|
|
|
|
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 8:39:10 AM | Let me get this right, you advocate that no punishment can be given if it affects the criminals family, so what are we saying, no fines, no prison, no nothing?? because it all affects relatives.
Now i think im happy your not a High Court Judge, in fact there would be no point in any laws under the pink and fluffy regime, perhaps if murderers and rapists just say sorry, or do you think that would be too much a humiliation?
Dear oh dear
Gosh, why not go the whole hog and and have kangaroo courts and then public executions, we could even charge £10 a ticket and make some money for the government in the process..........sheeesh, the views on these forums never cease to amaze me.
I thank god, the death penalty won't come back, because it's barbaric and I want to go forward and not backwards to medieval times.
Question to you? If the death penalty had still been in force, Sally Clark would be dead now. Do you think thats a sacrafice worth taking? I for one don't because it would make you no better than the murderers, for that surely would be the killing of an innocent person. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 8:41:16 AM |
I thank god, the death penalty won't come back, because it's barbaric and I want to go forward and not backwards to medieval times.
Thats the thing, it WONT come back! Its barbairic and one day in my lifetime i can see it being banned under international law. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 8:45:17 AM | I find that there is something fundamentally hypocritical about any society that on the one hand condemns killing as a crime, but on the other hand would kill someone for committing one.
As a society we are enlightened enough to know that killing is wrong. Just because a small section of society may not be as enlightened and commit horrendous crimes it does not mean that our society as a whole has to lower itself to their level.
Apart from paedos. They should be gassed like badgers. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 8:50:59 AM | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Question to you? If the death penalty had still been in force, Sally Clark would be dead now. Do you think thats a sacrafice worth taking? I for one don't because it would make you no better than the murderers, for that surely would be the killing of an innocent person.
Exactly my point above, its bloody hypocritical. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 9:11:32 AM |
This thread is about the death penalty, for which i am totally againsts. Also, for other crimes yes i DO think it should be taken into account. Why lock up a father for a petty crime when they can do community service and remain supporting his family instead of locking him up and causing the family WHO ARE INNOCENT the financial preasure etc.
Yes it is about the death penalty and we are not discussing petty crimminals who wouldnt deserve the death penalty, but whilst we are at it lets , are there not alot of petty crimminals out there who live off state benifits anyway, who dont work and dont want to but would prefer to live a life of crime and live of the proceeds whislt having state benifits as well and not give a toss about who they hurt emotionally or steal from, and the familes of some of the petty crimminals also benifit from the proceeds of crime. Are you trying to say that all families are totally inocent and dont know whats going on.
Then you have the hardened career criminals who no matter how many times they go to jail come out and go's back to the old ways and dont give a toss about who they hurt or steal from but whilst inside the families live off of benifits and have also benifited from the proceeds of crime, are you trying to say that the partners/families dont know whats going on.
People talk about rehabilitation, well sorry but its fact that some people are beyond any help that people try to give them, they dont want to be rehabiltated.
Gosh, why not go the whole hog and and have kangaroo courts and then public executions, we could even charge £10 a ticket and make some money for the government in the process..........sheeesh, the views on these forums never cease to amaze me.
And remarks like the above amaze me in what seems to be a serious discussion/debate about the death penalty being reinstated as law for henious/horrific crimes against innocents who didnt deserve to die, not only do the innocents suffer before dying their familys, loved ones, children, freinds suffer for the rest of their lives and people want to worry about the familys of the crimminals who carried out the crimes. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 9:34:40 AM | in principle i do feel certain people should get the death penalty, but only if there is no doubt at all about their guilt, which leads to say sally clarke, she was found guilty because of the evidence of one man and his expert advice, and would have been put to death, which is of course wrong, so maybe in all cases, [premeditated murder]it should be agreed by at least two experts or even a panel of them to try to achieve the correct result
i would not want anything like hanging but a needle should do the job
how much say is sutcliffe and ian huntly are costing society to have a comfy life, it dont sit right with me | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 9:59:26 AM |
it is obvious that none of you have ever served a sentence, i have, not that I am boasting, I commited a crime and was punished, I will never commit a crime again as my punishment worked and I would rather die than be locked up again....
I am so glad you have said this as my son served a prison sentence and it was far from pleasant as many posters seems to think. He was beaten, witnessed a suicide, shared a toilet with another person with no privacy, far from the 'life of riley'. I'm not sure where these misconceptions come from. If people have privileges in prison, it cant be a general thing - he would never want to go back.
I think the death penalty is an escape for the offender. A lifetime remembering what he/she has done is a far more fitting punishment and whilst I appreciate overcrowding in prisons is a problem I am against the death penalty, it isnt the answer and I feel it would not act as a deterrent. People often dont think that far ahead when they kill. They either do it as a crime of passion or believe they will never be caught. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 10:13:34 AM | no we should not
agree that there is a lot of money wasted in the prison system
certainly not by excessive care
but the economics behind your reasoning is a bit faulty
especially now that you have prisons run by private enterprises | |
|
| |
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 11:05:47 AM | Lilly,
Please try to understand that we may not all share the same view as yours, its called debate and in general its healthy...
Anyway back to topic, i actually agree that community service is a good alternative to a custodial sentence, but we are talking about the medium to upper echelons of criminalty here. Do you really think that weeding flowerbeds or repainting youth centres is going to stop them stealing or mugging, for lower level crime that affects the community (anti social behaviour/criminal damage) its a good idea.
Now for the career criminals then im sorry but they really should go through the indignity of dare i say it, sharing a bucket. Whilst we are on the subject of perseved hardship, did you know a prisoner gets longer on the phone than a soldier in Afghanistan.
So Sally Clark would have been dead now, er actually not, there is an elongated appeals process for people on death row, think of up to 20 years awaiting execution, so although it sounds very sensationalist, no she wouldnt have been dead now. Is she innocent, well in the eyes of the law she is not guilty on the evidence she was previously convicted on, does that mean shes innocent? Or does it mean that the CPS will not pursue a case that is unpopular......
Oh and i think charging for a ticket would be unpopular and would fall foul as we may need an entertainments licence, then we get in the horrible world of Health and Safety, so i think free viewing would be the best way forward.
sheeesh, the views on these forums never cease to amaze me.
Im glad these views amaze you, and challenge your preconceptions, wouldnt it be dull if you had 20 or so clones agreeing with your every post, would'nt really feed your mind would it?? | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 11:07:22 AM |
I am so glad you have said this as my son served a prison sentence and it was far from pleasant as many posters seems to think. He was beaten, witnessed a suicide, shared a toilet with another person with no privacy, far from the 'life of riley'.
Suicides happen in prison as they do in the community, so do beatings but people dont go to prison for nothing do they, are they not paying a debt to society for the crime they commited.
As for having to share a toilet in prison with no privacy i'm not sorry about this but maybe all prisoners should be given a cell with an on suite for personal use only, along with their TV, radio, kettle ect ect ect. Not so long ago prisoners didnt have a toilet in their cell, after lock up they had a tin bucket and were only allowed to urinate in it.
. People often dont think that far ahead when they kill. They either do it as a crime of passion or believe they will never be caught.
So people dont think when they kill but go out armed with real guns with real live bullets, why didnt they take a toy plastic gun.?.
Sad thing is all not crimes are crimes of passion, what about Huntley who killed 2 ten year old girls, what about the London Bombers who killed over 50 innocent commuters and maimed and injured numerous others. Did they believe they'd never be caught.
For people like these i believe in the death penalty. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 12:32:18 PM | Suicides happen in prison as they do in the community, so do beatings but people dont go to prison for nothing do they, are they not paying a debt to society for the crime they commited.
I'm not defending him. He did wrong and he paid his debt. I'm just questioning those views that think prison is easy.
So people dont think when they kill but go out armed with real guns with real live bullets, why didnt they take a toy plastic gun.?.
Sad thing is all not crimes are crimes of passion, what about Huntley who killed 2 ten year old girls, what about the London Bombers who killed over 50 innocent commuters and maimed and injured numerous others. Did they believe they'd never be caught.
No not all crimes are those of passion but I do believe that Huntley thought he could get away with it and possibly the London bombers. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 12:50:08 PM |
what about Huntley who killed 2 ten year old girls, what about the London Bombers who killed over 50 innocent commuters and maimed and injured numerous others. Did they believe they'd never be caught. For people like these i believe in the death penalty.
The muslim bombers embrace what they call martyrdom, and believe there is a place for them and all their family members in heaven with 49 virgins or whatever? There is no point executing fanatics, much better to make them spend the rest of their days in a prison cell.
The abhorrent crimes of Ian Huntley were purely opportunist, but yes he thought he would get away with it. He has already tried to kill himself so executing him would be doing him a favour. Make him pay for his crimes, I hope he lives a long, miserable exhistence, regretting his crimes for every minute of the day. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/5/2007 5:40:31 PM |
The muslim bombers embrace what they call martyrdom, and believe there is a place for them and all their family members in heaven with 49 virgins or whatever? There is no point executing fanatics, much better to make them spend the rest of their days in a prison cell.
Irrelevant if they died commiting the act.
The abhorrent crimes of Ian Huntley were purely opportunist, but yes he thought he would get away with it. He has already tried to kill himself so executing him would be doing him a favour. Make him pay for his crimes, I hope he lives a long, miserable exhistence, regretting his crimes for every minute of the day.
And how much has it cost the tax payers to keep him there, safe from those on the outside and those on the inside. It is not cost effective to keep people who should never be released incarcerated for their natural (Should be unnatural) lives. | |
|
| |
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 2:25:04 PM | Roy Whiting tonight sits in Wakefield jail. He's serving life for the murder of a child.
He's been in prison before. He served 5 years for the abduction and sexual assault of another little girl. She survived, and her testimony helped to put him away last time. I have no doubt that he spent his time in jail not only wanking thinking about that assault, but also planning what he would do to his next victim.
I also have no doubt that he planned for his next victim not to be able to give evidence against him.
That next victim was Sarah Payne.
I cannot imagine what horrors she experienced in her final hours far away from the protection of those she loved.
Somewhere in Sussex tonight, a boy and girl are discussing their next date together. It might even lead, in a couple of years, to them getting married, and then to producing a baby daughter. In a few more years, that daughter will be around five years old......at about the same time that Whiting is released. He will have spent his latest spell in jail planning what he would do to his next victim - he may even be doing it this very night.
If so, then he will be planning the abduction and murder of a child who isn't even born yet.
So, what is so wrong about taking steps to prevent all that?
If Whiting had dangled on the end of a rope, there wouldn't be a 'next' victim.
And for those who say that there would be too many 'mistakes' if the death penalty were introduced, I would just point out that juries were very reluctant to convict for capital crimes. Those who are today released after being wrongly convicted would not have been convicted before. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 3:16:53 PM |
If so, then he will be planning the abduction and murder of a child who isn't even born yet.
So, what is so wrong about taking steps to prevent all that?
If Whiting had dangled on the end of a rope, there wouldn't be a 'next' victim.
But the basis of this arguement is the convicts release back into society, something i dont agree with, take a life you should have your freedom removed FOR GOOD. If this were the case, this would not be a valid arguement for the death penalty would it?
And for those who say that there would be too many 'mistakes' if the death penalty were introduced, I would just point out that juries were very reluctant to convict for capital crimes. Those who are today released after being wrongly convicted would not have been convicted before.
Would you also agree that for the very same reasons, some murderers may not be convicted when they SHOULD BE? | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 4:18:30 PM | MSG 179
But the basis of this arguement is the convicts release back into society, something i dont agree with, take a life you should have your freedom removed FOR GOOD. If this were the case, this would not be a valid arguement for the death penalty would it?
We're not discussing the useless sentences that killers get nowadays.
Would you also agree that for the very same reasons, some murderers may not be convicted when they SHOULD BE?
Possibly, but it's not my fault if the CPS presents flimsy cases.........if the evidence is there, then they should be found guilty, and if it isn't, then they should go free. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 4:36:08 PM |
Possibly, but it's not my fault if the CPS presents flimsy cases.........if the evidence is there, then they should be found guilty, and if it isn't, then they should go free.
NOR are we discussing how effective the CPS may be, BUT your point backs up my theory that in an inperfect system there MUST be a way to undo mistakes, and you cannot undo death, hence my view. It is by no means formed by any kind of sympathy for those commiting the appropriate crimes, the sympathy is for those that didnt, or even "may not have" - e.g. an element of doubt. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 4:42:47 PM | MSG 181
NOR are we discussing how effective the CPS may be
Given that we are talking about 'safe' convictions, my point is entirely relevant.
your point backs up my theory that in an inperfect system there MUST be a way to undo mistakes
If we had the death penalty, we WOULD have a way of undoing mistakes.
It's called 'trial by jury'.
It is by no means formed by any kind of sympathy for those commiting the appropriate crimes, the sympathy is for those that didnt, or even "may not have" - e.g. an element of doubt.
The 'doubt' is presented twice in court, once by the jury assessing the prosecution case, and again when the defence tries to destroy it. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/6/2007 4:56:16 PM |
If we had the death penalty, we WOULD have a way of undoing mistakes.
It's called 'trial by jury'.
So are you claiming this system is perfect then and that miscarraiges of justice never happen? Never had you down as THAT niave! | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/7/2007 12:06:21 PM | MSG 183
So are you claiming this system is perfect then and that miscarraiges of justice never happen?
No and no.
If we look at the US system, appeals against the death sentence can drag on for decades. This ensures that every possible piece of evidence will be examined, even if the jury didn't have access to it.
I have no problem with such forensic examination of a case. It ensures that:
A) The convicted man isn't committing more crimes.
B) Justice will be done in the end, whether he is ultimately acquitted or executed. | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/7/2007 12:22:06 PM | ^^^^Fair enough Vin - others arguing about the cost of keeping someone in prison for life should note that this lengthy appeals process is far more expensive (from the evidence from the USA which has said system).
If I believed that mistakes were never made and that every person receiving a capital sentence was guilty (beyond reasonable doubt), and that a lot of people (poll suggest a majority) in this country would want the death penalty back I would in that case accept the majority view, although personally my conscience cannot condone it. I think eventually someone innocent would go to their death either through a miscarriage of justice or incompetence, which is my main objection.
Btw, you said on an earlier post that the pathetic sentencing policy in this country is not the subject, or words to that effect, I hope I have got the gist without misparaphrasing you. Surely in a considered debate on the death penalty, offering realistic alternatives (natural life) is a useful contribution? | |
|
wafta
|
Joined: 6/14/2007
Msg: 174 | |
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/7/2007 12:42:36 PM |
We're not discussing the useless sentences that killers get nowadays.
Actually, this should be a major part of this discussion.
The reason people are pro death penalty is because murderers, rapists, etc. aren't getting tough enough sentences.
So, yes, as an alternative to "legal murder", life should mean life and these people should never be released into the community again. Tougher sentences would solve the problem of the public being outraged by murderers and rapists who are being released to re-offend.
With reference to the comments in Msg 184 above, I don't really see the relevance of those points to the pros and cons of the death penalty. If someone is found guilty of murder and sentenced to a life sentence (in its ideal form of REAL life), then the convicted "isn't committing more crimes".
Should other forensic evidence become available during that sentence then "Justice will be done in the end, whether he is ultimately acquitted or" NOT !!
Same thing except no need for further killing.
What amazes me more than anything else is that the people who "claim" to be the most caring and warm hearted are the ones who would be rubbing their hands together in glee and queueing for a ringside ticket should executions be brought back in this country. 
Killing is either right or it isn't - and in my humble opinion it's not right under any circumstances | |
|
| should we have the death penalty over here
Posted: 9/7/2007 2:22:34 PM |
The reason people are pro death penalty is because murderers, rapists, etc. aren't getting tough enough sentences.
I do believe you have hit the proverbial nail on the head there.
If murderers were put in PROPER prisons, served actually LIFE inside instead of 10 years then people would think that justice had been served. If, instead of radios, tellies and playstations, hard labour was introduced such as smashing rocks then people would think that the punishment was halfway to fitting the crime. No, it wouldnt bring back their loved ones but at least they wouldnt be living cushy lives with 3 hot bloody meals a day.... Which is more than i have had since my freezer defrosted itself when i was away and i couldnt afford to replace everything lost and had to spend a tenner (all i had at the time) on a few bits so my son could eat for the week, ahh well toast has been nice this week... | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
