(hypothetical thought) should we use death row inmates for "free" labour instead?

[runny yolk]

Criminals should not be allowed to roam the streets. If you wanna enslave them, i can't think of any safe job that they can do within an enclosed monitored area. I don't trust the scums of society to build buildings or even be a factory worker where they can sabotage the products.

 

[elmohootbigbird]

Idk how to further explain this. Like prison but with unpaid labour or maybe 24/7 tracking,or chained? Dead men can't work after all. Kept alive even doing the shittiest jobs is better than dead right? Imagine a workforce of death row convicts cleaning your hawkers. The money saved could be used to help the needy elderly from doing such backbreaking work

people with no hope and nothing to lose are very dangerous.

 

[zueinder]

Summary execution Assad style or forced free labour

Looks like edmw is short for inability to read. Assad allow appeal? Many times execution getting delayed due to lame reasons like shortage of poison for execution or even just incapable system.

 

[skylink67]

Those inmates on death row are just waiting for their execution. Slavery and other inhumane treatment of prisoners should not be allowed.

Just because they are scum of society doesn't mean I want the gahmen to change the law to allow torture and forced slavery on prisoners.

 

[johnsonheng]

Just saw the news in Reddit today that the woodlands double murder guy was finally hung.

There was one guy complaining why he was kept in a pending situation for years,being a waste of tax payers money for so long which I agree with

It got me thinking, if it is absolutely certain that the person is guilty of the crime and will no doubt be sentenced to death*, why not use them for free labour instead- especially with the declining birthrate and the need to eventually wane off our dependence on (especially cheap) foreign labour, this would seem like a pretty good option
*Or maybe even all criminals*

Of course that doesn't mean we treat them inhumanely like slaves of the 1700s and starve,beat or whip them. What I am thinking of is bare minimum sustenance and daily needs to just keep them alive

Another way to to put or imagine this, for example to say , would be to make a death row inmates be a toilet cleaner, road sweeper, dishwasher or one of the other low(er) level jobs just like a normal civilian would, except he doesn't get paid a single cent ever. Take the money saved from his salary and invest it elsewhere or help the needy

The only draw back I could think off would be backlash from human rights activists groups and other nations accusing as of "modern slavery"

china did that when they cannot find enough workers for iphone production.

 

[WarMage87]

Report: Critical Analysis of Using Death Row Inmates for Unpaid Labour

Optimal Answer:

Utilising death row inmates for unpaid labour is ethically indefensible, practically unviable, and economically unsound.

• Fundamental Ethical Breach: Such a practice constitutes forced labour, violating international norms and human dignity, regardless of the inmates' crimes.
• Insurmountable Security Risks: Managing high-risk inmates with no incentive for compliance outside secure confinement poses extreme dangers to the public and staff, incurring prohibitive costs.
• Economic Fallacy: The small number of death row inmates and the high costs of security and supervision negate any potential savings from unpaid labour; capital punishment processes are already significantly more expensive than life imprisonment.
• Contradicts International Standards: The proposal directly contravenes ILO conventions against forced labour and UN standards (Nelson Mandela Rules) for humane prison conditions and voluntary, remunerated work aimed at rehabilitation.
  Confidence: 95%

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
2. Risk-First Evaluation: Security, Safety, and Reputational Hazards
3. Ethical Analysis (Applying Frameworks)
   3.1. Deontological Perspective: Violation of Rights and Dignity
   3.2. Utilitarian Perspective: Negative Consequences Outweigh Benefits
4. Practical and Economic Feasibility (Applying Cost-Benefit Analysis)
   4.1. Prohibitive Costs and Logistical Barriers
   4.2. Lack of Motivation and Productivity
   4.3. Negligible Scale
5. Legal and International Standards
   5.1. International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions
   5.2. UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules)
6. Context: Existing Prison Labour Programmes
7. Conclusion

1. Introduction

The hypothetical proposal raised in the HardwareZone forum – using death row inmates in Singapore for unpaid labour – prompts critical examination. The suggestion posits potential economic benefits, such as saving taxpayer money and addressing labour shortages (#1, #38). This report critically analyses the proposal's feasibility and ethics, drawing upon the forum discussion, established ethical frameworks, international legal standards, and external evidence regarding prison labour and capital punishment.

2. Risk-First Evaluation: Security, Safety, and Reputational Hazards

Presenting risks first aligns with prudent assessment (Protocol 6.4). The proposal carries severe and multifaceted risks:

• Extreme Security Risks: As highlighted extensively in the forum (#2, #11, #55, #60, #62, #64, #95, #119, #122), death row inmates, often convicted of violent crimes and facing execution, represent a maximum-security population. They possess minimal incentive for compliance and maximum incentive to escape or inflict harm, having "nothing to lose." Deploying them for labour, especially outside controlled prison environments, would necessitate extraordinary, likely cost-prohibitive, security measures (#54, #85, #117, #120).
• Risk of Violence and Sabotage: The lack of motivation and inherent desperation could easily translate into violence against guards, the public (if working outside), or fellow inmates, as well as sabotage of work processes or equipment (#55, #60, #62, #121). The Pulau Senang prison riots of 1963 in Singapore serve as a stark historical precedent (#5, #6, #8, #9, #10). This experiment in rehabilitating gang members through labour on an island settlement ended violently, with inmates rioting, killing the superintendent and three staff, and destroying the facility (#5, #6). This underscores the volatility inherent in managing high-risk prison populations in work settings, even those intended to be rehabilitative.
• Ethical and Reputational Risks: Implementing such a policy would constitute forced labour, violating fundamental human rights and international law (#12, #13, #15). This would inevitably attract severe condemnation from international human rights organisations and potentially damage Singapore's international standing (#1, #35), aligning with concerns about "modern slavery" raised in the forum (#1, #39, #41).
• Risk of Creating Perverse Incentives: As noted in the forum (#91, #93, #98) and seen in debates surrounding private prisons globally, creating economic value from imprisonment can generate perverse incentives to increase incarceration rates or impose harsher sentences for labour purposes.

3. Ethical Analysis (Applying Frameworks)

Applying ethical frameworks explicitly clarifies the moral dimensions (Framework Application Guideline & Transparency Preference):

3.1. Deontological Perspective: Violation of Rights and Dignity

• Deontology judges actions based on adherence to duties and rights. From this standpoint, the proposal is unethical.
• Forced labour is inherently wrong, violating the fundamental right to autonomy and self-determination (ILO, 1930; 1957). It treats individuals merely as means to an economic end, disregarding their inherent dignity (#4, #12).
• Even for those convicted of heinous crimes, basic human rights and dignity persist. International standards, like the UN Nelson Mandela Rules (2015), mandate treating all prisoners with respect and prohibiting torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (#4, #19, #36), which forced, unpaid labour arguably constitutes.
• The forum comments questioning the "rights" to impose such labour (#30) and highlighting inhumane aspects align with this perspective.

3.2. Utilitarian Perspective: Negative Consequences Outweigh Benefits

• Utilitarianism assesses actions based on maximizing overall well-being or "utility". While the stated intent might be societal benefit (cost savings, labour provision - #1, #38), the likely consequences render the proposal net negative.
• High Costs: Security, supervision, and potential legal challenges would likely vastly outweigh any economic gains from the labour of a small number of inmates (#18, #21, #29, #32, #34). Studies consistently show the death penalty process itself is far more expensive than life imprisonment due to heightened legal processes and security (#18, #21, #29, #32, #34). Adding a complex, high-risk labour component would exacerbate these costs.
• Significant Harms: The risks of violence, escape, sabotage, international condemnation, and the potential for abuse represent substantial negative utility.
• Minimal Benefits: The small death row population (reportedly ~50 in Singapore - #20, #23, #26, #33) means negligible impact on labour markets or overall state finances (#27, #31, #117, #120).
• Therefore, applying a Utilitarian framework leads to rejection of the proposal due to the high probability of severe negative outcomes overwhelming minimal potential gains.

 

[WarMage87]

4. Practical and Economic Feasibility (Applying Cost-Benefit Analysis)

A formal Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) framework reinforces the utilitarian conclusion:

4.1. Prohibitive Costs and Logistical Barriers

• Security: As repeatedly stressed, the cost of safely managing death row inmates in work settings would be exceptionally high (#18, #21). Standard maximum-security protocols are already expensive; adding work deployment increases complexity and cost significantly.
• Supervision: Requires highly trained staff in sufficient numbers, adding to personnel costs.
• Infrastructure: Potential need for specialised, secure work facilities.
• Legal & Administrative: Costs associated with establishing, managing, and defending such a programme against inevitable legal and ethical challenges.

4.2. Lack of Motivation and Productivity

• Inmates facing execution have no positive incentives (pay, reduced sentence, skills for future employment) to work diligently or safely (#51, #62, #67, #17). Fear of immediate punishment for refusal might induce minimal compliance, but not productive or quality work. Coercion is ethically unacceptable and often counterproductive.
• Existing prison labour often faces challenges with skill levels and motivation; these would be magnified exponentially with death row inmates (#39, #40).

4.3. Negligible Scale

• With an estimated death row population of around 50 in Singapore (#20, #23, #26, #33), the total potential labour output is minimal and cannot realistically address national labour shortages or generate significant economic value (#27, #31, #117, #120).

Conclusion of CBA: The quantifiable costs (security, supervision) and unquantifiable risks (violence, escape, reputational damage) vastly outweigh the negligible potential economic benefits. The proposal is economically irrational.

5. Legal and International Standards

The proposal starkly conflicts with established international norms:

5.1. International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions

• The ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) defines forced labour as "all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily" (#7, #15, #17, #24). Unpaid labour extracted from death row inmates clearly falls under this definition.
• While Convention 29 allows for compulsory prison labour under certain conditions (convicted in a court of law, work carried out under public authority supervision, prisoner not hired out to private entities), it aims to suppress forced labour. The Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) further prohibits forced labour for specific purposes like political coercion or economic development (#13, #22, #35).
• Critically, ILO interpretations emphasise that if prisoners work for private entities, it must be voluntary, with conditions approximating free labour (#2, #3, #13, #14). The spirit of these conventions aims to prevent exploitation, even within the prison system. Forcing unpaid labour contradicts this spirit entirely.

5.2. UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules)

• These rules (revised 2015) set the benchmark for humane prison management (#4, #19, #31, #36, #38).
• Rule 4 emphasizes rehabilitation and reintegration as primary goals of imprisonment (#19). Forced, punitive labour is contrary to this objective.
• The Rules stress that prison conditions should minimize suffering (#19) and prohibit cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (#4, #19).
• Regarding prison work specifically, Rule 97 states it should not be of an afflictive nature (#12). While not explicitly mandating voluntariness for all prison work, the overall framework emphasizes dignity, rehabilitation, and fair treatment, including equitable remuneration (Rule 103) (#19). Forcing unpaid labour, especially on those facing execution, is incompatible with these principles. Death row inmates are often excluded from standard prison work or education programs due to security constraints (#42, #43).

6. Context: Existing Prison Labour Programmes

It is important to distinguish the proposal from existing, regulated prison work initiatives. In Singapore, Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG), formerly SCORE, manages work and training programmes for inmates (#11, #16, #25, #27, #28).

• Goal: Enhance employability and aid reintegration, reducing recidivism (#11, #25, #27, #28).
• Nature: Involves skills training and work (often for partner companies) within prison industries, aiming for market relevance (#11, #25, #27). Inmates typically receive a small allowance.
• Participants: Generally not death row inmates, but rather those serving sentences with a prospect of release.
  These established programmes operate under a rehabilitative framework, starkly contrasting with the punitive, exploitative nature of the unpaid forced labour proposal for death row inmates.

7. Conclusion

The proposition to use death row inmates for unpaid labour, while perhaps superficially appealing from a purely retributive or narrowly economic standpoint to some, collapses under critical scrutiny. It is fraught with unacceptable security risks, demonstrably impractical and economically unsound, and stands in direct violation of fundamental ethical principles and international legal standards governing forced labour and humane treatment. The historical precedent of the Pulau Senang riots serves as a potent warning against such approaches. Existing rehabilitative prison work programmes operate under entirely different principles and objectives. Therefore, the proposal is not a viable or ethically justifiable policy option.

 

[WarMage87]

References

(Note: Full APA 7th formatting requires specific details like DOIs or URLs which are not always available from search snippets. Entries below follow the general format based on provided information.)

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). (2022, June 15). Captive Labor: Exploitation of Incarcerated Workers. ACLU. #39

Amnesty International. (n.d.). Executions Around the World. Death Penalty Information Center. #33

Amnesty International. (2009, January 16). Singapore: Executions since December defy global trend. Amnesty International. #37

Brunero, D. M. (Cited in). (2023, July 14). 'Riot Island': The brutal arc of Singapore's prison experiment. Southeast Asia Globe. #8

Death Penalty Information Center. (n.d.). Cited in Death Penalty. National Association of Social Workers. #45

Death Penalty Information Center. (n.d.). Cited in 10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong. Human Rights Careers. #43

Equal Justice USA. (n.d.). Wasteful & Inefficient. Equal Justice USA. #21

Gray, T. S. J. (2023, January 28). Singapore's prison without walls made the world sit up in 1960s. How did it fall apart? CNA. #9

Human Rights Careers. (n.d.). 10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong. Human Rights Careers. #43

Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research (ICPR). (2023, November 9). Rights and wrongs of prison labour laws explored in new ICPR briefing. Birkbeck University of London. #3

International Labour Organization (ILO). (1930). Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). ILO. #7, #15, #17, #24

International Labour Organization (ILO). (1957). Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). ILO. #15, #22, #35

International Labour Organization (ILO). (n.d.). Combating forced labour. ILO. #13

Loyola University of Los Angeles Law Review. (1989). Capital Punishment or Life Imprisonment—Some Cost Considerations. Loyola University of Los Angeles Law Review, 23(1), 45-58. #29, #32

Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. (n.d.). Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our Doom? Santa Clara University. #41

National Archives of Singapore. (n.d.). Pulau Senang - Singapore. Singapore Infopedia. #5

National Archives of Singapore. (n.d.). Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises - Agency Details. Government Records. #16

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (n.d.). Death Penalty. NASW. #45

Ohioans to Stop Executions. (n.d.). Dozens of comprehensive studies have been done about the cost of the death penalty. OTSE. #34

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2016). Short Guide to the Nelson Mandela Rules. PRI. #31

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2020, February 23). UN Nelson Mandela Rules. PRI. #36

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2024, April 11). Input to the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery... OHCHR. #12

Public Governance International. (n.d.). The Story of the Singapore Prison Service: From Custodians of Prisoners to Captains of Life. PGI. #11

Reddit. (2023, December 21). Ethics of human experimentation on death row inmates. Reddit. #30

Singapore Prison Service (SPS) & Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG). (2024, February 14). SPS and YRSG Annual Statistics Release for 2023. SPS. #28

Singapore Prison Service (SPS). (n.d.). Cited in The Transformation of Yellow Ribbon Singapore. #25

The Advocates for Human Rights. (2020). SINGAPORE Stakeholder Report for the United Nations Universal Periodic Review. OHCHR. #23

United Nations (UN). (2015). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). UNODC. #19, #38

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2019, July 18). The Nelson Mandela Rules: Protecting the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty. OHCHR. #4

University College London (UCL). (2023). Labouring behind bars: assessing international law on working prisoners. UCL. #2

Various Authors. (n.d.). Pulau Senang prison riots. Wikipedia. #6

PS

The stark contrast between the rehabilitative aims of existing prison work programmes (like those run by YRSG) and the purely punitive and exploitative nature of the proposal underscores the ethical chasm. Focusing solely on extracting "free labour" ignores the complex realities of managing high-risk individuals and the broader societal commitment to human rights, even for those who have committed terrible crimes.

Footnotes

1. Pulau Senang Riots (1963): This event (#5, #6, #8, #9, #10) is a crucial local historical data point demonstrating the failure of a specific prison labour experiment involving high-risk individuals (gang members detained without trial) in Singapore, highlighting the security risks discussed.
2. Cost of Death Penalty: Multiple studies (#18, #21, #29, #32, #34), primarily from the US context due to available data, consistently show capital cases are significantly more expensive than life imprisonment cases, contradicting the "cost-saving" argument often used by proponents or raised in the forum (#1, #45). Costs include extended trials, mandatory appeals, and heightened security on death row.
3. International Labour Standards: ILO Conventions 29 and 105 (#7, #13, #15, #17, #22, #24, #35) form the bedrock of international law against forced labour. While nuanced regarding prison labour for public authorities, the core principle is voluntariness, especially concerning work for private benefit.
4. Nelson Mandela Rules: These UN rules (#4, #12, #19, #31, #36, #38) represent the global consensus on minimum standards for humane prison treatment, including aspects related to work, dignity, and rehabilitation.
5. Death Row Numbers: Estimates for Singapore's death row population hover around 50 (#20, #23, #26, #33), reinforcing the argument about the negligible scale of any potential labour force.

Optional Enhancement

To deepen this analysis, further investigation could focus on:

1. Detailed operational procedures and costs of Singapore's maximum-security prison management.
2. Specific legal precedents or attorney-general opinions in Singapore regarding the interpretation of ILO conventions on prison labour.
3. Comparative studies on the psychological impact of forced labour specifically on death row populations versus other inmate groups.
   Please indicate if you wish to explore these specific areas further.

 

[Orphan]

Just saw the news in Reddit today that the woodlands double murder guy was finally hung.

There was one guy complaining why he was kept in a pending situation for years,being a waste of tax payers money for so long which I agree with

It got me thinking, if it is absolutely certain that the person is guilty of the crime and will no doubt be sentenced to death*, why not use them for free labour instead- especially with the declining birthrate and the need to eventually wane off our dependence on (especially cheap) foreign labour, this would seem like a pretty good option
*Or maybe even all criminals*

Of course that doesn't mean we treat them inhumanely like slaves of the 1700s and starve,beat or whip them. What I am thinking of is bare minimum sustenance and daily needs to just keep them alive

Another way to to put or imagine this, for example to say , would be to make a death row inmates be a toilet cleaner, road sweeper, dishwasher or one of the other low(er) level jobs just like a normal civilian would, except he doesn't get paid a single cent ever. Take the money saved from his salary and invest it elsewhere or help the needy

The only draw back I could think off would be backlash from human rights activists groups and other nations accusing as of "modern slavery"

Better yet, force them into free labour THEN harvest their organs after death

Let's continue 1 step further and consider how a totally dispassionate society can wring the most out of these murderers. They will automatically have their bodies be donated for science, no way to opt out.

Prior to execution, tie down to surgery table. Have neurosurgeons cut open the skull and insert electrodes in the brain and do experiments to learn more about the human brain while the criminal is still alive.

After their execution, their cadavers automatically donated to medical schools for med students to practice their dissection skills. Regardless of religion.

Drain all the blood for the bloodbank.

After cutting up the skin and flesh of the dessicated corpse, practise how to extract the individual organs. Healthy organs donate.

Once organs extracted, practice amputation skills through the bones with powered and hand saws.

Then next batch of students practice how to reattach/stitch the bones/appendages/flesh/skin back together. The reassembled Frankenstein body can then be released to their families for rites/burial/cremation.

Take pictures of each step of the process. Everyday have a section in the newspapers with all these pictures to thank them. We help them atone a little for their crimes.

See will reduce crime rates or not.

Should also see a huge drop in immigrants, esp the more shady ones.

Just a though experiment as it is unlikely to happen. Most people will intrinsically feel that it's somehow wrong to desecrate a dead body, and the backlash will be quite strong. Which is why countries have stopped doing this.

 

[thetortiserunner]

References

(Note: Full APA 7th formatting requires specific details like DOIs or URLs which are not always available from search snippets. Entries below follow the general format based on provided information.)

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). (2022, June 15). Captive Labor: Exploitation of Incarcerated Workers. ACLU. #39

Amnesty International. (n.d.). Executions Around the World. Death Penalty Information Center. #33

Amnesty International. (2009, January 16). Singapore: Executions since December defy global trend. Amnesty International. #37

Brunero, D. M. (Cited in). (2023, July 14). 'Riot Island': The brutal arc of Singapore's prison experiment. Southeast Asia Globe. #8

Death Penalty Information Center. (n.d.). Cited in Death Penalty. National Association of Social Workers. #45

Death Penalty Information Center. (n.d.). Cited in 10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong. Human Rights Careers. #43

Equal Justice USA. (n.d.). Wasteful & Inefficient. Equal Justice USA. #21

Gray, T. S. J. (2023, January 28). Singapore's prison without walls made the world sit up in 1960s. How did it fall apart? CNA. #9

Human Rights Careers. (n.d.). 10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong. Human Rights Careers. #43

Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research (ICPR). (2023, November 9). Rights and wrongs of prison labour laws explored in new ICPR briefing. Birkbeck University of London. #3

International Labour Organization (ILO). (1930). Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29). ILO. #7, #15, #17, #24

International Labour Organization (ILO). (1957). Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). ILO. #15, #22, #35

International Labour Organization (ILO). (n.d.). Combating forced labour. ILO. #13

Loyola University of Los Angeles Law Review. (1989). Capital Punishment or Life Imprisonment—Some Cost Considerations. Loyola University of Los Angeles Law Review, 23(1), 45-58. #29, #32

Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. (n.d.). Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our Doom? Santa Clara University. #41

National Archives of Singapore. (n.d.). Pulau Senang - Singapore. Singapore Infopedia. #5

National Archives of Singapore. (n.d.). Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises - Agency Details. Government Records. #16

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (n.d.). Death Penalty. NASW. #45

Ohioans to Stop Executions. (n.d.). Dozens of comprehensive studies have been done about the cost of the death penalty. OTSE. #34

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2016). Short Guide to the Nelson Mandela Rules. PRI. #31

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2020, February 23). UN Nelson Mandela Rules. PRI. #36

Penal Reform International (PRI). (2024, April 11). Input to the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery... OHCHR. #12

Public Governance International. (n.d.). The Story of the Singapore Prison Service: From Custodians of Prisoners to Captains of Life. PGI. #11

Reddit. (2023, December 21). Ethics of human experimentation on death row inmates. Reddit. #30

Singapore Prison Service (SPS) & Yellow Ribbon Singapore (YRSG). (2024, February 14). SPS and YRSG Annual Statistics Release for 2023. SPS. #28

Singapore Prison Service (SPS). (n.d.). Cited in The Transformation of Yellow Ribbon Singapore. #25

The Advocates for Human Rights. (2020). SINGAPORE Stakeholder Report for the United Nations Universal Periodic Review. OHCHR. #23

United Nations (UN). (2015). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). UNODC. #19, #38

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2019, July 18). The Nelson Mandela Rules: Protecting the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty. OHCHR. #4

University College London (UCL). (2023). Labouring behind bars: assessing international law on working prisoners. UCL. #2

Various Authors. (n.d.). Pulau Senang prison riots. Wikipedia. #6

PS

The stark contrast between the rehabilitative aims of existing prison work programmes (like those run by YRSG) and the purely punitive and exploitative nature of the proposal underscores the ethical chasm. Focusing solely on extracting "free labour" ignores the complex realities of managing high-risk individuals and the broader societal commitment to human rights, even for those who have committed terrible crimes.

Footnotes

1. Pulau Senang Riots (1963): This event (#5, #6, #8, #9, #10) is a crucial local historical data point demonstrating the failure of a specific prison labour experiment involving high-risk individuals (gang members detained without trial) in Singapore, highlighting the security risks discussed.
2. Cost of Death Penalty: Multiple studies (#18, #21, #29, #32, #34), primarily from the US context due to available data, consistently show capital cases are significantly more expensive than life imprisonment cases, contradicting the "cost-saving" argument often used by proponents or raised in the forum (#1, #45). Costs include extended trials, mandatory appeals, and heightened security on death row.
3. International Labour Standards: ILO Conventions 29 and 105 (#7, #13, #15, #17, #22, #24, #35) form the bedrock of international law against forced labour. While nuanced regarding prison labour for public authorities, the core principle is voluntariness, especially concerning work for private benefit.
4. Nelson Mandela Rules: These UN rules (#4, #12, #19, #31, #36, #38) represent the global consensus on minimum standards for humane prison treatment, including aspects related to work, dignity, and rehabilitation.
5. Death Row Numbers: Estimates for Singapore's death row population hover around 50 (#20, #23, #26, #33), reinforcing the argument about the negligible scale of any potential labour force.

Optional Enhancement

To deepen this analysis, further investigation could focus on:

1. Detailed operational procedures and costs of Singapore's maximum-security prison management.
2. Specific legal precedents or attorney-general opinions in Singapore regarding the interpretation of ILO conventions on prison labour.
3. Comparative studies on the psychological impact of forced labour specifically on death row populations versus other inmate groups.
   Please indicate if you wish to explore these specific areas further.

This really is a bit too much to read.How about this, we throw out every single notion of ethnics and do it full north Korean/Japanese occupation POW style, with the only catch that we give them enough just to keep them alive to work, or implement 1 day of work = 1 more day to live. Others can condemn this and that all they want but we are a sovereign nation. Our country our rules

 

[thetortiserunner]

Let's continue 1 step further and consider how a totally dispassionate society can wring the most out of these murderers. They will automatically have their bodies be donated for science, no way to opt out.

Prior to execution, tie down to surgery table. Have neurosurgeons cut open the skull and insert electrodes in the brain and do experiments to learn more about the human brain while the criminal is still alive.

After their execution, their cadavers automatically donated to medical schools for med students to practice their dissection skills. Regardless of religion.

Drain all the blood for the bloodbank.

After cutting up the skin and flesh of the dessicated corpse, practise how to extract the individual organs. Healthy organs donate.

Once organs extracted, practice amputation skills through the bones with powered and hand saws.

Then next batch of students practice how to reattach/stitch the bones/appendages/flesh/skin back together. The reassembled Frankenstein body can then be released to their families for rites/burial/cremation.

Take pictures of each step of the process. Everyday have a section in the newspapers with all these pictures to thank them. We help them atone a little for their crimes.

See will reduce crime rates or not.

Should also see a huge drop in immigrants, esp the more shady ones.

Just a though experiment as it is unlikely to happen. Most people will intrinsically feel that it's somehow wrong to desecrate a dead body, and the backlash will be quite strong. Which is why countries have stopped doing this.

Well and fully from the bottom of my heart AGREE! this is EVEN better if I am a Family member of someone murdered, I will fully support all this and even pay to watch it live. More countries should do this

 

[thetortiserunner]

people with no hope and nothing to lose are very dangerous.

Oi, Y R U calling me out

 

[thetortiserunner]

Criminals should not be allowed to roam the streets. If you wanna enslave them, i can't think of any safe job that they can do within an enclosed monitored area. I don't trust the scums of society to build buildings or even be a factory worker where they can sabotage the products.

Chain all of their limbs up ,tape their mouths, make them do the same repetitive motion all of their waking hours. E.g wash hotel bedsheets 15h a day straight , only stopping to eat , and/or scroll further down you can see what the other guy has said to do experiments with them and their bodies

 

[thetortiserunner]

Those inmates on death row are just waiting for their execution. Slavery and other inhumane treatment of prisoners should not be allowed.

Just because they are scum of society doesn't mean I want the gahmen to change the law to allow torture and forced slavery on prisoners.

You contradicted yourself? If they are the scum of society then they deserve all that. Even then, they deserve no rest in death. Piss,**** and PCC on their graves

 

[CaiPuDan]

how about harvest their organs for those that waiting for organ transplant in hospital

 

[TrollAndOgres]

Maybe those long term inmates should be required to work within prison.

 

[thetortiserunner]

Looks like edmw is short for inability to read. Assad allow appeal? Many times execution getting delayed due to lame reasons like shortage of poison for execution or even just incapable system.

Once confirmed 100pe percent guilty you have 3 options

1. Immediate execution within the next hour with a method of your choice (hanging, shot to the head, electrocution etc )

2. Forced labour camp. 1 day you work for is 1 more day you get to live, otherwise see option 1

3. (Bonus) - eye for an eye punishment from the victim (if survived) or the family members

4. (Bonus) Like ORPHAN said, death by experimentation

 

[skylink67]

You contradicted yourself? If they are the scum of society then they deserve all that. Even then, they deserve no rest in death. Piss,**** and PCC on their graves

They are scum doesn't mean you have to go to their level. Seriously something wrong with u?

Btw whose clone are you? How about replying me with your main account instead of hiding?

 

[thetortiserunner]

They are scum doesn't mean you have to go to their level. Seriously something wrong with u?

Btw whose clone are you? How about replying me with your main account instead of hiding?

Not a clone for sure, these are my real genuine thoughts. Just because you think differently from me doesn't mean I am wrong

 

[wutawa]

Just saw the news in Reddit today that the woodlands double murder guy was finally hung.

There was one guy complaining why he was kept in a pending situation for years,being a waste of tax payers money for so long which I agree with

It got me thinking, if it is absolutely certain that the person is guilty of the crime and will no doubt be sentenced to death*, why not use them for free labour instead- especially with the declining birthrate and the need to eventually wane off our dependence on (especially cheap) foreign labour, this would seem like a pretty good option
*Or maybe even all criminals*

Of course that doesn't mean we treat them inhumanely like slaves of the 1700s and starve,beat or whip them. What I am thinking of is bare minimum sustenance and daily needs to just keep them alive

Another way to to put or imagine this, for example to say , would be to make a death row inmates be a toilet cleaner, road sweeper, dishwasher or one of the other low(er) level jobs just like a normal civilian would, except he doesn't get paid a single cent ever. Take the money saved from his salary and invest it elsewhere or help the needy

The only draw back I could think off would be backlash from human rights activists groups and other nations accusing as of "modern slavery"

If u r sentenced to free labour, will u do your work nicely or sabotage it? As in clean the toilet properly, sweep the road, wash the dishes. Don't forget death row inmates don't think like normal civilians.