| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:06:08 AM | "Some murderers are serving too long in jail, meaning prisons will become "full of geriatric lifers", Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips has said.
He questioned the need for a mandatory life sentence for murder and voiced doubts murder law reforms would succeed without changing the sentencing regime."
BBC news website today.
I believe that with DNA available that far few murderers are wrongly convicted. I would suggest that where this evidence is used to convict without doubt, then we should be bringing back hanging. Hanging as a deterrent to those who would willfully take life is a real deterrent. With an increasingly violent society, including gun crime, it is also another one. I would also argue in favour of the birch as a method of reducing prison population and punishment. It always worked before and we need it now. So let's have no arguments about wrongful convictions, let us concentrate on the crimes where the evidence is definite. Those who deprive innocent human beings of life, should be denied their own. That is justice. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:15:20 AM | If it "always worked before," we wouldn't need it now. Economic stability is a far greater deterrent to violent crime than any form of punishment.
And I don't see government subsidized brutality as being a hallmark of a civilized society. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:50:48 AM | | I wish we in Canada would bring back the death penalty and extend it to rapists and child molesters. Some people just don't deserve to live. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:57:17 AM | | i think we should keep them locked up i would like to know what this judge would feel if he had a loved one murdered i bet he wouldnt want them serving less than life then.I sometimes wonder if these judges live on same planet as us a lot of them dont serve long enough as it is without reducing sentances | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 5 | |
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:59:11 AM | That is justice.
I don't think you understand the definition of justice. You need to go back
and study it. Justice is not about catering to some dude who's flipping out
seeking revenge...he belongs in a nut house. It is exactly why nobody
who is emotional and hysterical can serve as a justice because there
will never be justice.
Study law before you start on another tangent. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 11:30:27 AM | | I do understand Justice and I am not one to be a madman seeking retribution either.Yes exactly^^^. Justice is the inevitability of a course of action that leads you to the result of what you do as prescribed by the law. It is detached from emotion. I am as saddened as anyone else about soldiers shot in WW1 for cowardice when shell shocked, and about others who have been condemned when in hindsight are innocent. Justice is actually in part, about fear of it. But I havn't suggested anything aside from due process and the inevitability of action as described in legal process. I am suggesting that extreme justice, capital punishment, can be meeted out fairly with the element of doubt removed in a lot of cases due to DNA testing. I don't wish to judge the hanging of Hussein (which looked more like the traditional lynching) as an example of how it goes, or has been. The process of hanging is effective, humane and fast, compared with the rather disgusting efforts of those across the pond who invented lethal injection. Let us be blunt. Huntley and Mrs West should have swung. Msg 2. I don't think you are right. Economics has little to do with it. Just have richer murderers. Having minimum wages isn't going to make any odds to a crime rate. Societal change is needed and the "fear" of an effective police force with a high detection rate. I don't need to bring other offences that could expect hanging, into this. It could be argued that we hang drug dealers of particular variety, into it. This is outside of the area I am discussing here. Unless of course the law changes and drug dealing become a capital offence ( as it ought to). | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 12:04:50 PM | | im not going to argue pro or anti capital punishment. The argument that capital punishment is a detterant, however, doesnt hold up. Most murders occur with great emotion - anger, hate, jealousy, rage - and the perp isnt thinking consequences - in fact, most dont expect to get caught. Argue capital punishment if you think that is just but arguing a detterant doesnt hold water. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 3:25:31 PM | It is not known for sure if hanging is humane and fast as you have asserted. The C1 & C2 vertebrae are broken apart and the person is rendered unconscious(ideally). The hanged person strangles to death - that is what kills them, it is not the drop and broken neck. People may be aware when unconscious.
I think capital punishment is barbaric state sanctioned murder that has no place anywhere in society. CP throughout history has been shown to be no great deterrant. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 3:32:17 PM | First of all, detterents DO work, just not for Murder 2. Murder 1, absolutely. Second, most judges are first of all trained as lawyers. Politicians too, that is why we have so many problems with rotten government. And in Law school, they are trained to 'prevaricate'; to mislead and deceive without actually stating an untruth. IE they are all liars! Woe to you lawyers. I like the idea of the rope as deterrent, in fact, I know some 'politicians' who deserve to be drawn, hung, and quartered. If their 'quarter' was stuck on top of, like, the Sears Tower, everyone would see it and not wish to join them. Deterrent.  D | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 7:06:59 PM | Got to say...there is some merit in finishing off some killers. Forget the appeals, the years on death row, etc, etc....just a rope. Olson, Nyg, Bernardo...just to name a few. No doubt about their convictions...why are they still at the taxpayers trough?
Sure...some now in jail are in doubt...fine...but these? No doubt at all.
the only way it can be used as a detterant, is to have as many as possible witness it.
Caning in the Phillipines works wonders....no kid wants the shame of being caned in public, and have to wear the marks of their humiliation. They become socially ostrasized...for awhile. There are very few "repeat offenders" when this punishment is used.
In our society, where nobody takes responsibility for their deeds, this could well prove a good detterant. People will take notice of what they are doing to each other, and start taking responsibility for their actions.
Locking someone away, then turning them loose on society does nobody any good at all. Least of all the future victims. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 8:35:09 PM | $13.50 for a box of 50 .38 calibre rounds,
is alot cheaper than buying a new rope
for an equal number of hangings.
Some forms of capitol punishment are indeed
quite barbaric, bordering on torture.
And, while I may not be an advocate of capitol
punishment, overall. There are some types of criminals
who simply deserve to die | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/9/2007 9:14:06 PM | | Wasn't it Shakespeare who said"Kill all the lawyers." That man was a genus..Seems many that don't believe in capital punishment do so after they lose a loved one to a ruthless killer.. I personally believe in it. I think and it's just my opinion that the sonofa****es should go ten times worse than their victims did.. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/10/2007 10:33:39 PM | I fully believe in capital punishment ... in cases where there is no reasonable doubt as to a person's guilt, and if their crime(s) were NOT committed out of self-defence, were not crimes of 'passion, or done 'accidently'.
And, i'd like to suggest that the people on trial for raping, torturing, and murdering the 13 year old girl (in Edmonton) be the first candidates... After reading about their intentions (looking to pick 'someone' to kill that day), and details of what they did to that girl, I really can't see why society would allow them to even 'exist' any longer...
Capital punishment may not serve as a deterrant for some, but it would sure eliminate the chance of repeat offenders. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/10/2007 11:52:05 PM | It's interesting to note that many see a difference between capital punishment and murder.
Shakespeare also wrote...."A pound of flesh, no more, no less" | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 15 | |
| Murder
Posted: 3/11/2007 12:59:01 AM | We should have a law like this: Those that voted yes for capital punishment would
agree to execute the condemned. Their names would be drawn much like it
is for jury duty...alphabetically. Bare in mind that many executioners have
remorse over this. Murderers executing murderers. Makes sense to me....just don't
harm the rest of us is all we ask.
Also, before you murder them, you have to sit next to their family expecially
their mothers, sisters, brothers and hear her them plead for
their sons life. If you can sleep after this, then you are a total utter
freak of nature.
Ya dumb sonofabitches. Lot's of lip service in this thread. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/11/2007 4:29:29 AM | i think we should keep them locked up i would like to know what this judge would feel if he had a loved one murdered i bet he wouldnt want them serving less than life then.I sometimes wonder if these judges live on same planet as us a lot of them dont serve long enough as it is without reducing sentances
Letting victims decide the fate of criminals is a bad bad idea. Simply because they are so emotionally involved. If I feel that somebody who steals my car should be shot in the knee, is it a justifiable punishment?
1.Capital punishment has never been shown to reduce criminal behavior. 2. Reduced chances or no, consigning one innocent man to death is bad. 3. on a purely practical level. Capital punishment has been shown time and time again to be more expensive than life imprisonment, due to the appeal process and long times on death row anyway. If you reduce that appeal process, you lead to GREAT problems with issue number 2.
I just wanted to add that their isn't supposed to be a reasonable doubt in convictions... but yet innocent people still get the death penalty.
Also for the same crime you're much more likely to get it if you're male rather than female.... and skin colour of the victim plays a part too... | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/11/2007 8:47:06 AM | Ewok... let's take a look at society.
Most of society just wants to live their lives, protect their children, and feel (even the tiniest bit) SAFE. How do they do this knowing there are a bunch of derranged , twisted, "freaks of nature" walking around- eager to rape, torture, mutilate, and kill? And...consider the fact that they are partly willing to do so, BECAUSE they have absolutely no "fear" whatsoever of any serious consequence for their actions - because of the "bleeding heart" criminal system that exists.
Yes, some would not fear even capital punishment, but there are alot that would. The "mad dogs" who have no fear (or human feeling pretty much at all) COULD THEN MAKE THEIR CHOICE..."HMMM ...IF I RAPE & KILL THIS LITTLE GIRL..I WILL DIE." Then, it becomes their CHOICE to die if they hurt that little girl....
As for those of us who vote for capital punishment being the ones to do the executing... I think you'd be surprised how many people would not have a problem doing so ... Yes, there would be guilt, but alot could live it KNOWING that the 'monster' could never hurt another innocent person.
I feel far more sympathy for the victim, and family of a victim . and even for potential victims - than for that of the offender. I would have a much harder time sitting with the family of a victim that had just lost a loved one to a "rehabilitated"(ha) killer who had just been let out of prison...
Similarly, why do you think innocent people die regularly because of drunk drivers??
Look at the "deterrant".... a $600-$1000 fine and six months to one year's licence suspension ?!? I can almost 100% guarantee you that people's 'habits' would change if Canada actually starting treating drunk driving like a CRIME. How many drunk drivers do you think there are in the countries that have instant execution as a punishment??? | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/11/2007 9:25:47 AM | | Having had been the victim of a serial child molester who emotionally tortured me for several hours before he had his little accident falling on a brick and breaking his neck. I paid for that **stards abuse many years in therapy before I figured out if I hadn't protected myself it was I who would have died, I may be a freak of nature now but at one time I was an innocent little boy. I would have no problem pulling the switch on some animal that took a human life in cold blood even if I had to sit through several hours of babbling mothers balling their brains out about why their little Johnny raped and mulitated a 3 year old girl then ate her remains, no problem. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/11/2007 10:32:58 AM | It sounds wonderful, but it's too simplistic.
First of all, very rich people seldom pay the full price for their crimes. If you are a millionaire, your chances of being executed are quite small. If a white man kills a black man, the same general rules apply. If you doubt any of this, do some research on it.
If your sentence decides on your income/who you kill, then it's time to rethink the concept of justice.
Secondly, there are far too many errors in sentencing. If you research into the number of people let out of jail because they were "set up" by over zealous (and sometimes well intentioned) policemen and prosecutors , you'd find quite a large number of people involved. It shows a troubling lack of real justice being served. Especially when high profile cases are involved, politicians and police are often pushed to do whatever is necessary to "catch" the criminal - or the next best thing.
Thirdly, there are a large number of people who are simply mentally ill. Their actions are not rational, and they are not in control. Those people are essentially not to blame, in the same way a sane person is.
If you could eliminate all those variables (and you really can't) , then I'd be for capital punishment for the worst murderers. Serial killers, terrorists, people who kill for money, or to eliminate a witness ? No problemo.
Someone who kills their spouse in a jealous rage ?
Umm....no. Those people should get life. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/26/2007 11:59:28 PM | It is foolish to believe in and support capital punishment. The cops, politicians, and prosecutors are under tremendous pressure to get "justice" and mistakes/carelessness happens.
I even think it's atrocious to imprison someone based on circumstantial evidence. The person may be innocent! But if you kill them, then what? | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/27/2007 10:28:11 PM | First of all, capital punishment is not meant to act as a deterrant, but is in reality, a mechanism to make society feel better - that "justice" was done. It's secondary function is to remove those elements of society that prove to be too risky and too expensive to maintain in permanent custody.
I also agree with many of the postings above that the mentally ill and the second degree murder are not worthy of cap punishments, but I disagree with some of the other caveats.
Income and convictions are related, but this can be fixed by providing social funding for lawyers for people charged with murder. Secondly, while mistaken convictions do happen, they are rare, and I'd rather have 1 innocent man die, than have 100 go free. Its worth the cost for a safer society, and has precedents in history (people sacrificing themselves for the benefit of the whole) | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/28/2007 1:56:32 AM |
"Some murderers are serving too long in jail, meaning prisons will become "full of geriatric lifers", Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips has said.
The health care in jail is so abysmal that many geriatric lifers lives will expire before their sentences are close to being completed. Health care for inmates is at the bottom of the penal system's priority list. | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/29/2007 12:33:30 PM | Sexyfunnyguy:
I'd rather have 1 innocent man die, than have 100 go free. Its worth the cost for a safer society, and has precedents in history (people sacrificing themselves for the benefit of the whole)
You say this now because you can't imagine yourself being the one person found guilty.
I wonder though if you'd feel the same if you were the innocent one sitting on death row?
And what of the n 1-100 rule? What if enough people think we need to tighten things up to 1 - 10. This would mean more innocent behind bars in exchange that fewer guilty will go free.
What of the people who actually did commit murder and later repented, served their time, and are now giving back to the community. I myself know of such a person. He commited a double homicide, but today gives back as a volunteer in institutions and rehab centres. His story gives hope and instruction to a lot of people going down the wrong path. He can speak into their lives in a way that the average person or counselor cannot. If he'd been executed the world would be less for it as he is giving in ways that others cannot.
I happen to believe people can change and repent. Who are any of us to say they can't and therefore should die? | |
|
| Murder
Posted: 3/29/2007 1:07:07 PM | OK, agree with the OP that DNA evidence, coupled with other evidence, can reduce the number of wrongful judgments and incarcerations.
But he steps out in another ethical issue - death sentence.
I'd like to see the OP do his homework. I want to see evidence from cultural or national studies that prove that the death sentence is a deterrent to murder.
I also want to know if acute violence and murder statistics climb after large wars, when men are taught and encouraged to go against strict social ethics on taking the life of another (in anger or by 'engineered' self defense (eg., defending homeland/way of life).
See, we have a case of muddled morals in individuals who might not otherwise commit this 'sanctioned murder' (sorry, thats exactly what we do in military conflicts, we kill others).
So I guess the pertinent question is: can these folks be rehabed NOT to kill when they return to peacetime activities. You would think the natural answer is: of course. Think again, because if this reversal of social ethics programming goes on for years, it can diddle seriously with risk perceptions (punishment for doing something wrong) and reflexive actions (reflexive violence of a killing, rather than physical deterrent nature).
And then we have crimes of passion. These folks aren't typical killers. I think they can be rehabilitated, but not by the present penal detention system.
Finally, we have pathological killers, socio- and psychopaths who cannot be rehabed, period. I maintain that they have serious deficits - inborn and socially reinforced in their brains. This has recently been proven by spectroscopic evidence of highly abnormal brain function in MOST, not just one or two, of the critical brain locus of behavior, personality and motivation/judgement/decision controls.
What do do about this last group. My answer is harsh, and you don't use DNA to determine this type: you use a combination of psychiatric and physiological tools. You cull this group, either by permanent detention in isolation (very expensive) or by martial resolution (the death penalty).
So, it would seem that the death penalty is far from being a one-stop solution to punishment for murder.
I suggest that there are cases where it may be prudent, as a last resort with the worst (serial) offenders. When you have a case of socialization errors (gang violence) or crimes of passion, then it a very different ballgame. Not only can the negative qualities be treated, but they can be visualized to make sure that treatment used (drug, therapy and other behavioral mods) work. The proof, as they say, is in the (spectroscopically visualized) pudding. | |
|
rowlie
|
Joined: 5/18/2006
Msg: 25 | |
| Murder
Posted: 3/29/2007 2:41:46 PM | I still don't think you address the matter of choice. We all have that choice, even if in temper.
I would doubt if murder cases rise after a major military conflict. Some of the most dangerous military adversaries any one would wish to meet, who I personally know, are actually the most gentle and nicest persons who you would wish to find. They are looking after you and your interests. That seems to be suggesting that the armed forces are full of potential pyschopaths, and indulge in recruiting them. Well we know this is not the case and the results of statistical analysis will probably result in the balance being statisticly even. But then we only research things when we need an worthwhile answer. A lack of research is not to be taken as meaningful.( How many so called "dead people" take a deep breath after being dead for 30 minutes? I just need to know this to help to avoid wrongful death diagnoses.) How many are fighting to get out out of the coffin after burial?
Military decisions about killing someone are about self defense.You go to war and meet someone opposite you who is in the same situation, are you going to decide that because he is married and has 3 children to support, that you will pass on him and kill the guy by him instead. This is not murder, this is adults being in a situation were one or the other dies. Most of us do not ask for the choice. But if so, that is not going to make me murder someone on the street. Mass murder in UK happened after the troops returned from WW II? No statistics available- because none were needed.
Morals are not muddled in war. You just fight for your mates, and your country, and the folks at home,and to see tomorrow alive.
I have not brought crimes of passion into this, and this a legal defence. WE CAN ALL FLIP. And to say about the Huntleys, Hindleys, Husseins, Hitlers , Crippens ,of this world. HANG THEM. | |
|
Home
login 
