Do you agree with the death penalty ?

[Lamp]

Do you agree that for certain crimes, the death penalty should apply ?

If so, for what crimes ?

And how ? Hanging ? Firing squad ? Lethal injection ? Stoning ? Beheading ? Hung, drawn & Quartered ?

If the death penalty applies, should it be like America where you can spend 20 years on death row, while all the legal appeals and investigations go on ? Or should it be like Saudi Arabia where they march you off the next day and execute you ?

Or do you think that capital punishment is wrong, based on your own personal beliefs about the fundamental sanctity of preserving all human life ?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Taking a life, for taking a life, seems in my mind a bit redundant.

That put aside, i always believed(partly 'cause of my religion) that a death penalty is a more forgiving penalty then say, a lifelong exile.

 

[Dreamor]

Some states in america and infact countrys still have the option for a Firing Squad, while I don't agree totally with that... I do think the 'Death Penalty' should be used within the UK. There are certain events that SHOULD mean a person is sentenced to death.

I'm also a believer that the UK should have a 'chain gang system' like the US does. Make them rebuild the roads, lay train tracks... jail is nothing but another way to teach the criminals to be better at what they do. I mean its something like a 60-70% chance of re-offending, its insane.

I mean look at a number of pervert cases recently, how many of them are on "the register" or have previously been cautioned, how far do things have to go before somethings done.

/rantmodeoff

 

[echome]

No.
I belive in trying to help and change people. Lower the senteces but insted focus a lot more on some sort of treatment.

 

[ilaya]

death too good for some peeps. they need to make their terms in prison a living hell.. not just as a punishment, but also as a detterant.

rapists and paedos.. chop their cocks and nuts off and have other prisoners bum them everyday.

murderers.. a good few punches in the face, knees in the the nuts by anyone who wants to.... then one morning the guards suddenly turn up and say! hey guess what! we gonna execute you now! and if they say.. good.. throw em back in the cell for more punishment.

sod human rights.. these bastards showed no regard for that law when they done the crime so why should it then apply to them?

 

[Andrilyn]

I disagree with the death penalty, for the same reason as Tohtori gave and because it will result into way more shit in the end.
Because if someone has done something and he will know he will get the death penalty then that person will do everything within his might to not get caught, if that means the person has to kill another 12 people just to stay out of the hands of the police then he will most likely do that and in the end it will cause alot more suffering to alot more people.

Ofc I don't want people that have commited a crime to be treated softly and have all the comfort of home in their prison but I don't believe that the death penalty is the answer.

 

[Huntingtons]

sod human rights.. these bastards showed no regard for that law when they done the crime so why should it then apply to them?

because the law applies for everybody - the people offending the offenders are breaking the law and should be treated same way and so on and so on, in the end there will be no one left... good plan really thought through

 

[Chronictank]

From the old post as im lazy

the priniciple argument here seems to be that prison is soft, so kill them instead..
surely if thats your justification you would rather the money spent on "improving" the prison system?
less reading the sun tbh

i said it before,
they should bring back hard labour, and introduce a reward scheme based on the ammount of work you do.
All prisoners could have the minimum, but "luxuries" such as tv etc should be earned through graft.
This way the prisoners
a) potentially can pay their own way
b) will have a little money when they get out (subsequently the money they earn can also be taken for what hey owe such as child support)

Why waste a rescource when you can exploit it?


concerning rape trials, what if the "victim" had made it all up?. it has happened on numerous occasions because at the moment current law favours the victim (so much for innocent until proven guilty), at the moment the case can be appealed. If you want to implement the death penalty it is game over even if you are innocent , this is just one example.
I agree on tougher penalties, i dont agree on the death penalty.

 

[Sparx]

i think a better option would be to make prisons alot more like a military prison, none of this sitting in your cell 23 hours a day, they have you out at 6am for inspections PT and other things to really punish you

 

[[HB]Jpeg]

IMO yes death penalty should be in the uk. for very serious crimes like multiple murder.. child murders .

i also think people that rape women/kids or peopple that commit serious sexual crimes should be castrated.

i know some may say give them a chance to rehibilitate. but IMO they dont deserve to if they have killed sum1 intentionally.

lethal injection imo would be best form of.. i think firing squad . hanging , gas chamber etc a bit old fashioned now.

 

[CorNokZ]

Kidnap a child, beat it, rape it, kill it and dump it in some swamp as it's just a piece of trash.. YES! Let's help ppl who does this and set them free again!

Life time in jail amongst bikers with small children or death penalty.. Not that there is much difference

Death penalty only for severe child abusers imo.. Two people have brought a new person to the world! Not only has this new humanbeing been inside the mother for nine months, but it might have taken years even to get pregnant! Afterp perhabs five years, with the parents caring and loving their child, some sleezbag(no offence Sleezer ) comes along and just takes it all away 'cause this person has some sick twisted wierd fantasy!

Deathrow 4 you !

 

[Levin]

No.

Taking another's life is never right, whether you do it because you're a sick fuck or because you're sanctioned by some text in a lawbook that someone came up with.

Put them out of harm's way - for life if need be or with an appeal every 20 years or so. I agree with labour too if it helps in some way. But irrevocably taking away someone's chance to do better, by killing them, is just against everything I believe in. Nobody has the right to do that to anyone. Not even to those who have themselves done it.

Secondary to that, but still valid arguments are those who are sentenced but innocent, and the increased spiral of violence that someone here mentioned.

Likewise I don't believe castration is a good way to solve things. If an offender asks for it, then sure, but otherwise just make them do time as everybody else.

 

[noblok]

I'm lazy too:

I believe that there are four factors which play a role in punishment: deterring, safeguarding, reforming and retribution.

As a deterrant the death punishment isn't particulary useful. Perhaps it would be if it would be introduced for lesser crimes, such as speeding, but in those cases it would conflict with our moral intuitions of justice. For more serious crimes however, the punishment doesn't affect the crime rates that much. there is empirical evidence to support this statement in the form of US states who had death punishment, got rid of it and reinstated it again without noticing a significant difference (I'm afraid I don't have a link).

As a tool for keeping society safe it has one advantage over life long imprisonment. There is no way they can escape once dead. I find this a weak argument; it just means that prisons need to be better secured. Although you can never completely eliminate the risk, I find this alone an unconvincing argument pro-detah penalty.

It needs no explaining that the death punishment has no advantages when it comes to reformation.

This leaves the retributive element. Here I would like to pay attention to three elements: retribution, practical arguments and forgiveness.

I agree that retribution should not be neglected. Someone who commits a murder of passion poses no real threat to society any longer, but if he got away without any punishment at all, this would go against our moral intuitions. The state should impose a symbolic punishment, to show that this behaviour is not accepted (note: I don't mean a £1 symbolic compensation, I mean a punishment which has no use, except a symbolic). This is not only needed for the victims, but for society as a whole.

There are at least two practical arguments against the death punishment. A first one is the one already mentioned in the first post: you will eventually kill someone innocent. The second one has already been touched indirectly by Chronictank. This argument focuses on the family of the criminal. The criminal isn't the only one who is punished, his family suffers from the penalty as well. Financially, as Chronic showed, but emotionally too. Here we need to balance the emotional harm caused to the family of the criminal and the emotional relief given to the family of the victim. Going all the way for the family of the victim isn't really balancing.

This touches the last point: forgiveness. Yes, retribution is needed to recover from the loss/harm done, but one can only completely recover if he also forgives the criminal. This is an idea which is very important in the christian (and to a lesser extent the jewish) tradition, but I believe it has an importance which exceeds the religion. If retribution is aimed at undoing the harm that is done in a symbolic way, then the logical conclusion/culmination of this process is forgiveness. Forgiveness doesn't actually undo the harm that's done, but it creates a situation which is as if the harm wasn't done.

Added to that I also believe that murder is always wrong. Institutionalised murder is no different. Institutionalised murder sends out the message that sometimes it's OK to kill someone, which is not a message I agree with. This will have consequences for morality as taking someone's life won't seem that horrible anymore (and revenge is promoted as a good thing). An example of this are the people in the US who go to executions to see the criminals die. This is obviously wrong, but I think it's an inevitable consequence of instittutionalised murder.

 

[Calaen]

For pyscho murdering baby raping fuckers I say kill them all. It is not right but they gave up all human rights by attacking someone that is more times than not unable to defend itself.

Bring back National service for 16 year olds, teach them discipline and respect so that when they leave they are better prepared to make life long decisions.

As for other crimes, make them work hard while they are there, get something back and make it feel like a punishment.

As for the people that talk about helping the criminals, some people do not deserve the chance. Anyone that has sex with a 3 year old child should be burned on a stake to send out the message. People will still commit these sick acts however everytime we catch one they burn. Beats the hell out of letting them out after a life of luxury in the current system for them to reoffend.

 

[crispy]

Death penalty - no way man

 

[Chronictank]

As for the people that talk about helping the criminals, some people do not deserve the chance. Anyone that has sex with a 3 year old child should be burned on a stake to send out the message. People will still commit these sick acts however everytime we catch one they burn. Beats the hell out of letting them out after a life of luxury in the current system for them to reoffend.

It's exactly this quick fix mentality that got us in the mess in the first place.

 

[kivik]

Aye! Jails are getting full, need to clean up some!

 

[Raven]

peodos and rapists should die slowly and painfully, even if you can change these people you need a deterrent to others. maybe flaying, starvation or impalement

 

[Zenith]

Murder is always wrong. If the man who killed someone else does not deserve to live, why would the people sending that man to the deserve to live?

After all, they both did the same thing, regardless of how they did it.

And also answer this question... if death penalty would be more commonly used in the world, innocent people are bound to be sent to the death; it has already happened before, and innocent people do spend alot of time in the prison. The thing is, they can be released from the prison, but cant be ressurected from the dead. The outcome would be, alot guilty people would be killed, but along those a increased number of innocent people would die.
The question is; is it worth it?

 

[Gamah]

Yes.

People who take life don't deserve life!

 

[Calaen]

It's exactly this quick fix mentality that got us in the mess in the first place.

YOU CANNOT FIX FUCKING KIDDY FIDDLERS Stop trying to tell me you can because there is no scientific proof to back it up. Cutting their cock off is not enough, sexual abuse does not require having a penis. They are a waste of resources that would be better used thrown into a bin than given to them.

You show me how killing the lowest scum of the earth got us into this nanny state of giving criminals more rights than there victims and ill cut my own fucking cock off.

 

[Calaen]

Murder is always wrong. If the man who killed someone else does not deserve to live, why would the people sending that man to the deserve to live?

After all, they both did the same thing, regardless of how they did it.

And also answer this question... if death penalty would be more commonly used in the world, innocent people are bound to be sent to the death; it has already happened before, and innocent people do spend alot of time in the prison. The thing is, they can be released from the prison, but cant be ressurected from the dead. The outcome would be, alot guilty people would be killed, but along those a increased number of innocent people would die.
The question is; is it worth it?

It not as common as it used to be because evidence is a lot more solid nowadays. I would take 5 innocents dying every 10 years along with 500 murderers who would kill more than the 5 innocents anyway.

 

[Chronictank]

YOU CANNOT FIX FUCKING KIDDY FIDDLERS Stop trying to tell me you can because there is no scientific proof to back it up. Cutting their cock off is not enough, sexual abuse does not require having a penis. They are a waste of resources that would be better used thrown into a bin than given to them.

You show me how killing the lowest scum of the earth got us into this nanny state of giving criminals more rights than there victims and ill cut my own fucking cock off.

There is no proof showing that executing him will make any difference whatsoever to the "kiddy fiddlers" of the future,
it is not a deterent proven by various experiments and capital punishment has been proven to not work
You laughably ask for "scientific evidence", yet you completely ignore relevant studies on the topic.

You also failed to read my post;

the priniciple argument here seems to be that prison is soft, so kill them instead..
surely if thats your justification you would rather the money spent on "improving" the prison system?
less reading the sun tbh

i said it before,
they should bring back hard labour, and introduce a reward scheme based on the ammount of work you do.
All prisoners could have the minimum, but "luxuries" such as tv etc should be earned through graft.
This way the prisoners
a) potentially can pay their own way
b) will have a little money when they get out (subsequently the money they earn can also be taken for what hey owe such as child support)

Why waste a rescource when you can exploit it?

What you propose is a quick fix, and a moronic one at that as it has been proven not to work. So not only do you set a false presedence that it will make a difference, you also waste god knows how many rescources on setting up the execution chambers, putting in guidelines to control it as well as creating bodies to oversee and ensure things are done legitimately.

You have yet to come up with any argument other than revenge (which makes you almost as bad as the person who commit's the crime) why the death sentance should be legalised in this country

 

[Calaen]

No it does not make me as bad that argument is horse shit. Why waste all the money feeding them and all the court cases and give them protection? It is pointless Killing them might not have an effect but atleast over the period of a year you have a couple of hundred less of them preying on our children. rather than them being released to make more friends and create more sick fucking plots to rape and abuse kids.

You tell me now what is the punishment? A cushy life in a cushy cell with all the trimmings most of them could never afford in the first place.

 

[Chronictank]

No it does not make me as bad that argument is horse shit. Why waste all the money feeding them and all the court cases and give them protection? It is pointless Killing them might not have an effect but atleast over the period of a year you have a couple of hundred less of them preying on our children. rather than them being released to make more friends and create more sick fucking plots to rape and abuse kids.

Again you addressed no points in my post ad made no logical argument whatsoever so far,
1) you will have the court cases anyway, they will be given protection anyway. When in the system they will be under the same protection as everyone else, so the cost of that is effectively 0
2) there would be no more on the streets than there would be under the system i proposed.
Why? because the people released would be released anyway for whatever reason, so have you reduced the number by legalising the death penality? No
Have you benefitted the country/legal system by killing them? No, in fact you have done the inverse as under my proposed system they would be earning their keep so have 0 cost of housing as well as being cheap labour so potentially profitting the penal system

 

[Gamah]

Kill em all, and give me some tax cuts

 

[Jeremiah]

I think it depends on what you consider to be the most important. The good of the many, or the good of the individual. Its a really hard thing to discuss, because we (rightly) believe we all have the right to live.

But people who have murdered... in my mind they have forfited their right to live.

 

[noblok]

I think it depends on what you consider to be the most important. The good of the many, or the good of the individual. Its a really hard thing to discuss, because we (rightly) believe we all have the right to live.

Is capital punishment for the good of the individual or for the good of the many and why is it that alternative?

 

[Jeremiah]

I think capital punishment is for the good of the many. But I dont think I'd actually ever support it.

 

[noblok]

For the life of me I can't see why it's for the good of the many. It doesn't work as a deterrent and it has no significant advantage in safeguarding society. It does however create a moral climate where people think that murder is OK in some cases and it supports the idea that revenge is a good basis for morality, which is in my opinion not to the advantage of the many. The only advantage it has in my eyes, is the advantage of the individual, namely the advantage of the one demanding revenge.