If a person was murdered, most people would say lock the son of a [bleep] up for life. They're not interested in their recovery; since they took the victim's. It's common human knowledge a punishment is necessary to both punish the criminal, and warn others not to do it in the future. They don't care for the criminal, and so why should the government? Human rights are there to provide happiness. If somebody takes this happiness from another person, why should they deserve happiness?

 

 

 

When people say lock the person up, why wouldn't you? In all honesty, what are the chances that the person who's actively tortured a person for over a year could be successfully rehabilitated to never have those impulses again? Very very slim, I'd imagine.

 

 

 

But I do believe that you should give people human rights. Just because a person kills another person, why should they be declared less than a human? A big portion of murders aren't the horrible deaths that we hear about. They're likely people who 'just tried' (relatively speaking) to rob someone, or perhaps shot someone in a 'heat of the passion', not tortured a child to death. These people will likely be able to be rehabilitated. There's many former gangsters, killers, robbers, who've realised the mistakes in life they've made and repent and try to become functioning members of society.

 

 

 

That's a good point, if that woman has another baby, chances are it'll end up like the others, neglected.

But I do believe that you should give people human rights. Just because a person kills another person, why should they be declared less than a human?

 

 

 

Because they declared others as less than human for no reason. We're just playing by their own rules, except we give a little more compassion because we don't just do it to innocent people like they did.

 

 

 

There's many former gangsters, killers, robbers, who've realised the mistakes in life they've made and repent and try to become functioning members of society.

 

 

 

And a lot of people pretended/seemed to be successfully rehabilitated, just to go back into society and make the same "mistakes". So either we allow criminals a second chance and risk more innocent people getting killed, or we don't allow them a second chance and risk guilty people who would have been successfully rehabilitated getting killed. It's a matter of who you have more compassion for: the innocent or the guilty. But that being said, no matter what course of action you take there's no such thing as a perfect victory.

They deserve to be tortured in every horrible way possible then water board their [wagon] and "accidently" poor to much water over them.

Jail for life.