Where do you stand with regards to the death penalty?

citizenx13 said:
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…
Click to expand...

Those with close personal ties to the victim should have absolutely no say in the sentencing of the perpetrator, precisely because of their impartiality. Perhaps if a member of my family were killed/raped/whatever, then I'd want the perpetrator killed, but that's exactly the reason I should have nothing whatsoever to do with the sentencing.

Your second "point" about prison life being easy for a convicted murderer/rapist/paedophile is just laughable.

I'm not even sure why I bothered to challenge an argument such an irrational and emotionally driven argument.
 
Fully support it provided:

There is video evidence, or DNA evidence.

It has to be said that i'd also extend the death sentence to anyone who convicts a particular number of crimes too (a high number i.e. the man who committed 600 burglaries).

As long as guaranteed evidence is there from independent sources then they should face the death penalty. I would also extend the death penalty to paedophiles and multiple rapists (the last one may be abused i am aware by angry/jealous women so there may be precautions).

I arent happy we spend more than £50,000 keeping Roy Whiting locked up!
 
Paul11 said:
how is the dealth penalty more expensive?
Click to expand...

It's not as simple as just taking the bad guys out of the courtroom and hanging/injecting them, you know. There is huge legal, investigatory, and infrastructural overhead that has to be paid for.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost/page.do?id=1101084

That's not to mention that the capital punishment has very little effect on actual crime rates, too, so from a pragmatic point of view it's worse than useless.
 
Last edited:
Mucky_Pup said:
I'd be happy if they just reviewed the way prisons are ran currently, and made them less of a cake walk, and more of a living hell for the occupants.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, they have a better time in prison than most people do outside. And all this human rights tosh, if they commit a crime against society they should lose all rights that people in society have. Just takes the pee tbh what they get away with.

Living hell is how it should be, a proper deterrent to ever wanting to go back.
 
I don't see there really being a point to the death penalty, not to say I agree to the current state of affairs.
 
D.P. said:
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.
Click to expand...

Any evidence that reducing the quality of life for prisoners has a positive impact on reducing recidivism? Or is this something that you just feel should be done to punish the prisoners?

The same question to anyone who thinks that prisons should be harsher to act as a deterrent - any evidence that this works? And just in case it's brought up "it stands to reason" isn't an argument that holds much weight.

Badgi said:
The death penalty for treason never went anywhere.....
Click to expand...

But since we've abolished the death penalty itself and have no official facilities for carrying out capital punishment then whether de jure or de facto the effect is the same.

I'm against the death penalty for a number of reasons, cost being one but principally because I don't believe it to be effective, there's no possible reparations if you get it wrong and morally I don't believe it is right for someone to take life whether it be the state or an individual (I except self-defence from this). The victims and their families should have no say in sentencing - we expect our judicial system to be fair and impartial, that's almost impossible if you are closely involved with the effects of the crime.
 
vonhelmet said:
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.
Click to expand...

Agreed, often people do get confused and assume that a 'sex offender' and a 'paedophile' are the same thing.

-------------------------

And for the record I am and have always been strongly opposed to the death penalty regardless of the crime committed.
 
There's no way we can be 100% on guilt, and as such we are unable to ever see the death penalty as an option.
Capital punishment doesn't reduce crime rates, and is incredibly expensive. It does nothing but give the victim and their families some sort of temporary satisfaction.
In saying that though I'd be for it in the face of absolute evidence and certainty though I accept that this is an impossibility and as such we could never have the death penalty in our justice system.
 
I dont agree with it because you cant reverse it in the case of a mistake coming to light.
 
Personally I am for it. The arguments against it (evidence after death, inhumain etc) don't weigh up for the deterrent it would achieve in our society. Criminals laugh at our justice system, life never means life, and the more an offender 'offends' the less this person receives as punishment. What has this got to do with the death penalty? Not a lot. But the death penalty would show that being a criminal in the UK is not worth it.

Yes it is archaic, but no less so than culling of deer, or killing of animals for meat. And if a murderer has been so callous as to take someone else's life, then why should they deserve to live theirs?

*And before anyone says that 'it isn't a deterrent, look at America'; the US is a totally different culture to ours, society is vastly different to what we experience in the UK.
 
Last edited:
simulatorman said:
That would be very slow, painful and adequate. :D
Click to expand...

Such barbaric practice would make us worse than the criminal, no?

Personally, I don't agree with the death penalty, but I think that, if a relative or someone I knew was killed by someone else then I would want them to suffer like I/they had. IMO it's pretty pointless me saying 'Oh I don't agree with it' when I can only do it based on what I know now. I like to think that I would be the better person and not want the criminal to die, but I don't think that I would.
 
Im against is because 1 innocent mans life is worth 1000 b******* life. We're human and humans make mistakes after all, so at some stage an innocent man would be killed for a crime he did not commit.

Dont get me wrong if we could 100% prove at all times (which we cannot) then I would love to have it for the most heinous of crimes as mentioned above. Definetly a tough one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom