"The death penalty is not a deterrent, it is murder" Do you agree?
According to Wikipedia, capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the execution of a convicted criminal by the state as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offences. Examples of capital crime includes terrorism, drug trafficking, first degree murder and treason.
Death is the end of life. It is much feared by all. Therefore it is used as a powerful weapon to deter others from committing capital crimes. So the statement is wrong to a large extent in claiming that the death penalty is not a deterrent.
According to dictionary.com, to deter is to try to prevent. I believe that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. This is because we humans make rational decisions. Before we decide our actions, we would process in our mind if the action is a right one and the consequences of the action. Should people know that just by bringing in 15 grams (half an ounce) of heroin, 30 grams of cocaine or 500 grams of cannabis into our country, they would get the death penalty if arrested, chances are they probably would not try to do so.
So what factors would bring us to believe that the death penalty is murder? Well, many people argue that people should not try to be god and should not have the right to decide which human should die because of their wrongdoings. However, I think that this argument is not valid as this seems to be too protective of criminals who have committed capital crimes. We should not forget that these criminals have violated another human being, did not give them any rights in the course of their crime, and therefore their human rights should be taken away as well.
However, the death penalty has always been a controversial issue. As stated in http://www.antideathpenalty.org/reasons.html, “Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 82 inmates have been freed from the death row. That is 1 death row inmate found to be wrongfully convicted for every 7 executed.” With reference to this statistic, we should take into consideration that the juries and police officers are humans after all and they do err in their work. Hence, the death penalty may have loopholes and a person may be wrongly convicted at times. Miscarriage of justice is irreversible and a person’s life will therefore be wrongfully taken away by law. This is one of the stands that the anti death penalty groups have reinstated in their protest against the death penalty. Would not it be better to risk saving a guilty person than to condemn an innocent one?
What I would suggest is that the death penalty should still be accepted. However, the death penalty should only be sentenced if the person is really found guilty of a capital crime. This way, miscarriage of justice would be minimized.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Friday, April 27, 2007
blog task 2
Consider the merits and demerits of censorship and state your reasons why you think it is necessary/unnecessary
Censorship is everywhere. It is used to remove or withhold information from the public. The question is, to what extent is censorship necessary?
The advantages of censorship are conspicuous. Censorship serves to remove taboo topics such as death, violence, horror, sex, politics, race, religion, etc. These topics are sensitive for discussion and may arouse anger should a particular group of people be subjected against. Unnecessary tension may then ensue followed by riots or demonstrations. Therefore to safeguard both public and the national interest, censorship is necessary.
We should also not forget that the audience of the media ranges from a child to the elderly. Censorship can therefore help to remove topics like sex and violence which an average child should not be exposed to. This protects their mind from corrupted information. It can also save parents the trouble of having to answer questions related to sex or the trouble of having to wake up in the night to tend to their child’s nightmare after watching a horror show not meant for their age group.
Also, censorship is necessary especially for Singapore’s multi-racial society.
Many of the elder Singaporeans have yet to forget about the 1964 race riot which was believed to be caused by a rival political party of the People’s action party (PAP), Malaysia’s United Malay National Organization (UMNO). What UMNO did was to rouse the anger of the Malays in Singapore through the Utusan Melayu, a newspaper written for the Malays, by claiming that Malays were ill-treated by the PAP. This triggered a series of riots in Singapore then. With this incident deeply imprinted in the minds of the leaders of Singapore, it is no wonder that censorship is largely exercised to ensure that no negative message is sent to the citizens, in prevention of another large-scale riot.
However, critics have been swift to lash out at the use of censorship. They believe that censorship is not necessary as reality should be shown to us audiences. The truth to every piece of news should be known instead of beating around the bush and avoid releasing the truth. This, they believe, is freedom of expression.
Furthermore, censorship is not useful to a certain extent as there are other sources in which people can refer to to know the truth of a particular matter. This other source can come from the internet which is wildly used by all today. By just doing a simple search, one can gain assess to the different sources of information which they want to acquire. Hence, why should censorship be necessary if it fails to keep the truth from the people?
In my opinion, after examining both sides of the arguments, I believe that censorship is still necessary to a large extent to protect the interest of the nation. The merits of censorship far outweigh the demerits of it. One would rather choose to be kept in the dark rather than to discuss sensitive issues. As the adage goes, ignorance is bliss.
Censorship is everywhere. It is used to remove or withhold information from the public. The question is, to what extent is censorship necessary?
The advantages of censorship are conspicuous. Censorship serves to remove taboo topics such as death, violence, horror, sex, politics, race, religion, etc. These topics are sensitive for discussion and may arouse anger should a particular group of people be subjected against. Unnecessary tension may then ensue followed by riots or demonstrations. Therefore to safeguard both public and the national interest, censorship is necessary.
We should also not forget that the audience of the media ranges from a child to the elderly. Censorship can therefore help to remove topics like sex and violence which an average child should not be exposed to. This protects their mind from corrupted information. It can also save parents the trouble of having to answer questions related to sex or the trouble of having to wake up in the night to tend to their child’s nightmare after watching a horror show not meant for their age group.
Also, censorship is necessary especially for Singapore’s multi-racial society.
Many of the elder Singaporeans have yet to forget about the 1964 race riot which was believed to be caused by a rival political party of the People’s action party (PAP), Malaysia’s United Malay National Organization (UMNO). What UMNO did was to rouse the anger of the Malays in Singapore through the Utusan Melayu, a newspaper written for the Malays, by claiming that Malays were ill-treated by the PAP. This triggered a series of riots in Singapore then. With this incident deeply imprinted in the minds of the leaders of Singapore, it is no wonder that censorship is largely exercised to ensure that no negative message is sent to the citizens, in prevention of another large-scale riot.
However, critics have been swift to lash out at the use of censorship. They believe that censorship is not necessary as reality should be shown to us audiences. The truth to every piece of news should be known instead of beating around the bush and avoid releasing the truth. This, they believe, is freedom of expression.
Furthermore, censorship is not useful to a certain extent as there are other sources in which people can refer to to know the truth of a particular matter. This other source can come from the internet which is wildly used by all today. By just doing a simple search, one can gain assess to the different sources of information which they want to acquire. Hence, why should censorship be necessary if it fails to keep the truth from the people?
In my opinion, after examining both sides of the arguments, I believe that censorship is still necessary to a large extent to protect the interest of the nation. The merits of censorship far outweigh the demerits of it. One would rather choose to be kept in the dark rather than to discuss sensitive issues. As the adage goes, ignorance is bliss.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
blog task 1
TVBS scandal points to credibility problems in Taiwan's media industry
Despite living in the digital age, books and papers are still the order of the day.
Businessmen donned in suits browsing through the papers with a cup of coffee in cafes and commuters reading their books in trains in the early morning are common sights.
So why does the world have a fascination with books, magazines and papers?
They provide people with a quick source of information, whether as a form of relaxation or for work purposes.
The question is, how far do we expect the information to be accurate from these sources and does that matter? The gamut of information ranges from the sensational coverage of Madonna's adoption of an African kid to news about the shutting down of North Korea's nuclear facilities. Obviously, the former appeals if one just want some light reading but the latter is taken more seriously if one is reading to keep abreast of the world's developments.
Video footages showing death threats are usually taken quite seriously by television viewers who naturally demand more about the accuracy of the information. So one is hardly surprised to learn that the Taiwanese public was really upset upon learning that it's trust on the media has been abused when the truth about the journalist shielding the truth of the sensational video source surfaced.
In this highly competitive society, everyone tries to outdo each other. The media industry is no exception. The TVBS's production of this arresting video can be understood to be one method to stay competitive by attracting viewers. Though they had success initially as their rating shoots sky high when the footage was aired, their reputation came crushing down when their deception was uncovered. Is this really what the media industry want?
Therefore, the next question is, how do we keep in check that the media remain responsible to what they report? One way to flex the consumer's muscles is to air any displeasure through, ironically other forms of media. For example, if one feels that the radio station has been making partican remarks, he or she can write to the Straits Times forum.
The problem of the credibility of the media has always been present. One should also not doubt the fact that this problem of credibility will continue to persist as there is no solution to resolve this problem. What one can do however, is to read from different sources to obtain the truth of events or to develop a better perspective of the situation.
Despite living in the digital age, books and papers are still the order of the day.
Businessmen donned in suits browsing through the papers with a cup of coffee in cafes and commuters reading their books in trains in the early morning are common sights.
So why does the world have a fascination with books, magazines and papers?
They provide people with a quick source of information, whether as a form of relaxation or for work purposes.
The question is, how far do we expect the information to be accurate from these sources and does that matter? The gamut of information ranges from the sensational coverage of Madonna's adoption of an African kid to news about the shutting down of North Korea's nuclear facilities. Obviously, the former appeals if one just want some light reading but the latter is taken more seriously if one is reading to keep abreast of the world's developments.
Video footages showing death threats are usually taken quite seriously by television viewers who naturally demand more about the accuracy of the information. So one is hardly surprised to learn that the Taiwanese public was really upset upon learning that it's trust on the media has been abused when the truth about the journalist shielding the truth of the sensational video source surfaced.
In this highly competitive society, everyone tries to outdo each other. The media industry is no exception. The TVBS's production of this arresting video can be understood to be one method to stay competitive by attracting viewers. Though they had success initially as their rating shoots sky high when the footage was aired, their reputation came crushing down when their deception was uncovered. Is this really what the media industry want?
Therefore, the next question is, how do we keep in check that the media remain responsible to what they report? One way to flex the consumer's muscles is to air any displeasure through, ironically other forms of media. For example, if one feels that the radio station has been making partican remarks, he or she can write to the Straits Times forum.
The problem of the credibility of the media has always been present. One should also not doubt the fact that this problem of credibility will continue to persist as there is no solution to resolve this problem. What one can do however, is to read from different sources to obtain the truth of events or to develop a better perspective of the situation.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
not just another story..
Hi guys! I heard this story recently and would like to share it with you guys.
This story makes a sad person happy and a happy person sad..
Therefore, if you are feeling moody now, I hope this story can brighten up your day.
However if you are feeling happy now.. Well, i would not encourage you to carry on reading this..
Well.. Here goes the master of story telling =DDD
One day Solomon decided to humble Benaiah, his most trusted minister. He said to him, "Benaiah, there is a certain ring that I want you to bring to me. I wish to wear it for Sukkot, and I shall give you six months to find it."
"If it exists anywhere on earth, your majesty," replied Benaiah, "I will find it and bring it to you, but what makes the ring so special?"
"It has magic powers," answered the king. "If a happy man looks at it, he becomes sad, and if a sad man looks at it, he becomes happy." Solomon knew that no such ring existed in the world, but he wished to give his minister a little taste of humility.
Spring passed and then summer, and still Benaiah had no idea where he could find the ring. On the night before Sukkot, he decided to take a walk in one of the poorest quarters of Jerusalem. He passed by a merchant who had begun to set out the day's wares on a shabby carpet.
"Have you by any chance heard of a magic ring that makes the happy wearer forget his joy and the broken-hearted wearer forget his sorrows?" asked Benaiah. He watched the grandfather take a plain gold ring from his carpet and engrave something on it. When Benaiah read the words on the ring, his face broke out in a wide smile. That night the entire city welcomed in the holiday of Sukkot with great festivity.
"Well, my friend," said Solomon, "have you found what I sent you after?" All the ministers laughed and Solomon himself smiled. To everyone's surprise, Benaiah held up a small gold ring and declared, "Here it is, your majesty!" As soon as Solomon read the inscription, the smile vanished from his face.
Hey, at this point of time, guess what is the inscription on the ring ok. The answer is below.
The jeweler had written three Hebrew letters on the gold band: "Gam zeh ya'avor' -- "This too shall pass." At that moment Solomon realized that all his wisdom, fabulous wealth and tremendous power were but fleeting things, for one day he would be nothing but dust.
The END...
How's this story? =D
Share it with some of your moody friends that you see ok.
And if you do not understand the story, you can come look for me..
This story makes a sad person happy and a happy person sad..
Therefore, if you are feeling moody now, I hope this story can brighten up your day.
However if you are feeling happy now.. Well, i would not encourage you to carry on reading this..
Well.. Here goes the master of story telling =DDD
One day Solomon decided to humble Benaiah, his most trusted minister. He said to him, "Benaiah, there is a certain ring that I want you to bring to me. I wish to wear it for Sukkot, and I shall give you six months to find it."
"If it exists anywhere on earth, your majesty," replied Benaiah, "I will find it and bring it to you, but what makes the ring so special?"
"It has magic powers," answered the king. "If a happy man looks at it, he becomes sad, and if a sad man looks at it, he becomes happy." Solomon knew that no such ring existed in the world, but he wished to give his minister a little taste of humility.
Spring passed and then summer, and still Benaiah had no idea where he could find the ring. On the night before Sukkot, he decided to take a walk in one of the poorest quarters of Jerusalem. He passed by a merchant who had begun to set out the day's wares on a shabby carpet.
"Have you by any chance heard of a magic ring that makes the happy wearer forget his joy and the broken-hearted wearer forget his sorrows?" asked Benaiah. He watched the grandfather take a plain gold ring from his carpet and engrave something on it. When Benaiah read the words on the ring, his face broke out in a wide smile. That night the entire city welcomed in the holiday of Sukkot with great festivity.
"Well, my friend," said Solomon, "have you found what I sent you after?" All the ministers laughed and Solomon himself smiled. To everyone's surprise, Benaiah held up a small gold ring and declared, "Here it is, your majesty!" As soon as Solomon read the inscription, the smile vanished from his face.
Hey, at this point of time, guess what is the inscription on the ring ok. The answer is below.
The jeweler had written three Hebrew letters on the gold band: "Gam zeh ya'avor' -- "This too shall pass." At that moment Solomon realized that all his wisdom, fabulous wealth and tremendous power were but fleeting things, for one day he would be nothing but dust.
The END...
How's this story? =D
Share it with some of your moody friends that you see ok.
And if you do not understand the story, you can come look for me..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)