god ? What else are they teaching in Introductory Cultural Studies I ? That religion is nothing more than a belief in god ? No moral aspects ? Nothing to learn about, say, the equality and universality of humans, or the need to care for others even if they are not of your group ?

Move on. Get ready for Introductory Cultural Studies II next year. Then you might 'learn' about how all cultures are equal, that sort of rubbish. Fine-tune your BS detectors.

Joe

What I find strange, is that most participants here, when asked about punishments (death or otherwise), envision or imagine someone else in the cell or on the gallows, never themselves, never even a dear family member, always a complete stranger.

Yes, we are all good people of course, so when considering the topic, rather than focusing on actual criminals, I will continue to consider mainly the well-being of those good people who are convicted of evil crimes, either accidentally or because the law itself is evil. I will also give some consideration to the sufferings of the innocent families of criminals.

Dear O Sung Wu,

I'm back and doing well.

You ask - should the death penalty be re-visited for certain
atrocious crimes?

I feel that decisions about capital punishment are not
really about deterrence. They are about retribution.
About society's revenge on a person who takes another's
life.

Whether such retribution is justified is a moral
judgement for each individual to make.

Some people feel that those who kill another human
being should pay the supreme penalty and forfeit their
own lives; others feel that human life is so sacred
that society is demeaned when the state kills its
citizens, however grave their offense.

Personally, I am against the taking of human life.

Hi there LOUDMOUTH...

Joe, I fully appreciate your position or suggestion of allowing the guilty man the option of ending his protracted cellular confinement, by having the option of choosing death. However, I don't think its morally fair to the victim's NOK, that offenders of a capital crime, being able to dictate their punishment? I appreciate your suggestion has merit, in terms of fairness? But offenders of serious crimes should suffer whatever the court has imposed, as punishment whether, it's fair or otherwise.

G'day STEELEREDUX...

No, not at all. Military justice, by its very nature, should be adjudicated swiftly, and the punishment, just as swift, primarily when the crime arises out of combat. However, if it involves a serious military offence, such as desertion (extremely hard to prove), provided it's NOT in the face of the enemy, or, physically assaulting a Commissioned Officer, again, provided it didn't occur during a 'contact, then the normal convening of a Court Martial would apply.'

In a combat environment, any serious dislocation to the good order and discipline of the Royal Australian Army can have a catastrophic effect on a mission. If a 'contact' is made, or an ambush is set, or in circumstances, where the section or platoon is taking immediate fire - any serious breaches of discipline, could result in a complete wipe-out of the entire Sect. or Pl. Steele, the military must operate under an entirely different set of rules, I'm sure you can appreciate that?