Death Penalty

[Styles]

If we had the ultimate sancition in the death penalty for the worst crimes, for example sadistic or premeditated murder, do you think we should introduce the death penalty (techically we cant due to the EU) but if we could would you be in favour?

 

I think now with DNA and how evidence is gathered in most cases of a guilty verdic they must be right.

 

If you do agree, what crimes should it be for?

I myslef think murder, unless in self defence plus being a traitor to the UK.

[Ghostrider]

Nope, not for it. The means of proving guilt may be excellent these days, but they're still in the hands of people who can be as crooked, biased, agenda driven, or just as plain stupid as they ever were. The evidence gathering techniques and the interpretation of that evidence may be great in the hands of an intelligent, honest and fair minded person, but how many of those are you likely to find among the slew who are involved in any one case....

 

Besides, anyone who is guilty of a crime for which the death penalty could be considered, is not worthy of such a quick release anyway. They deserve to be kept alive as long as possible, but in a painful, desperate and absolutely miserable existence. Death, is not the deterrent many people believe it to be, many people have a very cavalier attitude towards their own demise, they simply don't care....However, IMHO, most are likely to care, and be at least somewhat deterred by the threat of being forced to exist in a living hell for as long as they can possibly be kept alive.

[tlady]

I have to agree with everything that Ghostrider says ... apart from the fact that the animals that SHOULD be subjected to a "living hell" are cosseted in our prison system, I know this is another thread but ... prison is much too lenient..

 

If there is absolutely NO doubt that someone is guilty of a premeditated crime ... murderers or sex offenders ... they should be made to pay their own way.. If they don't work... they don't eat .. Why should I pay for these monsters??

 

Ghostrider is right, why should these animals be afforded the luxury of having their lives ended ... when their victims relatives are being subjected to a "living hell"

 

Personally the salt mines sound like a good alternative ....

[KOYAANISQATSI]

plus being a traitor to the UK.

What, god, queen, country, Gimmie a break.

[JustMe]

While there can remain just the least bit of doubt, and even with advances in forensic science doubt still remains, then I object to the death penalty simply because it is not possible to undo the penalty once it has been carried out.

 

Even without any doubt I am still against the death penalty as an option for the courts. Of course this is in part because I feel, as a wishy washy liberal, that it is wrong for the state to take a life. After all is that not the "crime" that the accused has committed?. They have taken a life, the state says that is wrong, and then takes their life as punishment. If taking a life is wrong then surely that applies to the state as much as the accused.

 

I also worry about the concept that the death penalty deprives the accused of a chance to show long term repentance. We are a Christian nation. The F.D. on our coins refers to the place of our Monarch as the Defender of the Faith". Included in this faith are the commandment "thou shalt not kill" and whole pile of texts on the lines of repentance being a way for a sinner to enter Heaven. How can this relate to the idea of the Judge in his black cap telling a sinner that he will be taken to a place where he will be "hung by the neck until dead".

[KOYAANISQATSI]

We are a Christian nation

Times are changing, there are many faiths at work in this land and though it is a facinating phenomenon and subject, many have no intrest in joining any. I would think it's a bit of self glorification if you lay claim to all our souls.

And back on subject, I think the truth of the matter is that you will find that the phrases "Hung by the neck until dead" and "thou shalt not kill" were both in fact written by men, from the minds of men.

And if you check, Leviticus is full of who should be stoned to death for whatever.

[Sudden Stop]

I'm in favour of the death penalty for those that are proven guilty but therein lies the problem of proving without any shadow of a doubt.

 

As far as I'm concerned the death penalty is just the cheaper option in comparsion to life in prison - and yes, I am just thinking of the money. But looking at the problems that the americans have with the death penalty ie people staying on death row for decades pending appeal after appeal, i don't see there is any benefit to the tax payer anymore.

 

What I would like to see is criminals doing hard labour - breaking rocks or something. Prison is far too comfortable for them, the only people being truly punished is the tax payer.

 

I suggest prison camps on offshore islands (where escape is impossible ) where they are put to work and any profit either put back to the public purse or put into charities/funds for the victims of crime.

[KOYAANISQATSI]

It might seem a bit harsh on say an old lady who hadn't payed her council tax. There are many laws and many crimes and many people in many prisons and each crime is different.

You may one day encounter a burglar in your house and in fury might kick the ever living turd out of him. Remember, this to might land you offshore breaking rocks, if there are many rocks offshore that need seen to.

[Medziotojas]

I suggest prison camps on offshore islands

 

 

Careful what you wish for. Don't want them on the doorstep.

 

There are far too many miscarriages of justice. The death penalty is a definite no no.

[Sudden Stop]

Careful what you wish for. Don't want them on the doorstep.

 

Well, obviously NIMBY but my point still is: rather than letting these people fester in prison costing us millions and since the justice system isn't foolproof (and therefore the death penalty is more or less written off), put them to work! I hate the idea of lifers sitting around all day whilst I'm at work paying of them.

 

How long would it take a couple of thousand lifers to level Foula off? Or get them to build a causeway between Unst and Yell, there's plenty of rocks laying about in Unst. Would just have to make sure there are plenty of guards to stop them making it to the mainland - don't want them stealing my flooer pots!

[KOYAANISQATSI]

And all the excuse for Gorden Brown to abuse his power stick and introduce as many new laws he can think of to get himself a dirt cheap work force.

 

Gospel of John, Chapter 11, verse 35.

As Dot Cotton would say.

[scrutineer]

a vote for yes from me - but only for the worst crimes ..... speeding, taking up two spaces in a car park etc

 

No seriously i do think the worst offenders should be disposed of. As for miscarriages of justice - many of those seem to be not proven rather than didn't do

 

in any case why are we wasting loads of our money keeping things like the ripper and huntley alive?

 

if they want volunteers and pay a reasonable rate , i'll do the job

[Medziotojas]

In the case of the Birmingham six the judge stated that he would have had no hesitation in imposing the death sentence were it within his power. Even after the true bomber confessed to the murders Gerry Conlon and his family were still held.

 

Prior to their conviction, evidence was hidden from the defence throughout the trial.

 

This of course, is a well known case, but there are many more we don't here about.

 

To impose the death sentence could mean putting some innocent people to their death. If there's even the slightest element of doubt, then it would be crazy to carry this out.

 

Remember, criminals can use DNA and modern technology to their advantage, and potentially put innocent victims in the spotlight!

[sassermaet]

Doesn't matter how guilty they are, the death penalty is barbaric and inhumane and should never ever ever be reinstated. It's hypocritical. You're trying to deter people from killing others by killing someone who has killed another person. It doesn't work. It's a paradox. It makes no sense etc. Basically I've made my point. Killing the person responsible doesn't help the situation. It should stay banned.

 

Or, in the words of Sister Helen Prejean:

 

"If I were to be murdered, I would not want my life avenged. Especially by government - which can't even be trusted to control its own bureaucrats or collect taxes equitably or fill a pothole, much less decide which of its citizens to kill."

 

Okay, it applies more to America than here, I just thought it was a good little point.

[Commodore]

i think with the case of people crashing into an airport with the sole purpose of killing loads of people, these people should get the death penalty.