Death Penalty vote back in the forefront

[Rusty Shackleford]

Better still why not make them fight to death for the public's amusement.

Rusty has volunteered be the event organiser and assures me that there will be onions in the burgers and the scoreboard will work. The economically savy OBL has staked her reputation on the operation running at a profit. She can guarantee that it will not cost the taxpayer a single penny.

I would be more amused if the fights were between murderers and bleeding hearts who put the welfare and rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.

 

[OldBlueLady]

I'm wondering how many of those who are against this are parents? Seems to me some of the most emotive posts in favour are from people with children.

I think DtS puts across the same points as I do, the list of people he names are ones that I think have forfeited every right to life because of their actions. I hear the argument about those who are of "unstable mentality" and would also agree that a secure institution is probably the right place for them, but the calculating, planning mind of people like Ian Brady, Peter Sutcliffe, Rose West etc is certainly not unstable and I believe that people who carry out these sorts of crimes SHOULD be executed.

 

[Firestorm]

Also how about terrorists?

Say bin Laden had been captured alive.... better to lock him away in the darkest, deepest cell in the US or to execute him and create a martyr? I know from my church history the execution of so many Catholics in the Reformation did wonders for the faith of the believers around the world! :winking:

Exactly, if the Romans had locked up Jesus instead of executing him, we wouldn't have easter eggs

 

[Gremlin]

So for instance, a burglar breaks into your house and ends up killing your wife/child, or a madman kills your wife/child in a random street attack or a drunk driver runs over and kills your wife/child.

You will NEVER see them again, but the murderer will be out and enjoying life again in a few years, a life that your wife/child will NEVER again enjoy.


Would you be happy with that?

Have you ever thought of this situation in reverse? Let's say that you or a loved one of yours is accused of the crimes you mention above, but you know that they're innocent. Would you be happier going into the trial knowing that a guilty verdict would result in that person being put to death by the state or would you prefer that there's an opportunity for a re-trial and the verdict to be quashed should evidence come to light in years to come?

 

[Firestorm]

Totally for it....Not just for murderers either.

Sex Offenders for example. Half the time there is evidence, anyone making images of kids, anyone found guily of large scale drugs offences, serial rapists......

.

Napper is due to death sentance for my mind. Thousands of kind are abused and they dont go around killing people. If you worked on that basis then I am sure everyone can think of a hard luck story.

Interesting dichotomy there Dave, Sexual assault is serious enough to warrant the death penalty for the assailant but trivial enough for the victim to be dismissed as a "hard luck story"

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Have you ever thought of this situation in reverse? Let's say that you or a loved one of yours is accused of the crimes you mention above, but you know that they're innocent. Would you be happier going into the trial knowing that a guilty verdict would result in that person being put to death by the state or would you prefer that there's an opportunity for a re-trial and the verdict to be quashed should evidence come to light in years to come?

With all the advances in technology, it wouldn't come to that. Anyhow, where someone is giving the death penalty at the moment, they seem to spend an eternity on death row, plenty of time to get a re-trial.

 

[Jedi Shrimper]

In 1999 Tony Martin shot & killed two intruders in his home. A great many of the press & public thought he should not even be in prison for his actions, yet under the death penalty law a number of posters here would choose, ie. you take a life, your life is taken - he would be executed.

 

[thewhelk]

im sure it would work as a deterrant

In all honestly????
Could I kill someone ?????????? if push came to shove unfortunately I probably could I think? I hope I never know,

Could I kill someone, knowing I to will then be killed by the goverment, going through years of paper work in the courts, knowing hat soon my day will come were I am strapped down and given a leathel injestion??? Most defiantely not (not even the wife he he heee!)

 

[londonblue]

I would be more amused if the fights were between murderers and bleeding hearts who put the welfare and rights of the criminal ahead of those of the victim.

I would be more amused if the fights were between murderers and the "people" that want them dead. Now that WOULD be an interesting fight.

 

[thewhelk]

In 1999 Tony Martin shot & killed two intruders in his home. A great many of the press & public thought he should not even be in prison for his actions, yet under the death penalty law a number of posters here would choose, ie. you take a life, your life is taken - he would be executed.

but then not in these circumstances............ tony martin did shoot these guys, he was in his won property midning his own business when somebody thought they could infringe on his personnel space with the intent to steal and who knows what else???
Somebody walking down a lane bludgening a whole family and there pet dog, whilst all they were doing was going for a summers walk?????

totally totally different scenarios. I know things are never black and white but I dont think you can compare tony martin with a seriel murderer or rapist child killer etc etc etc.......

 

[Jedi Shrimper]

Death Penalty as a deterrant.

US average murder rates - per 100,000 people.
2009
States with Death Penalty: 4.9
States without Death Penalty: 2.8
2008
States with Death Penalty: 5.2
States without Death Penalty: 3.3

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I would be more amused if the fights were between murderers and the "people" that want them dead. Now that WOULD be an interesting fight.

I think I could take Peter Sutcliffe in a row. Fred West looked a bit tasty mind.

 

[thewhelk]

A comment on BBC I thought was interesting
Comment number 776.
Paul 4 HOURS AGO
Having the death penalty gives several 'unintended' consequences:- people are not going to confess to a crime which has the possibility of a death sentence- jurors are less likely to find someone guilty of a crime which has the possibility of a death sentenceEven '100%' evidence is not 100%. Unless someone actually commits the crime in front of the jury, the evidence could have been altered
---
I also think the petitions could be prone to 'marketing' where people advertise them without telling people where the anti petition can be found. A good idea I've seen is that all petitions should have agree and disagree buttons

But again this all boils down to with unquestionable doubt ie the man in Norway...........


f*K him off hes not needed!!! I tell you what I was alive when the last exercution took place, lucky there wasnt internet then!!!! luckily there was still the shrimpers!! (as they were once known as!!!)

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

For me Napper is where he should be, in a maximum security mental institution for the rest of his life. His mind is broken and lets face it will never be fixed. If anything execution in his case might even be the merciful thing to do.

Daniel Taylor is obviously an extremely twisted character and someone who should be detained in a mental institution for an extremely long period. He is the the same age as me and I cannot even phathom the thought processes that go on in a mind like that. The problem for society is that there is noone out there who can adequately explain why people commit crimes like this. It could be said that its people like taylor that create people like robert napper.

I must admit i'm not a believer in 'evil', Taylor is obviously as twisted as they get and there isn't a doctor in the world who could gaurantee that he could be rehabilitated which leaves us with a big problem. If he could be 'cured' I have him serve 20-25 years and then be released. Unfortunately there is no 'cure' currently and may never be one, this is the reason the country is so split on this debate and why its so emotional. I can't agree to the death penalty though as I can't justify the risk of miscarriages in other cases that result in innocent people losing their lives.

Appreciated the debate dave, I know where you are coming from but I feel a bit different about the issue

Your focus seems to be entirely on curing and rehabilitating the criminal - you don't pay any attention to justice for the victim and the concept that one should be held accountable and punished for one's misdeeds. I firmly believe that there is evil in the world, and it is the responsibility of the righteous man to punish that evil.

 

[londonblue]

Good point and hard to argue against when it comes to Stagg. If he was innocent and put to death then that is clearly wrong. I would say that you some errors are inevitable but then if I was one of those "errors" then I would of course loose my life for nothing.

During the Colin Stagg trial I spoke to the prosecution barrister's wife who told me a very interesting story. Apparently in all his police interviews Stagg never once said he didn't do it. All he kept saying was, "You can't prove it." Everybody, and I mean everybody took that as a sign of guilt. As it turns out, everyone was wrong.

But, DtS, let's take this Stagg scenario one stage further, and pretend you were in his shoes. Do you think the death penalty is worth ruining your family's life for, because once in a while we're bound to make a mistake? Think about your wife trying to bring up your kids without you, and how you would feel knowing you are going to be put to death for something you didn't do, and would be denied the opportunity to see your kids grow up, maybe go to university, get married, maybe even have a family of their own. They will be forever asking, "Where's daddy?" and your wife will have to explain that you're dead, without getting all teary because she'll need to put on a brave face for them, whilst seething on the inside.

My view is quite simple. There will always be miscarriages of justice, and I want to be able to reverse those to avoid secarios like the one above. I am not a liberal that puts the rights of the murderer first, I put the family of the victims of a miscarriage of justice first because I know that they WILL happen. I also happen to genuinely believe that life in prison is a far worse punishment. I don't care about the cost simply because I would pay anything to punish people in the way I believe would give them the worst and longest pain (i.e. prison) and because the cost is so small in relative terms (about 50p per tax payer per year) I don't see it as an issue. I also don't see the point in killing people that are mentally ill because it won't mean anything to them. I am also not interested in revenge, I am interested in justice.

 

[Gremlin]

With all the advances in technology, it wouldn't come to that. Anyhow, where someone is giving the death penalty at the moment, they seem to spend an eternity on death row, plenty of time to get a re-trial.

Are you seriously suggesting that miscarriages of justice are a thing of the past?

 

[londonblue]

I think I could take Peter Sutcliffe in a row. Fred West looked a bit tasty mind.

Rusty, it's my game and I get to choose who you go in with!

 

[southendkid]

Your focus seems to be entirely on curing and rehabilitating the criminal - you don't pay any attention to justice for the victim and the concept that one should be held accountable and punished for one's misdeeds. I firmly believe that there is evil in the world, and it is the responsibility of the righteous man to punish that evil.

Revenge is not the same as justice. If a man accidentally ran someone over because they walked out in front of a car, the parents might feel it's justice to kill that man. The public who have no connection to the case on the other hand would not feel so strongly, it wouldn't be justice if the man was killed, it just satisfies a human need for revenge. The only time I would allow the death penalty was if there was a serious risk he could be broken out by sympathisers to him (high profile terrorists for example.) if I was told I was spending the rest of my life in solitude in a prison but I could kill myself anytime, if the prison is good I'd probably pull the trigger after a couple of years

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Revenge is not the same as justice. If a man accidentally ran someone over because they walked out in front of a car, the parents might feel it's justice to kill that man. The public who have no connection to the case on the other hand would not feel so strongly, it wouldn't be justice if the man was killed, it just satisfies a human need for revenge. The only time I would allow the death penalty was if there was a serious risk he could be broken out by sympathisers to him (high profile terrorists for example.) if I was told I was spending the rest of my life in solitude in a prison but I could kill myself anytime, if the prison is good I'd probably pull the trigger after a couple of years

I'm not advocating the death penalty for any murder or manslaughter that is committed. I favour the death penalty for child killers, terrorists, those that commit treason and Polly Toynbee.

 

[osymandus]

No such thing as 100% guilt?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-14400703

I challenge any parent right now to not want the death penalty for this. Sick *******.

Sorry an idea of guilt is the same as evidence ? Thuis is teh problem with theses debates , they are not simply , they affect everyone and the majority of people want an easy form or justice that they can see being done to alive ate sense of guilt or fear .
Yes he is scum , however better to study the method and motivations used to catch or prevent others from getting to this point.

Remember organised crime families of yore were created in times when their government's or rulers executed sometimes on whims or for the least of these . It made little difference .