Kay 發問時間: 社會與文化語言 · 1 0 年前

能請英文高手幫我翻譯嗎~贈10點

我是選擇不贊成廢除的。

第一,在所謂民主國家中,能夠被判重刑是相當不容易的一件事,

就算一審有罪,也還能不斷上訴,上訴時間更是長達十年以上,在這種情況下,

還被判死刑的,通常都是罪有應得。

* 第二,重大犯罪者再犯的機率相當高,如果我們不斷主張犯人的人權,

那身為有可能成為下一個受害者的平民百姓們,我們的權利在哪裡?

* 第三,有人主張,如果判罪犯重刑或死刑,那他會為了想逃避追緝,

而搶先殺害被害者,以便湮滅證據,所以減刑以及廢除死刑是在保護受害者。

而且我們無法證明,判死刑對減輕犯罪率有幫助。我認為這是不合邏輯的詭辯。台灣目前已判死刑,等待執行的死刑犯,都是已殺死被害人的。

也就是說,如果你不殺人,要被判死刑,幾乎不可能。

假設犯人會為了躲避死刑而殺死受害人,根本就是本末倒置,毫無根據的說法。再者,許多有死刑的國家,治安都比沒死刑的國家好。新加坡甚至有鞭刑,他的治安就很好。

台灣戒嚴時期的時候,判刑最重,結果治安最好。

做壞事會被關?殺了人很可能會被判死刑嗎?

如果你知道了還犯,那證明一般的教育對你根本沒有用,只能用更深刻的方式來讓你知道了。

而且,如果想當好人,何必等到被判死刑才當,你想改過向善,為甚麼不在殺人前改過?

你不給受害者機會,為甚麼我們要給你機會?你不跟受害者講人權,

為甚麼我們要跟你講人權?你既然不認為一個人的生存權很重要,

那我們拿走『它』又有什麼關係?

是的,大家都會犯錯,但是很少人會犯這麼大的錯。

你以為這是砍倒櫻桃樹,還是狼來了的這種錯嗎?你真的不知道殺人很嚴重嗎?你不要騙我了,還是砍掉重練比較快吧。

2 個解答

評分
  • 蜂欣
    Lv 6
    1 0 年前
    最佳解答

    I choose not in favor of repeal.

     First, the so-called democratic countries, can be convicted of a very difficult thing,

    Even if found guilty of first instance, it can continue to appeal, the appeal time is up to more than a decade, in this case,

    Also sentenced to death, usually deserved.

    * Second, the major offender recidivism rate is extremely high, if we continue to advocate the human rights of prisoners,

    As it may become the next victim of the civilian population who, where our rights?

    * Third, it was argued that if the sentence or the death penalty felony offender, he will be in order to avoid hunting,

    The first to kill the victim in order to destroy evidence, it abolished the death penalty was commuted and the protection of victims.

    And we can not prove that the death penalty on crime rates have helped to alleviate. I think it is illogical to sophistry. Taiwan currently has the death penalty, death row awaiting execution, are victims has been killed.

    That is, if you do not murder, sentenced to death, almost impossible.

     assume prisoners to escape the death penalty will kill the victim, doing is baseless statement. Furthermore, many have the death penalty, no death penalty law and order than good. Singapore and even flogging, his law and order on the good.

    Taiwan's martial law era, when the heaviest sentence, order the best results.

     doing bad things would be locked? Killing people is likely to be sentenced to death for it?

    If you know you still committed, that the general education that you do not, can only be more profound way to let you know.

    2010-04-15 01:39:07 補充:

    And, if want good people, why wait until the death penalty only if, you want to start a new life, why not turn over before the murder?

    You do not give victims the opportunity, why do we give you the opportunity? You do not speak with the victims of human rights,

    2010-04-15 01:39:19 補充:

    Why do we have to tell you the Human Rights? Since you do not think a person's right to life is important

    Then we took it 』『 what relationship?

    參考資料: 自己, 自己, 自己
  • 1 0 年前

    I am the choice did not approve that abolishes

    First, in the so-called democratic country, can 夠 sentence the severe sentence is quite not an easy matter, even if the first trial is guilty, can also appeal unceasingly, the appeal time is above ten years, in this case, but is also sentenced the death penalty, usually is the punishment is deserved.

    Second, the significant criminal violates again the probability is quite high, if we advocated unceasingly criminal's human rights, that body to have the possibility to become the next victim the common people, our right in where?

    Third, some people advocated, if sentences the criminal severe sentence or the death penalty, then he for will want to evade seizes, but will forestall to kill the injured party, with the aim of annihilating the evidence, will therefore commute a sentence as well as abolishes the death penalty is protecting the victim.

    Moreover we are unable to prove that sentences death penalty to reduce the crime rate to have the help. I thought that this is the illogical paradox. Taiwan present has sentenced the death penalty, waited for execution the facing the death penalty, those, has killed the victim.

    That is, if you do not kill people, must sentence the death penalty, is nearly impossible.

    The supposition criminal to avoid the death penalty to kill the victim, will be radically puts the cart before the horse, absolutely groundless view. Furthermore, many have death penalty's country, the public security has not been better than death penalty's country. Singapore even has the whip punishment, his public security is very good. Taiwan martial law time time, the sentence is heaviest, finally the public security is best.

還有問題?馬上發問,尋求解答。