Between the INSANE and SANITY

August 19, 2010 8:42am CST
Well, I have certain things that I feel like unfair in certain countries law enforcement regarding punishing those who abide the law. Imagine this scenario, in a case of murder, those who are sane given the punishment either lifetime sentence in jail or be hanged or any punishment by dead as well. But somehow if the person is insane, and proven insane, the punishment will be lighten up due to their mental state. Within this scenario, in my opinion, there shouldn't be any punishment that lighten due to the mental state of the person who conduct the murder. As we all know, those who murder already have the intent earlier to kill someone before the murder happen, regardless they are normal or insane. Does this concur to your thoughts or you have different opinion regarding punishment to be to those who are insane conduct crime such as murder. Share your thoughts.
2 responses
@MDG2211 (711)
• Argentina
20 Aug 10
is the excuse that all counsel seeking murderers, insane to pass off to your client to achieve reduction of sentence or is admitted to a school. It lends much to the trap lies. The main obstacle of the law are lawyers.
• Malaysia
20 Aug 10
But somehow, these excuses such as admitting themselves as "insane" will trigger the injustice for the victims. Anyway, the facts sometimes can be altered if the court ask for evidence that the defendant is not in mentally sound. Somehow, the lawyers are kind of tricky and in other way, is the biggest liar of all just to win the case.
• United States
21 Aug 10
It is disturbingly easy (physically) to commit homicide. What makes it painful for an average person to murder is the fact that the victim is a sentient being; he or she is human, and has feelings. However, if a human is insane, obviously, he or she does not think like the norm. If "ill" enough, he or she will have the ability to kill another, without feeling guilt. Killing another human is rather easy; he may not even need a weapon, if the victim is helpless enough. Thus, an unstable being can, within a few seconds, kill another being. The "murderer", in this case, may not be aware of his actions, nor the intent to kill. This fact must be taken into consideration. True, he did take the life of a beloved being, but if he had no intention, why should he be given the full punishment? It's understandable for the family to fight strongly for the lifetime sentence or execution, but would it be fair for the "killer", a human with no control over his actions, to die or spend his life behind bars because of an accident? Instead of killing a helpless man who does not realize that he had erred, the more plausible thing to do would be to teach him why he was wrong, and give him the help that he needs. And of course, with such a lenient law, there will be abusers. There are those who will kill intentionally, and feign insanity just to elude the punishment. Unfortunately, most of the time, we cannot tell whether the sick are really sick.