Where do you stand with regards to the death penalty?
- Thread starter Metatron
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 4,652
- Location
- Nottingham
Do you fully support keeping prisoners inside small cells for most of their days? no matter what the crime? are you willing for your taxes to go towards their keep? What if someone you knew, came around to your house one day, and killed every member of your family, would you not want vengeance?
The problem with the death penalty, especially in the 'civilised' world, is that it is still a barbaric practice, as has been proven before, when the suggestion of the use of something like hypoxia, which would be much more humane, the response from the justice system and the victims is "an eye for an eye, let them suffer".
Humanity, just isn't really a nice person.
The problem with the death penalty, especially in the 'civilised' world, is that it is still a barbaric practice, as has been proven before, when the suggestion of the use of something like hypoxia, which would be much more humane, the response from the justice system and the victims is "an eye for an eye, let them suffer".
Humanity, just isn't really a nice person.
In before 15 pages of repeated arguments over this. I'm thoroughly opposed and always have been - regardless of any other point in the matter, I simply cannot accept the idea of taking another life.
Almost certainly, which is why I should have no say in their sentencing.
Almost certainly, which is why I should have no say in their sentencing.
I honestly don't know.
Case 1) A man is convicted of touching up 10 year olds for over 20 years. Sentenced to life inprisonment. The proof is irrefutable and here is no way he didn't do it. On one hand, those kids are ruined for life, the parents are outraged, it costs the taxpayer thousands of pounds a year to keep this person in a box. On the other hand, its too barbaric to kill them? A lot of parents would probably settle for 5 minutes in a room with them and immunity from prosecution.
Case 2) Man is convicted of multiple murders. Sentenced to death by firingsquad/hanging/sharp sticks/etc. 20 years later DNA evidence proves that he was innocent. A man was killed for a crime he didn't commit.
Its honestly a very difficult situation and one that in my opinion would be made a lot easier if sentencing made any kind of sense. Some people literally get away with a few years in prison for driving over the limit and killing 2 people. THAT is when people really get annoyed at the system that is supposed to protect the innocent.
At the end of the day the Death Penalty is only ever going to be for the worst of crimes. Multiple rapists, murderers etc. If your mum was killed by a crank would you be happy that a judge sentenced that person to "life" only to be released in 20 years? Your mum paid a higher price than the criminal.
People don't wan't compensation, they want revenge. Fortunately for society most people are sane enough not to try and get it.
I wonder how many proper Lifers would take the death penalty if offered.
Case 1) A man is convicted of touching up 10 year olds for over 20 years. Sentenced to life inprisonment. The proof is irrefutable and here is no way he didn't do it. On one hand, those kids are ruined for life, the parents are outraged, it costs the taxpayer thousands of pounds a year to keep this person in a box. On the other hand, its too barbaric to kill them? A lot of parents would probably settle for 5 minutes in a room with them and immunity from prosecution.
Case 2) Man is convicted of multiple murders. Sentenced to death by firingsquad/hanging/sharp sticks/etc. 20 years later DNA evidence proves that he was innocent. A man was killed for a crime he didn't commit.
Its honestly a very difficult situation and one that in my opinion would be made a lot easier if sentencing made any kind of sense. Some people literally get away with a few years in prison for driving over the limit and killing 2 people. THAT is when people really get annoyed at the system that is supposed to protect the innocent.
At the end of the day the Death Penalty is only ever going to be for the worst of crimes. Multiple rapists, murderers etc. If your mum was killed by a crank would you be happy that a judge sentenced that person to "life" only to be released in 20 years? Your mum paid a higher price than the criminal.
People don't wan't compensation, they want revenge. Fortunately for society most people are sane enough not to try and get it.
I wonder how many proper Lifers would take the death penalty if offered.
Last edited:
No doubt. And 15 pages of whataboutery, thinly veiled insults, cliquey circle jerking and self righteous pretentiousness from know nothing know it alls. These threads always end as a cluster **** of ****.
Well I am on the other side of the fence. If someone takes another persons' life - they should have their's taken to - as long as it can be proven 110% that the criminal did do it. Otherwise in jail until proven otherwise.
For other crimes that did not mean a victim loosing their life - I don't agree with the death penalty in that case.
For other crimes that did not mean a victim loosing their life - I don't agree with the death penalty in that case.
+1, always have been and always will be against it
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,537
- Location
- London
Capital punishment is barbaric and in a system where proof can never be obtained at 100% - it presents an insurmountable difficulty in in it's irreversibility if an error is made.
Prisons are very unpleasant places to be, putting a person is pretty barbaric in itself, but at least it allows for correction of any errors at a later date.
Victims of crime and their relatives who desire revenge should rest assured knowing that prison ain't a whole lot of fun.
Prisons are very unpleasant places to be, putting a person is pretty barbaric in itself, but at least it allows for correction of any errors at a later date.
Victims of crime and their relatives who desire revenge should rest assured knowing that prison ain't a whole lot of fun.
Morning. I'd like to throw the cat among the pigeons by pointing out that being a pedophile is not and should not be a crime.
yikes, thats food for thought,
so if, maybe you do and maybe you dont, have a daughter?
and you caught someone molesting her, fiddling her, you wouldn't want to kill said miscreant, or want him or her punished in any way shape or form?
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2004
- Posts
- 11,788
- Location
- Somewhere
There's a difference between having paedophilic tendencies and acting on them. Criminalizing people simply for being paedophiles is tantamount to thoughtcrime.
There's two points to any punishment in my mind - one is the punishment itself, the other is the certainty with which you administer it.
I don't have an issue with the death penalty per se, but it is horrifically unjust when you have an imperfect justice system. The question is whether in reality you can actually ever be 100% certain of a crime, as opposed to "sufficient evidence". You only have to look at some of the poor sods who have spent years locked up before being acquitted to realise that the death penalty is rather final (so is losing years off your free life, but that's another debate).
In short, I don't have a problem with it, but I don't believe it can be reasonably and fairly applied within a realistic justice system.
I don't have an issue with the death penalty per se, but it is horrifically unjust when you have an imperfect justice system. The question is whether in reality you can actually ever be 100% certain of a crime, as opposed to "sufficient evidence". You only have to look at some of the poor sods who have spent years locked up before being acquitted to realise that the death penalty is rather final (so is losing years off your free life, but that's another debate).
In short, I don't have a problem with it, but I don't believe it can be reasonably and fairly applied within a realistic justice system.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
Well, out of the line of fire to be honest.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 719
I wonder if the view would change of people against it when one of their loved ones get taken from them in a violent and sadistic way or would they just shrug it off and be able to live with the knowledge the assailant is content with life living out their dark fantasy living in a “hotel” with free food exercise and all human right intact with a possibility to be released early due to prison overcrowding for good behaviour…
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 4,503
- Location
- Darkest Worcestershire
Bring it back for treason, murder and Kiddie fiddlers
im for it, in certain circumstances
if someone is a serial killer and proven that if you let them live out in society they will kill again, and you are going to keep them locked up in a cell for the rest of their lives, then im all for it
if someone is a serial killer and proven that if you let them live out in society they will kill again, and you are going to keep them locked up in a cell for the rest of their lives, then im all for it
In absolutely exceptional circumstances I am for it, but for the most part I think the problems can be resolved by a much harsher sentencing structure.
As others say, life should be life. Especially for 1st degree murder or multiple offenders.
The life quality in prison should be reduced and the inmates should be made to do manual labor, e..g sort through garbage to separate recyclables or some such such.
Keeping people in prison is expensive, but the death penalty even more so. Exploit prisoners to try to subsidies their stay. Additionally, all financial assets of prisoners should be taken to fund their prison costs.
As others say, life should be life. Especially for 1st degree murder or multiple offenders.
The life quality in prison should be reduced and the inmates should be made to do manual labor, e..g sort through garbage to separate recyclables or some such such.
Keeping people in prison is expensive, but the death penalty even more so. Exploit prisoners to try to subsidies their stay. Additionally, all financial assets of prisoners should be taken to fund their prison costs.