Just as an FYI, they won't be told till the DAY OF when they will die. Could be tomorrow, could be a decade from now all they know is their last moment will be a long drop and a quick stop. Also reason it took so long is because he was also injured in the attack so they had to give him physical therapy to stand trial and THEN kill him.
I'm fully ok with the death penalty in these circumstances when there's undeniable proof and their actions resulted in the tourture, abuse and death on many people and/or extremely vulnerable (cough kids). Why waste time just end it so they're no longer a threat.
I'm fully ok with the death penalty in these circumstances
Agreed.
Why waste time just end it so they're no longer a threat.
Because carrying out a Judge Dread style execution at the scene of a crime means almost nobody will know it happened and therefore fail to provide any form of deterrence against future [similar] crimes. Sure it's effective on a micro/macro scale, but it hardly affects the mega [Dread reference intended] scale.
Judges execute there and then if they decide but function almost entirely on reputation of being zero tolerance for the general public as anyone who breaks the law that way dies and any sensible person wouldn't want to be in the local vicinity that requires a Judge in the first place, in part because this can sometimes result in being charged with something by proximity, further diminishing the number of potential witnesses to Judges actually carrying out sentences and showing the system at work.
Meanwhile something like Starship Troopers, retardedly made movie as it was and ironically ending up quite based, had it's very "public" and televised executions by hanging that most probably know from the first movie but also shown again in the third: Marauders.
The difference between the two situations is that the general public/criminals are aware Judges will execute them if they fuck up so it's entirely possible this would increase the attempts by criminals at avoiding being caught rather than not breaking the law.
This is in line with the debate regarding how certain law enforcement decisions can actually increase crime severity like in cases where murdering a witness/victim ends up reducing the chances of someone being caught and identified. "No witnesses, no crime" in action, branching off in a similar vein to other matters of law breaking where one crime ends up being just as bad as another despite what obvious differences there might be in actions taken.
Starship Troopers however literally shows the public the whole process, that if you break the law you will be very publicly tried, sentenced, and executed on television and everyone will be able to see it, which isn't how I expect this matter to resolve but it's still quite a public spectacle on a somewhat global scale.
Just for clarity, the 'why wait' part was in reference to life sentences being issued than death penalties.
I mean I just heard recently Josef Fritzl COULD be getting released soon as 'he's no longer a threat'. For the crimes he did he should have gotten death than because he's now an old fucker he might be getting out into public again..
Depending on how well run your prison is, keeping a prisoner ties up a limited resource and costs $300 a day or so.
In lots of places judges must only sentence the most terrible of criminals because the prisons are literally full to bursting.
In this perspective the Singapore system of public beatings gives a distinct advantage. Offenders are tried quickly, beaten with the rattan ( a bamboo-like cane) and then deported or released.
The Singaporeans take a similar approach with hangings. Smuggling drugs through Singapore is a really dumb idea.
Just as an FYI, they won't be told till the DAY OF when they will die. Could be tomorrow, could be a decade from now all they know is their last moment will be a long drop and a quick stop. Also reason it took so long is because he was also injured in the attack so they had to give him physical therapy to stand trial and THEN kill him.
I'm fully ok with the death penalty in these circumstances when there's undeniable proof and their actions resulted in the tourture, abuse and death on many people and/or extremely vulnerable (cough kids). Why waste time just end it so they're no longer a threat.
Agreed.
Because carrying out a Judge Dread style execution at the scene of a crime means almost nobody will know it happened and therefore fail to provide any form of deterrence against future [similar] crimes. Sure it's effective on a micro/macro scale, but it hardly affects the mega [Dread reference intended] scale.
Judges execute there and then if they decide but function almost entirely on reputation of being zero tolerance for the general public as anyone who breaks the law that way dies and any sensible person wouldn't want to be in the local vicinity that requires a Judge in the first place, in part because this can sometimes result in being charged with something by proximity, further diminishing the number of potential witnesses to Judges actually carrying out sentences and showing the system at work.
Meanwhile something like Starship Troopers, retardedly made movie as it was and ironically ending up quite based, had it's very "public" and televised executions by hanging that most probably know from the first movie but also shown again in the third: Marauders.
The difference between the two situations is that the general public/criminals are aware Judges will execute them if they fuck up so it's entirely possible this would increase the attempts by criminals at avoiding being caught rather than not breaking the law.
This is in line with the debate regarding how certain law enforcement decisions can actually increase crime severity like in cases where murdering a witness/victim ends up reducing the chances of someone being caught and identified. "No witnesses, no crime" in action, branching off in a similar vein to other matters of law breaking where one crime ends up being just as bad as another despite what obvious differences there might be in actions taken.
Starship Troopers however literally shows the public the whole process, that if you break the law you will be very publicly tried, sentenced, and executed on television and everyone will be able to see it, which isn't how I expect this matter to resolve but it's still quite a public spectacle on a somewhat global scale.
Just for clarity, the 'why wait' part was in reference to life sentences being issued than death penalties.
I mean I just heard recently Josef Fritzl COULD be getting released soon as 'he's no longer a threat'. For the crimes he did he should have gotten death than because he's now an old fucker he might be getting out into public again..
Depending on how well run your prison is, keeping a prisoner ties up a limited resource and costs $300 a day or so.
In lots of places judges must only sentence the most terrible of criminals because the prisons are literally full to bursting.
In this perspective the Singapore system of public beatings gives a distinct advantage. Offenders are tried quickly, beaten with the rattan ( a bamboo-like cane) and then deported or released.
The Singaporeans take a similar approach with hangings. Smuggling drugs through Singapore is a really dumb idea.