Likes Likes:  49

View Poll Results: Corporal Punishment for Venables

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, ice him. He's evil

    19 55.88%
  • No. He's evil, but he deserves life

    15 44.12%
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 136 to 149 of 149

Thread: Does Jon Venables deserve execution?

  
  1. #136
    Duggee hug! MK Shrimper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In a phone box arguing with myself
    Posts
    45,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GBJ View Post
    My solution was to execute those who fit a certain strict criteria.

    If that's immoral, then you won't like the rest of my ideas. For Example, instead of testing new perfumes on animals, why not test them on real animals, like Venables. They type who are not used to being the prey? 8 hours per day for clinical testing, then the remaining 16 hours per day spent in an 8X4 box room. No fancy £250k-per-year prison. No new alias'. No chance of parole. At least that way, they'd be contributing something towards humanity.
    Well much like Messi & Ronaldo signing for us in the transfer window, it's never going to happen is it.

  2. #137
    Smiffy's Best Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Grays
    Posts
    7,084

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    I've given mine. More investment.
    If you're taking the death penalty out of the equation because it's far-fetched, then you have to remove more funding from the argument aswell.

    If You wanna argue the monetary side of it, then you'd have to strip back some of these special case prisoners human rights (which could be possible once we leave the EU) and treat them like the savages they are. Boxed up for the rest of their days & fed the bare minimum.
    Quote Originally Posted by southchurch View Post
    Ron has worked his socks off over many years and had many a sleepless night in his heroic attempt to keep this club afloat

  3. #138
    Smiffy's Best Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Grays
    Posts
    7,084

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    If we can return to the real world. What's your real answer to the question?
    See above.....
    Quote Originally Posted by southchurch View Post
    Ron has worked his socks off over many years and had many a sleepless night in his heroic attempt to keep this club afloat

  4. #139
    Duggee hug! MK Shrimper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    In a phone box arguing with myself
    Posts
    45,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GBJ View Post
    If you're taking the death penalty out of the equation because it's far-fetched, then you have to remove more funding from the argument aswell.

    If You wanna argue the monetary side of it, then you'd have to strip back some of these special case prisoners human rights (which could be possible once we leave the EU) and treat them like the savages they are. Boxed up for the rest of their days & fed the bare minimum.
    Why? One is a very real possibility, one isn't.

  5. #140
    Smiffy's Best Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Grays
    Posts
    7,084

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    Why? One is a very real possibility, one isn't.
    Unless you've been living under a rock, you'd know that this society's infrastructure is bursting at the seems. There's millions and one things that need more investment, do you think that prisoner reformation is high up on the agenda? Especially considering the elite know that there is very little chance of it affecting them?
    Quote Originally Posted by southchurch View Post
    Ron has worked his socks off over many years and had many a sleepless night in his heroic attempt to keep this club afloat

  6. #141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    I've given mine. More investment.

    You should be a politician dodging every question like a pro.What is your solution when you take the death penalty out of the argument?
    How would you spend that investment ?

    What amount would it take to stop Jon Venables or what ever he is called at the moment from driving past your or anyone else's children's school as we speak.

    When Theodore Johnson murdered his 3rd wife how that was due to lack of funding?. In fact the cheaper option would be to lock him up for life after the first murder and two women would be still alive.

  7. #142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    Well much like Messi & Ronaldo signing for us in the transfer window, it's never going to happen is it.
    You know that's how rumours start don't you?

  8. #143
    Certified Senior Citizen Tangled up in Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Sant Cugat del Vallès
    Posts
    23,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tangled up in Blue View Post
    Civilised countries don't have the death penalty.The argument for was lost a long time ago.Quite frankly I'd sooner let you and your fellow right-wingers argue the toss amongst yourselves rather than get involved.

    As far as the punisnment v rehablitation debate is concerned,I'm broadly on the rehabilitation side of the argument as I spent about 18 months working as (an unqualified) social worker in two different residential settings,back in the day.
    Quote Originally Posted by rigsby View Post
    We are not just discussing the death penalty though are we.

    With your experience what rehabilitation would you recommend for the killers of Debra Carne. Just to remind you one girl lured 17 year old Debra to a lonely place and two others beat her, stamped on her and then set alight whilst still alive.

    As a social worker what advice would you give to Roger Carne, Debra's father......You might be surprised to know that after those cheeky little scamps had had their fun Roger had to quit the Fire Brigade.........Wonder why?
    I should have said, I'm broadly in favour of rehabilitation (where possible) in my original post.

    Quote Originally Posted by GBJ View Post
    Based on the re-offending figures I posted, do you think the rehabilitation service is doing a good job?
    See above reply.
    “The funniest mortals and the kindest are those who are most aware of the baffle of being”

    Tonight at Seven-Thirty, W.H. Auden.

  9. #144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MK Shrimper View Post
    Before people harp on about the infaliability of DNA and some huge database with us all on it, pehaps they may like to read this: https://science.howstuffworks.com/wh...unreliable.htm

    Also, identical twins have identical DNA. Which one is the murderer and which one are you going to execute, knowing that possibly you could have a completely innocent twin?
    What’s your point? In both cases the police would not investigate the same way as they do today when they have DNA on file that matches the suspect

    additionally DNA is significantly more reliable than eye witness testimony which can totally wrong, even if someone thinks they are telling the truth.

    I am still to hear a case for not doing this, I would guess that in the long run it would even save money, not that that is the driving factor

  10. #145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by londonblue View Post
    I have a friend who has 2 sets of DNA...
    Interesting but not sure how it affects my point

  11. #146
    Junior Blues Co-ordinator OldBlueLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Benfleet
    Posts
    42,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by united we stand View Post
    additionally DNA is significantly more reliable than eye witness testimony which can totally wrong, even if someone thinks they are telling the truth.
    As we know from reading match reports every week!!!

  12. #147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by united we stand View Post
    Interesting but not sure how it affects my point
    Which set of DNA will be on record, and which will be found at the scene? There's a fair chance they'll be different.

    Moreover, one set of his DNA isn't his. He shares it with his stem cell donor which is some completely random stranger somewhere in the world. It could be his neighbour or it could be someone the other side of the world whose DNA won't be on record...
    Last edited by londonblue; 13-01-2018 at 10:08 AM.

  13. #148

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by londonblue View Post
    Which set of DNA will be on record, and which will be found at the scene? There's a fair chance they'll be different.

    Moreover, one set of his DNA isn't his. He shares it with his stem cell donor which is some completely random stranger somewhere in the world. It could be his neighbour or it could be someone the other side of the world whose DNA won't be on record...
    Again you (and others) are missing the point. A DNA match doesn’t = a conviction•, it equals an investigation. This is exactly what happens today.

    Still waiting to hear a downside if we used the black cab murderer example that others have used, he could have been caught after his first attack

  14. #149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by united we stand View Post
    Again you (and others) are missing the point. A DNA match doesn’t = a conviction•, it equals an investigation. This is exactly what happens today.

    Still waiting to hear a downside if we used the black cab murderer example that others have used, he could have been caught after his first attack
    So you've actually just agreed with the article MK linked. DNA isn't infallible, and can only assist an investigation.

    The problem, though is that Police who are under pressure to gain a conviction will overlook things like that and use what is on record, i.e. it must be him because the DNA matches, so now let's find other evidence to prove it.

    That kind of thing happens all the time. It even happened in the John Grisham book The Innocent Man you mentioned. That may have all happened before DNA became so widely used, but the simple truth is the investigator believe he was guilty, and did everything he could to prove it even if it meant supressing and manipulating other evidence. If he had DNA as his starting point that would have been worse because there's no way they would even consider that two complete strangers might have the same DNA.

    Again, it comes down to the human trait of finding evidence to support a conclusion rather than using all the evidence to arrive at a conclusion.
    Last edited by londonblue; Yesterday at 12:52 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

ShrimperZone.Com Official Sponsors