Surmanuhtlus (1)

Ma olen sellele k�simusele p��ranud suurt t� helepanu . Kahjuks pole rahuaegset surmanuhtlust seni veel k� igis L��nemere maade N�ukokku kuuluvates riikides kaotatud . Ma olen sageli seisnud silmitsi v�itega, et avalik arvamus on surmanuhtluse kaotamise vastu ja aeg pole selleks veel k�ps. Poolt ja vastu K�ige levinum pooltv�ide surmanuhtluse kohta on vajadus �hiskonnale. Nimelt olevat see hirmutusvahend seaduse ja korra tagamiseks. Vastavalt hirmutusteooriale on �hiskonna heaolu tarbeks vajalik tappa korrarikkuja, mis peletaks teised inimesed tagasi m�ttest midagi samalaadset korda saata. On tehtud lugematu arv uuringuid , kuid � kski neist pole t�estanud, et surmanuhtlusel oleks t�esti m�jus hirmutav toime. Tegelikult on hoopis vastupidisele osutavaid m�rke: v�givaldsetel k�ttemaksumeetmetel v�ib olla negatiivne m�ju �hiskonna moraalile ja nii v�ib surmanuhtlus hoopist�kkis suurendada v�givaldsust ning muuta �hiskonna brutaalsemaks. Teine pooltv�ide � tleb , et kui kurjategija on tapetud, ei saa ta enam teist korda kuritegu sooritada (nn igavene teov�imetus). See on k�ll �ige, kuid teistel karistusvormidel, mis isoleerivad kurjategija �hiskonnast, on surmanuhtluse ees v� hemalt �ks eelis. Nimelt aitavad nad kasv�i osaliselt v�ltida �iguss� steemis k�igest hoolimata ette tulevate eksimuste osutumist saatuslikuks. Surmanuhtlus aga kustutab nii nende eluk��nla, kes on ekslikult s��di m�istetud, kui nende oma, keda v�inuks rehabiliteerida. Eba�iglast kohut on minevikus hulganisti n�htud ja ei j�� see n�gemata tulevikuski. Eelmistest erineb k�ttemaksu kontsept. Selle peamine sisu on mitte kuritegu v�ltida, vaid tasuda k�tte v��ritik�itumise eest, s.o kurjategijale k�tte maksta. V�idetakse, et �iglus n�uab k�ttemaksu ja �hiskond n�itab selle l�bi oma hukkam�istu. Nii oleks surmanuhtlus �hiskondlike normide peegeldus . I've paid close attention to this issue. Unfortunately , not yet rahuaegset the death penalty in all countries in the Baltic countries belonging to the Board have been abolished. I've often been faced with the argument that public opinion is against the death penalty and the time is not yet ripe for this purpose. For and against The most common pooltv�ide the death penalty is the need for society. Indeed, the deterrent is the law and order . According scarytheory is necessary for the welfare of society to kill rioter, crowd of other people, a similar time to send something back to the idea . There have been countless studies, but none of them are proven , the death penalty would actually be an effective scary effect . In fact, quite the contrary is suggestive evidence : getting evens measures may have a negative impact on violent society, morality and the death penalty may increase aggression and even brutal and change society. Another against says that if the offender is killed, he can not no longer the second time the crime was committed (the so-called perpetual incapacitation). This is true while others penal fettles,isolating the offender of a society is the death penalty in front of at least one advantage . In particular, they will be even partly to avoid the legal system in spite of everything coming down osutumist fatal error . The death penalty, however , delete both of these lifecandles, who has been wrongly convicted, as their own, who could rehabilitate. Unfairly tried in the past, and for a lot of will not be seeing it in the future. Differs from the previous concept of revenge . Its main content is not to prevent crime, but served misprision behavior pay for, so the offender received pay. It is argued that calls for revenge and justice in society through its condemnation of the show. This could be a death sentence reflected the social norms.