What is a fair punishment for murderers?

[Whyayeman]

A two minute video, is that justice?

No mention of witnesses either..

Trial by YouTube?

 

[Robban]

Trial by YouTube?

Sad indeed.

 

[Whyayeman]

Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

Yes. It happens all the time here in the UK. Except that they are not free. they are on licence and can be returned to prison if they break the terms of the licence. I think there is a similar system of parole in America and in many other countries.

This is a way of reconciling punishment with rehabilitation. Thousands of men (mostly) are on parole for murder and walk the streets. This is for life, to complete their mandatory life sentences. They have limitations on them about where they can go, who they are allowed to contact. They must have regular contact with their probation officers, give notice of travel and so on. So they are never really free.

An English court has just this week sentenced a woman to a 'whole life' sentence; that is, she will never be released. This is exceptional in this country, for an exceptionally dreadful series of murders.

 

[returntosender]

her anger caused her to act out and someone died. I think the verdict was Fair. It wasnT a vicious ACT AGAINST THE ELDER. HOPEFULLY SHE WILL. LEARN control.of her emotions. What would Jesus think?

 

[Bradskii]

This thread is something of a drive-by I think.

 

[Runningman]

We have members on here who have various views on whether or not we should have the death penalty.

I will summarize this video
The person in the video murdered an elderly victim, this was unprovoked and completely random
For that crime the judge figured that 8 years would be a sufficient punishment

What do you think of that? Would you feel uncomfortable about a society letting known murderers walk free eventually?

We need to also think here for a moment that since this attack was unprovoked and random, it could have been anybody. And the victim that died was somebody's grandparent.

So I ask all that answers this question to put yourself in the shoes of the grieving family.

There should be a severe penalty, but with the end goal of them changing and reintegrating into society if at all possible. That's the ideal, but usually not the reality. People don't trust murderers and they may be blind to the nuances between premediated murder and involuntary manslaughter. They will most likely find themselves unemployable and needing to resort to more crime to make ends meet.

 

[Whyayeman]

There should be a severe penalty, but with the end goal of them changing and reintegrating into society if at all possible.

Life imprisonment is severe, the severest sentence short of the death sentence. The time spent by murderers in prison before parole has steadily increased in the last 20 or 30 years. I agree that rehabilitation should be an aim of imprisonment, after the protection of the public.

I agree that many people are uneasy about criminals after release too, especially killers. And yet almost all murderers go on to lead useful lives on release (here in the UK at least) with a few notable, highly publicised exceptions.

 

[Runningman]

Life imprisonment is severe, the severest sentence short of the death sentence. The time spent by murderers in prison before parole has steadily increased in the last 20 or 30 years. I agree that rehabilitation should be an aim of imprisonment, after the protection of the public.

I agree that many people are uneasy about criminals after release too, especially killers. And yet almost all murderers go on to lead useful lives on release (here in the UK at least) with a few notable, highly publicised exceptions.

Life imprisonment is severe, but I wouldn't call it rehabilitation. I don't know about the UK, but at least in the US it seems that many states don't do capital punishment due to its moral, ethical, and political dilemmas. However, letting someone just waste away in jail may provide a sense of justice for the victims, but at the expense of tax payers who are not concerned about a family getting their feel-good justice. That's expensive and actually people need to get on with their lives.

Really, they should just stop virtue signaling behind the guise of righteousness and just either rehabilitate them and let them out or end their life.

 

[Pommer]

Children, treatment/education until age of majority, then (up to) five-ten years thereafter and released.
Adults over 25, 20-30 years, again with education and support upon returning to society.
Adults 18-24 10-25 years.
All aggravating and mitigating circumstances taken into account.

Repeat offenders: life imprisonment, with the option for suicide at state expense.

 

[Bradskii]

...with the option for suicide at state expense.

If I was in for life then they'd be hard pressed to stop me.

 

[RileyG]

I don't believe in the death penalty for any reason. Life in prison with no possibility of parole would be the maximum sentence.

 

[Pommer]

I don't believe in the death penalty for any reason. Life in prison with no possibility of parole would be the maximum sentence.

This can be cruel if it’s an 18year-old (or worse the 15 yo who was “tried as an adult” which is senseless unto itself).
Suicide has to be an option…there could be a moratorium on it for say, 15 years?

 

[Robban]

her anger caused her to act out and someone died. I think the verdict was Fair. It wasnT a vicious ACT AGAINST THE ELDER. HOPEFULLY SHE WILL. LEARN control.of her emotions. What would Jesus think?

What he would think?
Maybe,
"If only they would listen to Moses."

"And follow his instuctions also outside of the land of Israel"

182nd mitzvah, (posirive)
is that we are commanded to designate six cities of refuge,

to be available for a person who killed someone accidentally,
we must fix the road and keep it straight,

and make sure that nothing will impede the fleeing person from running there.

(Were only for those who killed accidentally, not knowing the consequencies
of their actions.)

Torah has no concept of prison "punishment"
Why?
A place where you are told
"You will continue to age but you must not take charge of your life"

 

[Whyayeman]

Life imprisonment is severe, but I wouldn't call it rehabilitation. I don't know about the UK, but at least in the US it seems that many states don't do capital punishment due to its moral, ethical, and political dilemmas. However, letting someone just waste away in jail may provide a sense of justice for the victims, but at the expense of tax payers who are not concerned about a family getting their feel-good justice. That's expensive and actually people need to get on with their lives.

Really, they should just stop virtue signaling behind the guise of righteousness and just either rehabilitate them and let them out or end their life.

Rehabilitation is one of the duties of prison, at least in the UK. It is not taken seriously enough in that not enough resources are dedicated to it but it is enshrined in the law. In the case of murder all those convicted* must be sentenced to life imprisonment; the sentencing judge must set a tariff, a minimum term which must be served in prison. This term is the retributive aspect of the sentence.

After serving this period prisoners may be paroled; they can serve the rest of their lives on licence outside of prison. A parole board has the power to decide on whether the prisoner has been rehabilitated - that is, no longer a danger to the public. Prisoners on licencecan be recalled by a supervisor who will be a probation officer if the terms of the licence are broken.

* Except for 'whole life' tariffs.

It is not virtue signalling. It is a humane measure intended to provide a limited degree of freedom for convicts who are no longer dangerous.

 

[Diamond72]

I think there is a similar system of parole in America and in many other countries.

It is called probation. They get people to agree to probation rather than to fight it out in court. Then the next time they break a law they can be put in jail for violating their probation. They do what they can to get people to confess because it is very difficult to get a conviction without a confession.

 

[Whyayeman]

It is called probation. They get people to agree to probation rather than to fight it out in court. Then the next time they break a law they can be put in jail for violating their probation. They do what they can to get people to confess because it is very difficult to get a conviction without a confession.

Here parole is granted by a board chaired by a judge with professional and lay people together. The prisoner puts his case and the board decides. Parolees don't have to break the law, just the terms of their licence for a probation officer to have them returned to complete the life sentence.

 

[RileyG]

This can be cruel if it’s an 18year-old (or worse the 15 yo who was “tried as an adult” which is senseless unto itself).
Suicide has to be an option…there could be a moratorium on it for say, 15 years?

Suicide is cruel.

 

[JamesTW]

Understandably, there will be some grey area in which a standard punishment seems too much of a punishment or too little but can we not rely on the punishments in the Law as prescribed by Moses? While true repentance is good for some instances, there are sins that repentance can’t right. Generally speaking, the taking of life and many sexual sins are worthy of death, I assume, because there is no restitution. You can not right the wrong of child molestation or murder. Once those are done, that’s it.

God has already told us what the punishments should be for many different sins. I don’t feel we should ignore those.

While the lady in this case likely did not mean to kill the elderly lady, the complete disregard she had for the well being of others is not acceptable. To “accept” that type of behavior jeopardizes the entire community.

In Deut. 21:18-21, God tells us to kill the unruly child (I understand this isn’t such a simple premise) simply because they are not a good citizen. How much more should we consider the case of someone not being able to control themselves enough not to kill?

I don’t believe this lady meant to kill, and while it would be a sad end, she should face capital punishment.

 

[Robban]

Understandably, there will be some grey area in which a standard punishment seems too much of a punishment or too little but can we not rely on the punishments in the Law as prescribed by Moses? While true repentance is good for some instances, there are sins that repentance can’t right. Generally speaking, the taking of life and many sexual sins are worthy of death, I assume, because there is no restitution. You can not right the wrong of child molestation or murder. Once those are done, that’s it.

God has already told us what the punishments should be for many different sins. I don’t feel we should ignore those.

While the lady in this case likely did not mean to kill the elderly lady, the complete disregard she had for the well being of others is not acceptable. To “accept” that type of behavior jeopardizes the entire community.

In Deut. 21:18-21, God tells us to kill the unruly child (I understand this isn’t such a simple premise) simply because they are not a good citizen. How much more should we consider the case of someone not being able to control themselves enough not to kill?

I don’t believe this lady meant to kill, and while it would be a sad end, she should face capital punishment.

Moses killed an Egyptian and had to run.

what you have brought up is doubtful, we are talking about a very stable,

Torah-directed society we are talking about a community where people know the difference between right and wrong,

and only rarely does someone step out of those boundaries.

Rabbi Akiva was of the opinion that a court that issues a death warrant once in 70 years is a murderous court.

 

[JamesTW]

Moses killed an Egyptian and had to run.

what you have brought up is doubtful, we are talking about a very stable,

Torah-directed society we are talking about a community where people know the difference between right and wrong,

and only rarely does someone step out of those boundaries.

Rabbi Akiva was of the opinion that a court that issues a death warrant once in 70 years is a murderous court.

Hey Robban,

Excuse my ignorance but I’m not aware of Rabbi Akiva. He may have been a great man, but I do know that Moses had people killed for not honoring the Sabbath. An offense that we moderns think is a MUCH smaller deal that taking someone’s life. Moses was right for what he did and someone that goes against Moses is likely on the wrong side on the issue

We must remember that God sanctioned genocide so His children can live in the land He promised them.

I am confused on if you’re saying that we are the community that understands right and wrong or if we don’t and also if you are saying a society that follows Torah does not understand right and wrong.