What the film is about
-
A convicted murderer is not executed.
-
Instead, the state introduces a new punishment system:
-
His arms, legs, and body parts are surgically removed over time
-
Each punishment is publicly broadcast
-
-
The process continues until nothing recognizably human remains
-
Society accepts it because it’s framed as justice, deterrence, and public will
IRL Question
If given the chance to enact such a law in real life, would it pass?
Do rapists, murderers, terrorists, drug dealers, and other heinous criminals deserve extreme punitive treatment rather than the death penalty?
If a system like this were enacted for the most serious crimes, would it serve as a stronger deterrent—making potential offenders think twice before committing such acts? Or would execution be the more effective and humane option?
Assuming life imprisonment is no longer viable in the future, as society grows increasingly desensitized and violent, which punishment better preserves order: prolonged punitive treatment or death?
Considering the principles of human rights, do rapists, murderers, terrorists, and other heinous criminals still deserve the protection of human rights?
