Why can't we just torture people to death as a punishment for mass murdering?

Why can't we just torture people to death as a punishment for mass murdering?

So, I see that aussie dude or random north african idiot who decided to kill people and I realize that they do it partially due to impunity, because they know that at very worst scenario they will get life sentence.

If we accept torture to death as a punishment for mass murdering we will surely prevent many act of terrorism.

In case of suicide of murderer , we should punish his closest family members by jailing them for between 10 to 20 years in max security prisons

Thoughts?

Attached: 166br.jpg (330x330, 25K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingchi
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

You're just some sicko who wants people tortured.

We should build a statue of this guy, right in front of the mosque

No, I'm not but I realize what drives people to commit these vicious acts

how about we torture muslims and niggers to death

user, we mustjudge people by their actions not by their skin colour

...

What do you think about death by slicing anons aka Lingchi?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingchi

I believe the same. Murderers cause others to forfeit their lives, and so they should be forced to forfeit theirs.

People who commit crimes don't think they're going to get caught.

Harsh punishments have very limited deterrent effects and that's why we got rid of them. In addition, they are inhumane.

If our civilisation cannot be preserved without resorting to barbarism, it is not worth preserving.

based

even so called jihadists are afraid of being tortured not to mention these incel terrorists

>Harsh punishments have very limited deterrent effects and that's why we got rid of them.

those were different times, back then people didn't commit mass murders just to see their names in the news or just because they were bored

nowadays, people just get used to certain level of comfort and humanism but IMO once you cross the line be ready to pay for it.

Also, I think many terrorist who commit mass murder realize that the chances that they will get caught eventually are pretty high, but they know that punishment won't be very harsh

Is this opinion given in your expert capacity as just some guy?

If you want to torture people, you better have a solid fucking reason for doing so and not just hunches and suspicions.

I think that most mass shooters probably plan to suicide or suicide-by-cop. Certainly they at least know that their life is over one way or another, whether it be permanent detention or death. They're already willing to throw their lives away. If you make the punishments draconian you'll just ensure they all end in suicide instead of most of them, and in the process you will destroy everything worthwhile and worth protecting about Western society.

that's why I suggest to punish their closest relatives in case of suicide.

Some shit about "natural rights" including being against "cruel and unusual punishment."

>that's why I suggest to punish their closest relatives in case of suicide.
The purpose of the criminal justice system is not (primarily) to stop crime, it is to provide justice to victims and offenders.

I'm sure victims' families won't be against

Justice is not just doing whatever the victims want.

who cares about the definition of justice if my method will help to reduce growing number of public massacres

>who cares about the definition of justice
People who are interested in achieving it.

punishments were different throughout history, now it's time to adapt ourselves to the new environment

>punishments were different throughout history
Yes, and they were unjust.

times are changing

something that used to be unjust isn't necessary unjust right now

>In case of suicide of murderer , we should punish his closest family members by jailing them for between 10 to 20 years in max security prisons

What if they hated their family, like Adam Lanza or Elliot Rodgers

>something that used to be unjust isn't necessary unjust right now
That argument would require you to define justice, and using a civilised definition of justice would preclude torturing the family members of mass shooters. It would almost certainly even preclude torturing mass shooters themselves.

Hammurabi code

We don't even have capital punishment

Thats enough S&M porno for you buddy

Attached: french-montana.png (369x400, 222K)

Good idea, if your family member ever mass murders people let's put you in prison to get blacked, that will make it right.

If someone deserves to be tortured to death it's invaders and mentally ill stockholm syndrome faggots similar to yourself.

Only historians and edgy teenagers are going to remember this faggot.

sorry to say he will be immortalized by the gun grabbers there if they succeed

they're clones
the real shooter is taken underground after the event and wiped from the matrix
it doesn't matter

He should get a medal for cleaning up Christchurch

The problem with this is that you then have state sponsored torturers, which is a hell of a slippery slope.

I have thought about this, instead of torturing these criminals to death we should just throw them down a dark well with no food or water and seal it shut and let nature take its course.

This is what happens when people live by the color of their skin, they just end up doing nigger tier things.

we can discuss the method of torture, yes

I agree. I believe we should use our medical advancements to find out how to bring the most pain for the longest amount of time to the worst criminals such as mass shooters. And not just keep them alive , but lucid too. Make them experience pain both physical and mental for decades until they die, if we let them.

sounds like a great idea desu

...