Poll: Death Penalty - Yay or Nay
- Thread starter Sliver
- Start date
That's not an argument against the death penalty, it's an argument against the process the USA uses for applying the death penalty. Look at places like China or Iran and I think you'll find they can execute more people for less than the USA. But I guess it's not particularly trendy to protest about justice in these countries.
You do realize it costs more to execute people than it does to lock them up for life!!
Why is it so many right wingers are ignorant on such serious subjects
It's called an appeals process and it's to make sure that innocent people aren't murdered (AND yet they still kill innocent people)
LAWL @ China & Iran, yeah we want to be executing people like they do there!! WoW what a ridiculous comment
Source = https://www.amnesty.org.uk/death-penalty-2013-report-use-statistics-executions
Yeah lets be like that, sounds fair and just
Last edited:
The US has a lengthy appeals process to reduce the risk of executing someone who is innocent. If the death penalty was ever brought back to Britain, the process would be just as long and expensive.
O RLY?
Exactly.
There's too many grey areas when you just say 'yes I agree'. What if it's a crime of passion? What if someone murders a murderer in that instance? What if someone confesses to protect the life of a loved one? What if the state is wrong and an innocent is falsely accused?
I voted no - It's a difficult one, but I don't think it should be brought back in for two reasons:
1. There have been a number of people released after many years in prison, after eventually being found innocent - Can't be killing innocent people.
2. Death Penalty can be seen as a "get out" - Sometimes I think "damn they should kill that horrible person", but then I think "actually, wouldn't it be better that they suffer in prison for many many years instead.
In some cases (of which I've read about in this thread), where someone has murdered someone and they only get 10-15 years, I feel that is a different debate altogether. I still wouldn't agree with the death penalty, but I do feel sometimes the system is too lenient...
1. There have been a number of people released after many years in prison, after eventually being found innocent - Can't be killing innocent people.
2. Death Penalty can be seen as a "get out" - Sometimes I think "damn they should kill that horrible person", but then I think "actually, wouldn't it be better that they suffer in prison for many many years instead.
In some cases (of which I've read about in this thread), where someone has murdered someone and they only get 10-15 years, I feel that is a different debate altogether. I still wouldn't agree with the death penalty, but I do feel sometimes the system is too lenient...
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,353
I'd say yes, but only for those criminals who through persistent and violent reoffence show that they are unfit to ever live in a civilised society. As a cost saving measure compared to keeping them locked up for the remainder of their days.
Having it as an option for a first time offence definately not, i'm talking serial murder here with open and shut levels of evidence, if theres any doubt at all it mustnt be allowed the death penalty.
What we need to focus on at the moment though is the equalisation of justice to ensure sentences are balanced and correctly proportional, and that custodial sentences actually encourage reform rather than being a mosh pit to learn new ways to be a criminal or allowing radicalisation whilst inside. Thats going to do more good than killing people.
Having it as an option for a first time offence definately not, i'm talking serial murder here with open and shut levels of evidence, if theres any doubt at all it mustnt be allowed the death penalty.
What we need to focus on at the moment though is the equalisation of justice to ensure sentences are balanced and correctly proportional, and that custodial sentences actually encourage reform rather than being a mosh pit to learn new ways to be a criminal or allowing radicalisation whilst inside. Thats going to do more good than killing people.
You do realize it costs more to execute people than it does to lock them up for life!!
Why is it so many right wingers are ignorant on such serious subjects
Yes, in the US. $1,000,000 a year for prisoners on death row? BS, that doesn't sound corrupt at all.
When I was in the prison service at a dispersal prison we had groups called enhanced thinking skills and this subject often came up.
Prisoners always go about 90% on restoration of the death penalty.
What often was also mentioned was being given the option ie the judge asking you once found guilty and facing 20-30 yrs for instance if you'd rather be executed.This was always 100%, always. Can't go wrong with that one.
Prisoners always go about 90% on restoration of the death penalty.
What often was also mentioned was being given the option ie the judge asking you once found guilty and facing 20-30 yrs for instance if you'd rather be executed.This was always 100%, always. Can't go wrong with that one.
Not sure about that one. You mean 100% of the time they supposedly would prefer the death penalty?
Regardless, why would what the offenders 'prefer' make any difference? It's not for them to decide.
No, 90% roughly would have it restored but always 100% would like an option which nobody can argue with surely.
I know it's not up to them to decide but I was just throwing it in.
I have met literally hundreds of long term/lifer prisoners and I doubt if any really enjoyed looking forward to 30 odd years,I agree with them as well if it was me I wouldn't want it to be dragged on for ever.
In the days when prison staff were in the dock with them so many times after getting a massive sentence they would tell you they would rather die.
Last edited:
The obvious question which people will ask, the victims had no choice so why should they have a choice?
Otherwise, it's a great idea.
The cost of execution is minimal compared to 30 yrs jail so it's a great idea for that alone.
Presume that's to illustrate a trendy protest against injustice in China. If so, good - means my wardrobe is back in fashion again.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
As John40 states, a lethal injection is trivially cheap to ongoing law costs with the defendant on legal aid, with appeals and God knows what else, plus the cost of incarcerating someone these days is allegedly more than putting them up in the best class hotels in the world. Good old `uman rights.... Maybe the victim's family should have the final say?
I worked at Whitemoor and Full Sutton prisons for some time in the SSU/SSB/HSU units which were for terrorists/supergrasses and similar and the cost 15 yrs ago was around 100 grand a year.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
This suggests that social development is linear and that it always leads to a better society. Both are clearly not true.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 10,695
- Location
- Shropshire
I wonder how many Chinese produced products these demonstrators have purchased and have in their possession at the time of their protesting, or at home, whilst they take the so called, and rather trendy, moral high ground?
Sometimes people confess when innocent but even if they are guilty and admit to it, killing someone isn't morally acceptable IMO. Plus if someone is in a situation where if they admit guilt they get certain death but if they keep quite they get life in prison then the chances of finding the truth is greatly diminished. Killing someone doesn't make things any better for the victims, but knowing the right person was imprisoned and admitted guilt freely helps bring closure.