Some people here are genuinely scary and i'm not talking about the murderers
Probably already posted but here's a good video, watch it all he makes some damning good points
Last edited:
Poll: Death Penalty - Yay or Nay
- Thread starter Sliver
- Start date
Some people here are genuinely scary and i'm not talking about the murderers
Probably already posted but here's a good video, watch it all he makes some damning good points
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
Some people here are genuinely scary and i'm not talking about the murderers
Probably already posted but here's a good video
If you really think I'd shed a tear on those two lads with a bullet in their head and thrown in a ditch ...you'd be dead wrong.
You are aware what they dead to that toddler?
That's all they deserve.
Man of Honour
My general view is no to the death penalty under any circumstances, I've yet to hear an argument that is even vaguely convincing for me to think it's a good idea on the basis of benefitting society. If people are in favour of the death penalty because they think the state should be executing offenders for certain crimes then naturally that is their choice and I'm not about to spend time arguing over what is a different moral choice and worldview to mine. However where the argument is that it has some sort of benefit to society which you can measure e.g. deterrent effect, costs, reduction in crime etc the evidence seems clear that it doesn't work.
If you want harsher sentences because you want to see offenders suffer and you would like to see the state administer vengeance for transgressions then that's a worldview and that's fine (I disagree with it but won't argue on that basis since it's a personal preference sort of thing). However it is notable that the countries with the lowest rates of recidivism are those who focus on rehabilitation and continue to treat prisoners as people.
The basic point being that harsher sentences don't translate into much of a deterrent or at least the available evidence doesn't seem to support it unless this has changed wildly in the past couple of years. Embarrassing or dehumanising people simply isn't as effective as some would like to believe.
One of the major problems with aiming for a rehabilitation based approach is public perception because you get the stories of "soft on crime, soft on criminals" which riles up people. It's not without cost and it won't work for everyone but it is more effective than trying to be more punitive, it might seem illogical because "it's common sense, you'd not do it if you were going to suffer more when caught" but the evidence appears to show (and show convincingly) that people reoffend less after a well implemented plan for rehabilitation is followed. Rehabilitation is not universally successful so let's address that point straight off, there will always be some people who any system doesn't work for.
When you say prostrating themselves at the feet of authority - is this before or after they are caught? It's perfectly possible they've got limited faith in the fairness of the judicial system.
Are you really holding up those countries as models for a judicial system that you'd like the UK to emulate? If you are then again that's fine as a worldview but given the amount of human rights abuses in those countries I think we'll have to agree to disagree that there's anything to admire there.
The argument of cost is always going to be an interesting one - if you want a system with suitable safeguards then that costs money and takes time. If you don't want safeguards then life is cheap and there's very little to admire about that viewpoint as far as I'm concerned.
If you want harsher sentences because you want to see offenders suffer and you would like to see the state administer vengeance for transgressions then that's a worldview and that's fine (I disagree with it but won't argue on that basis since it's a personal preference sort of thing). However it is notable that the countries with the lowest rates of recidivism are those who focus on rehabilitation and continue to treat prisoners as people.
The basic point being that harsher sentences don't translate into much of a deterrent or at least the available evidence doesn't seem to support it unless this has changed wildly in the past couple of years. Embarrassing or dehumanising people simply isn't as effective as some would like to believe.
One of the major problems with aiming for a rehabilitation based approach is public perception because you get the stories of "soft on crime, soft on criminals" which riles up people. It's not without cost and it won't work for everyone but it is more effective than trying to be more punitive, it might seem illogical because "it's common sense, you'd not do it if you were going to suffer more when caught" but the evidence appears to show (and show convincingly) that people reoffend less after a well implemented plan for rehabilitation is followed. Rehabilitation is not universally successful so let's address that point straight off, there will always be some people who any system doesn't work for.
When you say prostrating themselves at the feet of authority - is this before or after they are caught? It's perfectly possible they've got limited faith in the fairness of the judicial system.
Are you really holding up those countries as models for a judicial system that you'd like the UK to emulate? If you are then again that's fine as a worldview but given the amount of human rights abuses in those countries I think we'll have to agree to disagree that there's anything to admire there.
The argument of cost is always going to be an interesting one - if you want a system with suitable safeguards then that costs money and takes time. If you don't want safeguards then life is cheap and there's very little to admire about that viewpoint as far as I'm concerned.
you keep spouting vengeance, I hear what your saying and keep banging on the same thing with such conviction how could you be possibly wrong, but sorry I think different get over it
No I wont get over it, as you and your like, are causing more crime and as such are causing more harm to society. you have got nothing to back your vew up other than fallacies and vengeance. Again its an illogical stance that you should be willing to reconsider, with the overwhelming evidence from around the world. Yet you ignore all the evidence because thats what you feel.
Do you not see how silly that position is. You are saying you want more crime, more people to be hurt, just so you can feel some sense of vengeance. You should be able to over ride that feeling you have with evidence. Yet you cant, why is that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
It's not about vegeance it's just disposing of humans that are unworthy to be alive.
No, it is worse!
When you are dead you are dead.
If you have spent the best years of your life in prison for something you didn't do (And then had the insult of being charged for your board and lodgings) you will spend the rest of your miserable life regretting what you have irretrievably lost.
Nope, Death is better actually.
Maybe some would rather die than be in prison, but what about the family of the wrongly executed? They've essentially become the family of a murder victim - where will the justice be for them?
How might the family of the original victim feel? Not only will there be the sense that the true murderer/criminal has got away with it, but another innocent person has died for it.
Man of Honour
I am completely and utterly gobsmacked at some of my fellow human beings and how they would accept something like this, it truly is beyond belief that you wouldn't want these two men executed.
I really don't know what to say
.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12920...lers-execution-is-overturned-for-being-cruel/
I really don't know what to say
.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12920...lers-execution-is-overturned-for-being-cruel/
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
hey it's not their family so it doesn't matter
what a surprise appeal to emotion fallacy, that's the only thing all you supporters ever give, thats it. that's your entire argument, no facts, no figures, no sense.
That's an especially horrendous case by the looks of it. Executing them seems more like vengeance than justice to me though. Even if you did execute them, would it still be an eye-for-an-eye? I think not, you want the same to happen to them/their family as what they did.
There has to be some sort of limit, because even with an execution, it might still not be enough vengeance for some people. That limit should be life imprisonment, which doesn't carry the same risks of miscarriages of justice etc.
Are there any statistics on the effects executing a murderer has on the victim's family? Does it really make them feel any better than a life imprisonment? (Ignoring the shamefully short sentences which are sometimes given here).
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
Actually it's the opposite of emotion. Dispose of unwanted rubbish, those that are against death penalty are appealing to liberal hippy emotions "peace man hey everyone deserves to live"
Man of Honour
WHERE THE BLOODY HELL DID I SAY THAT?
How the hell did you get that nonsense from my post?
Actually it's the opposite of emotion. Dispose of unwanted rubbish, those that are against death penalty are appealing to liberal hippy emotions "peace man hey everyone deserves to live"
what utter rubbish, that doesn't even make sense.
now go look up what a decent legal system is, with low reoffending rates, and why we know this works from a scientific stand point.
then how death penalty fits into it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
"with low reoffending rates"
They don't deserve to be alive, I don't give a monkeys about them doing time "getting better" and being released.
If you shoot them throw them in a ditch them they won't re-offend. Problem solved.
They don't deserve to be alive, I don't give a monkeys about them doing time "getting better" and being released.
If you shoot them throw them in a ditch them they won't re-offend. Problem solved.
No, that wasn't directed at you. That was a general 'you'. I think it's quietly inbuilt into many people that when they are wronged they want the punishment to equal what they did.
My point was, in a case like the one from the Sun article, the punishment could never be as harsh as the crime, so in the end, what is the point in killing them.
10 of the 11 states with the highest murder rates in America HAVE the death penalty. Doesn't look like it's much of a deterrent over there does it!!
More and more states are starting to remove the death penalty as a form of 'justice' yet the murder rate still declines:
Source = http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state
so you want to shoot every criminal what ever the crime. Step back from the keyboard think for a second what I am saying and stop posting utter rubbish. death penalty can be part of a good justice system which benefits society.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Posts
- 9,697
LOL. What on earth makes you think you should be killed for stealing an apple? Typical liberal you go total end of the spectrum.
Death should be for terrorists, serial murders, multiple rapists & child sex offenders, sadists, the worst dregs in society.