u/sadc0wb0y69

▲ 2 r/LNAT

Please mark my essay (first attempt at writing an LNAT essay)

Should the death penalty be reintroduced for those convicted of serious criminal offences?

For centuries, the death penalty was considered a just punishment for serious crimes such as murder. In theory, the death penalty is a fair and justifiable punishment for murder. The victim had their life taken from them, so the murderer losing their life in exchange should be a fair and balanced consequence. Many would argue that allowing a murderer to live out their life in prison on the tax-payers’ dime is a miscarriage of justice and a waste of resources. This lens of the issue, however, ignores the practical and ethical realities of the legal process. This essay will argue that the death penalty should not be reintroduced – not because of nebulous ideals of justice– but because of serious ethical implications and practical inefficiencies.In cases of murder, the perpetrator must face some consequence, usually imprisonment. This, of course, incurs costs to the state and ergo the taxpayer, but simply executing the murderer would not prevent these costs. This is because, in the modern day, a perpetrator is not simply executed. There is a long and involved legal process which must be carried out to ensure that the correct person is convicted of the crime, and to give the accused the opportunity to defend themself. During this, the state incurs costs related to the prosecution, the defense, and the imprisonment of the accused. Reintroducing the death penalty as a possible sentence would not reduce any of these costs, but instead increase them. In several states across the United States, the death penalty is still in practice. Due to the severity of the sentence of death, cases which have this as a possible outcome drag on for years and sometimes decades. If the perpetrator was instead sentenced to imprisonment, the state would save years worth of prosecution and defense costs. Not only does the death penalty not work as a cost-saving measure, it also ends the lives of innocent people. No matter the rigour or fairness of an investigation and trial process, there is room for human error or corruption. There have been several cases in the United States in which a man on death row, facing imminent death, is suddenly exonerated by new evidence. There have, unfortunately, also been cases in which an inmate who has been executed is later exonerated. Though being imprisoned for a crime one didn’t commit is a horrible prospect, being executed for a crime one didn’t commit is much worse. The possibility that an innocent person could be put to death should preclude the reintroduction of the death penalty on moral grounds.Though the death penalty could more completely satisfy some people’s sense of justice, the costs both financial and ethical outweigh the benefits.

reddit.com
u/sadc0wb0y69 — 4 days ago
▲ 0 r/GlasgowUni+1 crossposts

Would I be eligible for home fee status after switching from a work visa to a spouse visa?

I've lived in the UK for three years and am married to a UK citizen. I plan to switch to a spouse visa soon, but am wondering how that might affect my uni fee status. Part of the criteria on the UoG website is "You have a ‘leave to enter’ or ‘leave to remain’ UK visa (except any UK study or visitor visa) whose leave commenced no later than 1 August 2023 and has not expired OR you have a claim for asylum". Does this mean that the visa I'm on when I apply must have been issued at least three years ago, or that I must have had leave to enter / leave to remain for at least three year on any visa? Any advice is much appreciated.

reddit.com
u/sadc0wb0y69 — 12 days ago