First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Do human rights apply to convicted criminals?
1060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 8/16/16
Depends on the crime, rapists and murderers, yes they don't deserve to be treated like humans if they don't treat others like humans.
42532 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

vampirecell wrote:

Depends on the crime, rapists and murderers, yes they don't deserve to be treated like humans if they don't treat others like humans.


Do you believe in torturing these "human beings" for their raping and murdering?
1060 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

Do you believe in torturing these "human beings" for their raping and murdering?


Well they have no problem torturing others
42532 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / F / New Jersey, USA
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

vampirecell wrote:


Do you believe in torturing these "human beings" for their raping and murdering?


Well they have no problem torturing others


True. That is why I half agree with you.
690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / Eire
Offline
Posted 8/16/16 , edited 8/16/16
While it seems the use of prisons has turned into simply a holding area for criminals that is not what prisons are meant to be for.
It saddens me greatly that so many people seem to forget that prisons were meant to be for the rehabilitation of criminals so they could go back into society but in many places, including the USA they have simply become a business for people to exploit cheap labour among other things.

A criminal is meant to go to prison and receive counselling. To try and help them find a place in life where they do not need to break the law or do horrible things. I know none of this is easy but it seems like to so many people this has simply been forgotten in favour of locking people up and throwing away the key, which in the long term is going to be far more disastrous than I think anyone has yet to realise.

I know people see rapists and murders are nothing but animals and I fully expect and appreciate people feeling that way. However we need to look past those emotions, they aren't going to help anyone. They certainly don't help both victims.
28685 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

IntenseAutism wrote:


I know people see rapists and murders are nothing but animals and I fully expect and appreciate people feeling that way. However we need to look past those emotions, they aren't going to help anyone. They certainly don't help both victims.


Are you really calling rapists and murderers victims? There's nothing to look past when someone has killed or raped a loved one.
690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / Eire
Offline
Posted 8/16/16
I can understand your point of view but I do believe they are victims as well, of themselves but still victims. I don't mean to anger you by saying that but I think its important for people to think rationally about things of this nature.
28456 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M / Пенсильвания, США
Offline
Posted 8/16/16
The rather interesting thing is that you never define "Basic Human Rights." If by that you mean the garbage that is mixed in with some decency in UN GA Resolution 217, then no. If you mean the American basics of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, also no. If however you mean life, innocence until proven guilty in a court of law, and right of appeal, then yes I'll give you that.

When one lives in a "free and open" society one must expect consequences if their "freedom and openness" interferes with that of a another in a harmful way. Commonly, they should expect the loss of their own.
Azver 
32282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Forest, Finland
Offline
Posted 8/16/16 , edited 8/16/16
Yes, they do.

Rights are rights because they SHOULD be inalienable.

Punishment for their actions, their crime, is whatever was assigned to them by the legal system. Whatsoever I trust no judge, nor jury, that thinks themselves able to decide if someone should or shouldn't have rights. That authority is not something we can give to anyone; because that's one heck of a slippery road.

First one's always the hardest. And if we take them from a person, we'll eventually take it from a group. And when that happens, you better pray to whatever belief system you support that you belong to the "in" group, because eventually they'll come for yours.

And yes, I'm aware that slippery slope as a theory is not something that is always applicable; but I also understand human nature. And if something; oppressing and dehumanizing those who we oppose is something humans have done far too well, far too long.

PS: Yes I intentionally assumed that we're all OK with people suspending their freedom for serving their sentence, and other similar temporary reductions until he/she has served their conviction. But during that, or after that, basic rights, should not be tampered with. You're free to misinterpret as much of this as you want but I'm no lawyer, so I expect that I won't create a text that leaves no wiggle room, nor am I native speaker so... Sue me.
Tantic 
3198 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / England
Offline
Posted 8/16/16
Yes, obviously.
14953 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Massachusetts
Online
Posted 8/16/16 , edited 8/16/16
...yes.

People do not stop being people because they break the law. We have to uphold and extend the same essential rights to every human being, even and especially when we might not want to do so.

Like I'm a new englander. I knew people who were nearby the Boston Marathon during the bombing. You can bet your ass I wanted the bombers to hang for what they did. But we still had to treat them with a certain degree of humanity, and respect their rights. We have to follow the rules even if they don't. We have to follow them even and especially when we don't want to. Otherwise the rules don't mean anything.
37164 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/16/16
Yes. Upholding human rights in prison is not just about protecting the prisoner. It's good for society. Once we decide that there can be exceptions, we are morally compromised. It's a slippery slope from there. So even if an individual doesn't deserve protection, we must give it to them.
Azver 
32282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Forest, Finland
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

kinga750 wrote:

Yes. Upholding human rights in prison is not just about protecting the prisoner. It's good for society. Once we decide that there can be exceptions, we are morally compromised. It's a slippery slope from there. So even if an individual doesn't deserve protection, we must give it to them.


Also, can you imagine how much cheaper US would have it, if they could rehabilitate people coming through the prison system? :P

Ain't happening if they're treated without any rights as if animals.
35064 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 8/16/16 , edited 8/16/16
It is when people are charged, detained, tried, sentenced, and subjected to their sentences that we must be most vigilantly committed to protecting their human rights. We have an obligation to behave both justly and humanely.

Or so I think, anyway.
37164 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 8/16/16

Azver wrote:
Also, can you imagine how much cheaper US would have it, if they could rehabilitate people coming through the prison system? :P

Ain't happening if they're treated without any rights as if animals.


I agree. I think I posted more in depth about the prison system in another thread. Basically I think the US focuses too much on punishment and should focus more on rehabilitation. The prison system is a mess and assuming it ever gets cleaned up, I suspect we will look back and feel ashamed.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.