Poll: Death sentence (lengthy) - sorry

[PNL]

Even in your life time, when capital punishment was allowed, for thieving too wasn't it? , the crime rate was still high, and as said in my earlier post it has not acted as a deterrent in the States, so the only reason people ,IMHO, can back this cruel and inhumane treatment is for revenge, which put another way is satisfaction, which therefore makes them worse, again IMO, than the criminal, they have nothing to do with the event and yet they want the satisfaction/pleasure of knowing someone has died. Maybe public executions should be brought back to help in this call for Blood craze?
NO ONE, IMO, has the right to take another humans life be it criminal or 'criminally' judicial.

Sorry

Steve

Oi watch it you who you callng OLD sorry Steve dont agree here hang um high the scum then wont be taking another life

 

[HardBoiledEgg]

No definatley not.
All the death penalty is is state sanctioned murder. Thou shalt not kill - how do we enforce it? By killing you! Totally ridiculous

Punishent rarley works anyway, people still commit crimes even when the punishment is severe. You can go right back in history and see people being hanged for pickpocketing and the surrounding audience being pickpocketed whilst the hanging was taking place!

A way of preventing crime taking is place is whats needed, not elaborate 'punishment' schemes which don't even work.

 

[PNL]

No definatley not.
All the death penalty is is state sanctioned murder. Thou shalt not kill - how do we enforce it? By killing you! Totally ridiculous

Punishent rarley works anyway, people still commit crimes even when the punishment is severe. You can go right back in history and see people being hanged for pickpocketing and the surrounding audience being pickpocketed whilst the hanging was taking place!

A way of preventing crime taking is place is whats needed, not elaborate 'punishment' schemes which don't even work.

[1] Thou shall not Kill :shakehead well murderers dont think twice about it its just a hazard and part of criminality

]2] Punishment rarly works well It would in this instance cos they will be swinging by a rope

 

[brava007]

In order to convict someone it has to be "beyond reasonable doubt", which to me says, that sometimes there can be a chance that the person didnt do it. Also how many people have been aquitted later on appeal as new and compelling evidence has shown that it was not them.
Perhaps when the courts give sentances that are long, and proportionate to the crime, and prisons stop becoming a holiday camp and an easy getaway for criminals (food, warmth, roof over their head) then it may have an effect on people and deter them, whereas killing them just has their life over and done with, they cant dwell on what they have done whilst in a scabby cell for 20 years. Also, the victim cant see any justice being done if they are killed/raped, it doesnt make them feel any better that the offender is dead, they want them to suffer and be locked away for the rest of their life - death is an easy way out.

However, with the justice system a complete farce at the moment, victims are in a lose lose situation most of the time which is a sad thing.

I therefore voted no as I believe the courts getting a grip of current issues in the country, and realising what pityfull sentances they give out, and people treat prison as an easy way out, once this is resolved, it will have a better result than the death sentance ever could

 

[HardBoiledEgg]

Punishment rarly works well It would in this instance cos they will be swinging by a rope

Yeah that one killer would be dead, 'punished' is debatable. How about the next 50 that come along? Deterred? No. How do you deal with those? Crime / murders will never stop :yuck:

 

[MikeWhitcombe]

[1] Thou shall not Kill :shakehead well murderers dont think twice about it its just a hazard and part of criminality

]2] Punishment rarly works well It would in this instance cos they will be swinging by a rope

I have to agree with PNL here - mainly becuase there are many cases which have been in the Public Eye, like Bulger, etc. for which convictions have been made that the public, judging by their reaction, would have been quite happy to send out a lynch mob for. Surely in these types of cases, public opinion would be overwhelmingly in favour of the death penalty. At least making it an option available to judges for extreme cases would be an idea, even if it isn't declared suitable for every murder or rape case. A compromise solution would keep human rights militants happy, but at least the families of victims could, if it was what they wanted, see the murderers of their mother/father/child/dog burn in hell, rather than spend the rest of their days in free accommodation of a standard 10 times higher than most Youth Hostels and B&Bs in the world...

 

[HardBoiledEgg]

At least making it an option available to judges for extreme cases would be an idea

So selective murdering now? You are willing to hand over that power to a minority of judges? Another case of the powerful few controlling the less powerful majority. Nice :yuck: Who would decide which 'extreme' criminal get the gas and who lives? Isn't that playing God with peoples lives?

And why call human rights 'militiants' I don't agree with murder, government authorised murder especially but I' not a 'militant'

 

[MikeWhitcombe]

So selective murdering now? You are willing to hand over that power to a minority of judges? Another case of the powerful few controlling the less powerful majority. Nice :yuck: Who would decide which 'extreme' criminal get the gas and who lives? Isn't that playing God with peoples lives?

And why call human rights 'militiants' I don't agree with murder, government authorised murder especially but I' not a 'militant'

The press and or public opinion decides which cases have more prominence. Judges in the minority have to make decisions like whether to allow someone's life support machine to be switched of, for instance, so why shouldn't they be allowed to decide, after careful consideration (which is what they are obliged to do, it's their job) decide that a particular case could merit the death penalty being an option available for an eventual sentence.

By militant, I refer to people who actively protest against such ideas, by standing in the cold to moan about things which either don't concern them, or don't take into account the concerns of interested parties, I didn't mean you, of course!

 

[CinqyAbarth]

i've voted yes as peado's/psychos should not be rehabbed imo.. like huntley (the two girls) i cannot see a reason why they should still be alive!

Dont mean to cause an argument or anything with my views, each to their own...

 

[steve1219]

The press and or public opinion decides which cases have more prominence. Judges in the minority have to make decisions like whether to allow someone's life support machine to be switched of, for instance, so why shouldn't they be allowed to decide, after careful consideration (which is what they are obliged to do, it's their job) decide that a particular case could merit the death penalty being an option available for an eventual sentence.

By militant, I refer to people who actively protest against such ideas, by standing in the cold to moan about things which either don't concern them, or don't take into account the concerns of interested parties, I didn't mean you, of course!

You mean the British Government then.

Steve

 

[MikeWhitcombe]

You mean the British Government then.

Steve

...for instance

 

[steve1219]

Iraq, Speed cameras, student fees we can go on.

Steve

 

[HardBoiledEgg]

The press and or public opinion decides which cases have more prominence.

What!!?!! You want the PRESS to decide who lives and who doesn't!!! That is just crazy!

 

[ST3]

yes, yes and oh yes bring back death sentence but only for more severe cases as in point blank killing and intent to torture or kill. society is on a big down hill the way rapests, murderers and child molesters are getting away or let off too lightly. Death sentence will make them think before doing it, if they didnt well they should of.:bang:

 

[CinqyAbarth]

Spot on!

 

[PNL]

You mean the British Government then.

Steve

THats what govements are for TO GOVERN and I know they dont always make the right ones but I feel very strongly about our judicial ststem and to be honest this country when it comes down to it are nothing but a load of weak kneed old grannies god help us if world war three broke out just watch the namby pamby goody goodies moan if food shortages etc happened say this about the older generation they went through two world wars and showed a bit of back bone unlike this country today

 

[HardBoiledEgg]

I don't understand how you can say killing is wrong but it's okay for the state to kill you for doing it

 

[steve1219]

sorry Phil but if in your view we have to string people up to be a great country I suggest you emigrate to Iran you can have a weekly
show there.

Steve

 

[PNL]

I don't understand how you can say killing is wrong but it's okay for the state to kill you for doing it

you have taken that out of context you murder and you should die for taking a life

 

[ST3]

another bit to ad with the originall question and story....why let convicted immergrints stay in the uk? if they face the death sentence or jail in there home countries why flee to uk. Some thing really does need doing with the goverment. It said on the news the 2 of the blokes where illegally in the uk and all except 1 was on probation. IF THEY ARE WANTED IN THERE COUNTRY KICK THEM BACK TO IT BEFORE THINGS LIKE THAT HAPPEN. BRITISH PEOPLE CANT TAKE REFUGE IN THERE COUNTRIES:bang: