'Military Death Penalty Ban' · Background Information Proposal title: 'Military Death Penalty Ban' Author: Qvait To outlaw the death penalty in all circumstances by prohibiting the use of the death penalty in situations that GA#535 "Death Penalty Ban" did not cover. Purpose: Links Vote . For . · The Office's Analysis After years of debate and small steps, the World Assembly has recently finally taken a clear stance against the death penalty by passing , which bans the application of capital punishment in all cases except under military law in wartime. After a first failed attempt at also outlawing executions under these circumstances, GAR#535 "Death Penalty Ban" , the at-vote resolution "Military Death Penalty Ban" now fixes the flaws that had its spiritual predecessor voted down. It convincingly presents its arguments to end the death penalty under military law too in a well-written manner, seeking to finish what member nations have begun by passing GAR#535 ‒ abolishing the inherently unjust and cruel capital punishment once and for all. Thus, OWL recommends a vote FOR the at-vote resolution, "Military Death Penalty Ban". "Protecting Sapient Life" Supplementary Opinions · For From TSP Citizens is a citizen of Anatasha the South Pacific. wrote: Anatasha This bill should be passed. The death penalty is an ineffective way to deter violent crimes from happening in the society and is an unfair and unjust practice. When people do crimes, I do believe that they should face consequences but I strongly believe that death penalty is not the way to go and we should instead get rid of this barbaric practice of murdering people and allow better and fairer penalties to be put in place. From the World is a GenSec (General Assembly Secretariat) member who posted this on the NS forum discussion thread: Separatist Peoples wrote: Separatist Peoples Given that the threat of death is one of the single strongest coercion methods, and given that states are free to evade the heavy regulations on that tool by abusing their conscription powers, no. They do not. They are free to subject their citizens to an inherently unjust punishment. is a GA author and a citizen of Castle Federation the North Pacific. They posted this on the discussion thread on TNP's forums: wrote: Castle Federation I recognize the reasoning from the Hammurabi order of legal thought, but I like to think that law after the rise of Christianity supersedes that. A human who has committed grave evil acts is not really punished when their life is snuffed out. Sure there may be fear or an instant of pain but that is momentary. A life of reflection on what they did is a lot more than just a moment of receiving what one gave. I think it is a fuller justice for one and also a greater response in the face of evil. Greater is gained still if the opportunity for a life of repentance is given to an evil actor. An eye for an eye is such a materialistic reading of the situation, but we humans are more than just an eye, or a heart, or just a biological system and judicial remedies should reflect that. is the Delegate of McMasterdonia the North Pacific. They posted this on the discussion thread on TNP's forums: wrote: McMasterdonia ... The death penalty is not a deterrent and it is not rehabilitative. As if someone who commits war crimes or genocide isnt aware that they could be killed or executed at any moment. Executing such a person will also not bring the victims the closure that they need either. The death penalty does not achieve its stated aims. Against From TSP Citizens is a citizen of US of-A the South Pacific. wrote: US of-A This is an atrocity. This bill shouldn't be passed. If anything, the original Death Penalty Ban resolution should be repealed, not added on to. And this is not "judicial murder", as Qvait called it. People make decisions, and they have to face the consequences. It also acts as a deterrent. People say we should just give criminals life in prison. Isn't that more torturous? Instead of giving them a quick, clean death, they instead are forced into captivity for the rest of their natural lives, stuck there. From the World is a citizen of the North Pacific. They posted this on the official discussion thread on TNP's forums: The Mintorian Lands wrote: The Mintorian Lands There is absolutely nothing that anyone can say that will convince me to vote for this proposal should it ever reach quorum. When someone commits genocide or other crimes against humanity, particularly on a massive scale, they have already crossed a line and are beyond the point of redemption. How can such a criminal be forgiven for having killed tens of thousands of innocent lives and brought suffering to many more? Why sentence such a criminal to life imprisonment when they have snuffed out the lives of their victims, of which there are many? I am not convinced that it will be a satisfactory punishment for such crimes. Just as they have deprived their victims their right to live, they should not be allowed to live out their lives, for they have forfeited that right.