The death penalty and torture are they right?
As it goes it is illegal to torture people or put them to death in many countries.
I personally believe the death penalty should be used for repeat offenders and offenders of the most horrific crimes. In my reasoning when I say repeat offenders I mean those that consistently disrupt others lives by stealing and harming them. Many of these crimes are committed due to substance abuse. On the first occasion of offending they should be given a community based rehabilitation order. This would comprise being removed from their existing area, taught how to live in a community while being given budgeting lessons and breaking their habits.
In the second offence they should be – placed in a secure custody setting. While here they should be put through cold turkey – given a full intense rehabilitation program. Along with this they should be given the education as above. Teaching them how to live respectfully in society, handle their finances and given a reasonable level of knowledge and understanding of written and spoken language. They should there after be given a support worker not to hold there hands but to be there if they require help in the future. This would give them someone to turn to if in difficulty with their substance issues.
As they have already had two chances at great expense to the tax payer, not only in rehabilitation, but in the criminal justice actions along with any victim counselling that may be required. They should be seen as a lost cause. If you are given all the support humanly possible – and you still posse a real risk to public security, why should you be left to keep eating up valued resources, finances and time. Lay the person to rest. If you have a dog that can't be trained and is dangerous, it would be taken to the farm.
My opinion may seem harsh but haven lived in a few areas where substance abuse has ravished them. I have live below, above and next to addicts. I believe everyone can change with the right help. People say a person will only change when they are ready to do so, with the right psychological support they will realise they need to change. If on two occasions the support is unsuccessful why try at great cost to do it a third.
For persons convicted of crimes that can only be put in the category of horrific should be put to death – if – it can be proven further than “reasonable doubt” the person is the offender with no questionable evidence what so ever. If there's a modicum of doubt on the evidence the person should be put to hard labour with minimal rest periods.
Torture should be used in cases where the crime is severe but not in the horrific group. In no way, shape or form should torture be used during an investigation of a crime. Evidence under torture is factually inaccurate and questionable.
Torture it's self can cover anything from psychological mind games to inflicting long lasting injuries to the body. Even sleep deprivation is seen to be torture, however, the information that comes out during sleep deprivation is likely to be accurate if the sleep deprivation is kept to four days or so. After this a person will begin to say anything to get sleep.
We need to give focus to young offenders rehabilitation and serious punishment to the older offenders making examples of them. In criminal circles jail times is a badge of honour. Many people in the criminal justice system and social work sector would like to think, jail time works, quoting 30% of people don't reoffend but this is a poor attempt to pull the wool over our eyes. It's 70% of people that go on to reoffend once
If you make jails less attractive and more punishing the 70% may reconsider. Weather it be hard pointless labour or putting the “hard men” in a wing with no protection against each other.
I can only see two ways of making the world we live in the polite civilised society it once used to be. That is through education and life limiting of those that education doesn't work for.