Should life mean life?

enkoda said:
It's an example that qualifies as having absolute, irrefutable, incontrovertible evidence of guilt, where there is zero chance of evidence being unearthed in the future casting doubt on the original sentence - it completely nullifies the whole "we can never be 100% sure" stance.

I vote Cyberdyne Systems! ;) :D
Click to expand...
What happens when that example is not clear?

@ Tefal/ Nasher : because other people do it, it's ok? Is that your argument? Can you then see why that might not sit well with [people]?
 
In cases like this, clear cut and involve multiple crimes then the rope or whatever method should be used to eliminate the scum.

I'm sure it wouldnt be difficult to find an executioner. Maybe a retired SAS guy could do it, or a highly trained soldier.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
What happens when that example is not clear?

@ Tefal/ Nasher : because other people do it, it's ok? Is that your argument? Can you then see why that might not sit well with [people]?
Click to expand...


Do you slaughter all your own meat?

Landfill all your own trash?


Hell mags how about prison guard would you give up your job to do that or are you happy for somone else to imprison people for you
 
enkoda said:
Why on earth would anyone consider the death penalty for a case where absolute guilt hasn't already been established or proven?
Click to expand...


I suppose because otherwise there's not much point you'd have maybe one or two cases a decade
 
This is just shocking some people are just really messed up as well as deep level hypocrites. People want to sign up to be some sort of death squad killers because they will enjoy killing someone they don't even know, just because he killed someone else for some other reason.

Just goes to show some people are closet psychopaths/complete savages, just look how they will jump at the chance to be able to kill people legally. What a sickening thought.


[FnG]magnolia said:
@ Tefal/ Nasher : because other people do it, it's ok? Is that your argument? Can you then see why that might not sit well with [people]?
Click to expand...

Good luck trying to get sense into people. Some people are just sheep with none of their own morals.
 
Tefal said:
Do you slaughter all your own meat?

Landfill all your own trash?


Hell mags how about prison guard would you give up your job to do that or are you happy for somone else to imprison people for you
Click to expand...
No I don't and we recycle as best we can, although I'm not sure I'm answering your question.

Resident - your thoughts are noted.

edit- I would not become a prison guard, Tefal. I don't have the skills or application.
 
As an ex Prison Officer mags, providing you can breathe they will accept your application.

Lifers are also treated differently to IPP, Remand and convicted prisoners in prison, a lot of them think themselves to be a higher class of criminal - it would be an interesting case study for anyone that interested.
 
BowdonUK said:
In cases like this, clear cut and involve multiple crimes then the rope or whatever method should be used to eliminate the scum.

I'm sure it wouldnt be difficult to find an executioner. Maybe a retired SAS guy could do it, or a highly trained soldier.
Click to expand...

lol why does someone need to be former SAS to execute someone? There's probably a lot of former SAS who don't want that job because they can get lucrative paid work for their highly sought after specialist skillset.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
No I don't and we recycle as best we can, although I'm not sure I'm answering your question.

Resident - your thoughts are noted.

edit- I would not become a prison guard, Tefal. I don't have the skills or application.
Click to expand...


So by your logic we shouldn't have prisons because you wouldn't do the job?

Personally I'm not for the death penalty its a waste of time and money and in the Lee Rigby case it would have made them martyrs.

I'm just pointing out the "yeah but you wouldn't do it would you!!!" Line of argument is a bit of a strawman/pointless as there's loads of jobs we all benifits from.but wouldn't do.

Far eastern factory manager for example and all the horrors of those workplaces
 
asim18 said:
This is just shocking some people are just really messed up as well as deep level hypocrites. People want to sign up to be some sort of death squad killers because they will enjoy killing someone they don't even know, just because he killed someone else for some other reason.

Just goes to show some people are closet psychopaths/complete savages, just look how they will jump at the chance to be able to kill people legally. What a sickening thought.
Click to expand...
Do you consider the abduction, rape, torture and murder of an innocent woman an acceptable price to pay for the right to life of people who have previously committed the horrific murders of vulnerable pensioners in their own homes?
 
asim18 said:
I think people are forgetting that the problem here is that they assessed that he was no longer a risk. That is surely where the error was.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was the real error. Clearly, they wasn't rehabilitated and the process of the parole missed this.

I would assume the whole parole system is overworked, understaffed and needs redoing. I would also think we should look at how we "rehabilitate" people, maybe a more forceful and harsh approach should be adopted, maybe on the same lines as "brainwashing" to turn that person into a good person.

I do believe we should give prisoners the change of parole, especially in old age, but in the case of these two scum, they was released way too early after only 10 and 12 years, that is not enough, that even isn't the minimal time they served, should had been least 25-30 years.

I would also say, that our society as a whole is the problem too, it allows the creation of these people. Where, why and how did they go wrong? And what can we do to spot when it happened and what can we do to resolve people turning out like this?

I believe schools and the education system, should be at the front lines of this. Kids and students should also be tested psychological and socially to "weed" these people out, so they can be treated early.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
An example of revenge, or justice, or eye for an eye, or compensation? What was that case an example of, other than to be a point-to argument for someone who endorses state-sanctioned murder?
Click to expand...
To put it another way, why do you think people like that deserve to live?

I at least see how you could argue that, so I'll ask you this as well. Why should the taxpayer pay to keep people like that in jail? All justice is a form of revenge. You do something bad, you get a punishment.

Why is state sanctioned murder not acceptable to you? But state sanctioned fines, imprisonment and reduction of 'human rights' is ok?
 
The capital punishment argument doesn't stand up under even a small amount of scrutiny. If you take pains to ensure that the people being killed are 100% guilty you raise the bar so much that the paltry number of people you end up killing don't save you any meaningful money anyway, on top of that you would need to plan for appeals which cost money, and there would still be the very rare case of extraordinary circumstances where you topped a 99.9% chancer who actually happened to be innocent.

If you want to save the money you need to lower the bar in terms of certainty to up the numbers, and you need to reduce the appeals process which means as a result you'll be bumping off more innocent people. If your economics and morals say that's a reasonable compromise then more power to you, I just hope you never get wrongly sentenced for murder.

The only viable argument for the death penalty is that you believe that some people or some crimes are so heinous and reprehensible that you want those people to be punished as an act of revenge in the most permanent way possible, and you're happy that some innocent people will die, or that it will cost more than it currently does, to ensure that happens.

I'm of the opinion that as a society we should be better than the murderers and rapists, and I'd rather a wrongly convicted person is incarcerated than killed. Some people disagree and that's okay, but don't hide behind economics, own the fact that you want the state to kill certain criminals as a societal revenge for their actions, it's not an invalid position.
 
FortuitousFluke said:
The capital punishment argument doesn't stand up under even a small amount of scrutiny. If you take pains to ensure that the people being killed are 100% guilty you raise the bar so much that the paltry number of people you end up killing don't save you any meaningful money anyway, on top of that you would need to plan for appeals which cost money, and there would still be the very rare case of extraordinary circumstances where you topped a 99.9% chancer who actually happened to be innocent.

If you want to save the money you need to lower the bar in terms of certainty to up the numbers, and you need to reduce the appeals process which means as a result you'll be bumping off more innocent people. If your economics and morals say that's a reasonable compromise then more power to you, I just hope you never get wrongly sentenced for murder.

The only viable argument for the death penalty is that you believe that some people or some crimes are so heinous and reprehensible that you want those people to be punished as an act of revenge in the most permanent way possible, and you're happy that some innocent people will die, or that it will cost more than it currently does, to ensure that happens.

I'm of the opinion that as a society we should be better than the murderers and rapists, and I'd rather a wrongly convicted person is incarcerated than killed. Some people disagree and that's okay, but don't hide behind economics, own the fact that you want the state to kill certain criminals as a societal revenge for their actions, it's not an invalid position.
Click to expand...
I agree with you in the majority of cases. But in examples such as the lee rigby murders etc. Terrorism events where the people don't flee the scene and our proud of the crime they've committed, multiple witnesses and they openly admit the crime. I don't understand why we should front the cost of keeping them alive and putting them in jail.
 
Mason- said:
I agree with you in the majority of cases. But in examples such as the lee rigby murders etc. Terrorism events where the people don't flee the scene and our proud of the crime they've committed, multiple witnesses and they openly admit the crime. I don't understand why we should front the cost of keeping them alive and putting them in jail.
Click to expand...
Lol, he just addressed the cost argument mate!
 
cheesyboy said:
Lol, he just addressed the cost argument mate!
Click to expand...
The cost argument doesn't really work in cases that are so cut and dry as the Lee Rigby murders.

Did you miss the part where I said "I agree with you in the majority of cases" except for...

Please tell me what possible evidence could come to light that could change things? What appeals etc? The guy was sentenced to a whole life term with no chance of parole, Judges don't give these out willy nilly. What is the point of keeping these people alive? Answer it.
 
Keeping people in prison is such a drain. For absolute certain cases of guilt, they should just deport them to Austraila.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom