Death Penalty

[DTES]

This should keep everyone entertained on a Friday...

Reading the burglary thread made me think about this one. A lot of people wrote that they might take action themselves if they were being burgled, which is one thing that I'm not going to argue with here, but it was also suggested on the same thread that any burglar "deserves" to die.

Obviously that burglary debate continues on that thread, but on a related topic - do you believe a person ever deserves to die for a crime; do you support the death penalty? If so, for which crimes?

Poll to follow, if you're clicking on this one straight away...

 

[Gritt23]

That couple who tortured the 3 year old to death while babysitting him. I'd have no problem with them getting the death penalty.

 

[JetsetJimbo]

This is a discussion which never goes badly, right?!

Fwiw, I'm against. Not for any specifically wishy-washy reasons (although I am a bit of a pinko, Guardian-reading lefty), but simply because I do not believe the state should have the power to murder its citizens, under any circumstances. Even if you think that kind of power wouldn't be misused by the current government and political system, there's no guarantee that this will remain the case in the future. I've been to enough places which are or have been dictatorships to feel that the death penalty should be absolutely taboo.

 

[beorhthelm]

yes, but only to those who use excessive force detering intruders.

and people who start controversial polls on popular web forums.

 

[seagull_special]

If Brighton had a death penalty they would probably miss it. On a more serious note, My heart says 'hang em high' my head says 'executing people is barbaric and outdated and belongs in the past'

 

[clippedgull]

I support the Death Penalty for

Pre-planned murders

Terrorists

 

[Hillian1]

Anyone remember Derek Bently?

 

[DTES]

and people who start controversial polls on popular web forums.

Oh.

 

[Gritt23]

Terrorists

Suicide bombers?

 

[Gritt23]

Anyone remember Derek Bently?

Not personally, but yes I know about the case, what's your point?

 

[happypig]

I've always been against. However, I do think that in some cases a sentence of "Life imprisonment" should mean you never get released.

 

[Hillian1]

Not personally, but yes I know about the case, what's your point?

Hung because he was 18, wasn't even him carrying the gun, he was basically sentenced to die because the fella he was with was under 18 and Derek uttered the words "let him have it Chris" which is widely believed to have meant "give the policeman the gun Chris" and to really top of this complete miscarriage of justice, Derek was retarted with the mental age of 12 who was easily led.

I think the point i'm trying to make is that if you are going to hang people, the case should be absolutely watertight.

 

[clippedgull]

Suicide bombers?

!!! Could always piece them together and hang 'em!

 

[User removed 4]

I agree with it in principle , in practice, the old bill make too many mistakes, just look at Colin Stagg, there will be the usual people on here quoting statistics from US states that have the death penalty showing people that it hasnt deterred, the trouble is that there is no way of showing people that it HAS deterred, however life, should mean life.

 

[Gritt23]

I think the point i'm trying to make is that if you are going to hang people, the case should be absolutely watertight.

Exactly. I wouldn't EVER suggest the Death Penalty for all cases of murder, there are a multitude of complications beyond that, and Derek's case wouldn't get anywhere near falling into the "death penalty" category for me.

It just seems that his example is often brought up as evidence against the death penalty, when the reality is that bring back the death penalty doesn't mean we bring it back in exactly the same form as it was with us in the past. Things move one, just as we won't be dragging people through the streets behind horses before having them hung drawn and quartered. Nor, if we decide to do away with the monarchy will it be by executing the current monarch. Past behaviour doesn't have to set the precedent.

I could NEVER see it being all murders, and for that matter it wouldn't be hanging either.

 

[Gritt23]

!!! Could always piece them together and hang 'em!

Un-quatered, then hung. That's a nice nod to the past.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

The death penalty directly contravenes the 6th commandment, so for that reason alone, I don't think it's a good idea.

If someone is to die for commiting a crime, then it should be that they spend a lifetime being forced to consider their acts before leaving this mortal coil. The timing of their death is not a power that I would be comfortable wielding ( and as someone who has been a juror you would be fully aware that your decision in the jury room, however you may come to it, will cause someone to die ) - it would make me no better than a Holocaust camp guard who could on any particular day pick or chose who lives or dies.

We learn from other countries that the death penalty does nothing to reduce the amount of serious crime, all it does is debase our own morality to the level of those we wish to condemn. Someone who commits a crime doesn't expect to face justice, they think at the time they'll get away with it undetected, so we will never be certain if any sentence acts as a 'deterrent'.

' Let he who is without sin cast the first stone ' - the meaning of this is clear, as soon as you DO cast that first stone, then you have become as much of a sinner as the person who is being stoned.

 

[Seagull1967]

Serious sex offences, premeditated murder, violent rape

- for theft remove fingers and repeat offenders they lose a hand.

Bring back the stocks for other misdemeanours in the town square or shopping mall!!

At the end of the day if you know the punishment then these things can act as a deterrent!

 

[The Spanish]

in the unlikely event it ever come back in this country it would be the worlds most expensive way of getting some votes. it wouldnt be like pre abolition days with a relatively swift turnaround, we would end up like the US with millions in legal bills and people sitting in jail for donkeys years under the microscope. dont see what that achieves in reality apart from getting some bewigged twits a lot of ski ing holidays and selling a lot of newspapers.

 

[Hillian1]

Exactly. I wouldn't EVER suggest the Death Penalty for all cases of murder, there are a multitude of complications beyond that, and Derek's case wouldn't get anywhere near falling into the "death penalty" category for me.

It just seems that his example is often brought up as evidence against the death penalty, when the reality is that bring back the death penalty doesn't mean we bring it back in exactly the same form as it was with us in the past. Things move one, just as we won't be dragging people through the streets behind horses before having them hung drawn and quartered. Nor, if we decide to do away with the monarchy will it be by executing the current monarch. Past behaviour doesn't have to set the precedent.

I could NEVER see it being all murders, and for that matter it wouldn't be hanging either.

I agree with all this.

I'm not against the Death Penalty for some crimes, Child murder, genocide and the likes.

But, and this is just my opinion as the law sees it differently, Guilt is assumed when the evidence is Beyond all reasonable doubt, this should be rewritten to Beyond any doubt whatsoever.