Death row final statements

PMKeates said:
And so to demonstrate our collectively greater sense of humanity, we do exactly to them as they so heinously did to others. I don't buy it. It sets a moral standard that killing is acceptable in anything but defence - the very standard that sets many of the killings in motion in the first place.
Click to expand...

We should be doing our utmost to make society as safe as possible for those normal, law abiding citizens that live within it. I don't think the current system works.
 
By killing people that commit murder, we don't make it safer though. We make it safer through equality and education. More effort needs to be put into the prevention of the crime happening rather than a final solution.


George Hincapie said:
I'm not arguing with you - I'm telling you I'm not. People with views like yours are why this country is in the gutter.
Click to expand...

Utter tripe!
 
Glaucus said:
what utter garbage and shows how wrong you are.
Click to expand...

How does it? It's fine for you to jump on the 'let's **** George off because he doesn't agree with our limp-wristed Liberal views'. Prove me wrong. I don't accept I am and I very much doubt any of you will change my opinion. So really, if anyone else feels like posting **** like this, save your time. Go hug a tree instead.
 
George Hincapie said:
:rolleyes:

Dead murders can't murder again.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
A innocent excited, can't be released rom jail.
A murdered locked up for life, can't murder the public.
Death penalty does not reduce crime.

Capital punishment is barbaric and pointless and thank god the majority in UK agree.

Have you got any idea off the range of offenses that make up Murder.

Have you got any idea how stupid it looks, when you say people make this country rubbish and in the gutter.
 
Glaucus said:
:rolleyes:
A innocent excited, can't be released rom jail.
A murdered locked up for life, can't murder the public.
Death penalty does not reduce crime.

Capital punishment is barbaric and pointless and thank god the majority in England agree.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Oh really? Have you asked everyone in England? It's plain you haven't. Might be an idea not to make ridiculous assertions unless you can back it up with evidence.
 
George Hincapie said:
How does it? It's fine for you to jump on the 'let's **** George off because he doesn't agree with our limp-wristed Liberal views'. Prove me wrong. I don't accept I am and I very much doubt any of you will change my opinion. So really, if anyone else feels like posting **** like this, save your time. Go hug a tree instead.
Click to expand...

Hug a tree? lol.
 
George Hincapie said:
No, I'm not. If I was concerned with retribution then I'd be an advocate of a far more grisly end.
Click to expand...

Death is not a punishment however, it is a release from responsibilty. Unless you are religious of course.

George Hincapie said:
Don't be flippant. I clearly didn't mean randomly, I meant within the framework of the ROE in which it's for me to make a judgement as to whether a threat exists and act accordingly.
Click to expand...

I wasn't being flippant, it was your terminology I used not mine....and you haven't addressed that killing is not necessarily murder, so the term State Sponsored Murder is simply incorrect.

George Hincapie said:
You've got completely the wrong end of the stick, See response above.
Click to expand...

No I haven't, what you are saying is that self defence or defence of the state or it's people is effectively murder, which it isn't as murder has a specific legal definition.

George Hincapie said:
War is not State Self Defence. If you're an invading force then the intent to kill is there at the outset. The difference between murder and manslaughter is intent. That's it.
Click to expand...

Actually it is, and when it is abused it initiated War Crimes. Simply because one state invades another state doesn't mean it is not in defence of that state or it's people.

George Hincapie said:
I am at a loss to understand why death is not justice to you. Clearly some states in the US and a number of other countries around the World consider it to be so.
Click to expand...

It is too open to abuse and Irreversable miscarriages of justice, the death penalty is unnecessary when there are other viable options available that mitigate the risks whilst protecting the public and punishing the offender.

George Hincapie said:
I accept that's your position, but I don't accept that death is not justice. I think that for certain crimes it's an option. We did have the Death Penalty in the UK until the 60s, or whenever it was abolished.
Click to expand...

And what predicated the abolition of the death penalty?

George Hincapie said:
Justice in the UK now is a joke. Too many soft sentences, too much consideration given to the offender and not enough to the victim.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but that doesn't justify the return of capital punishment.
 
George Hincapie said:
:rolleyes:

Oh really? Have you asked everyone in England? It's plain you haven't. Might be an idea not to make ridiculous assertions unless you can back it up with evidence.
Click to expand...

You might want to gocheck opinion polls, or go check the two opposing petitions on the gov website.

So take you :rolleyes: and go pick up your toys which are now on the floor.
 
Trusty said:
They can't murder again from inside a prison cell either. What about innocent people?
Click to expand...

Why should that tax payer have to support them? We support enough wasters as it is.

Obviously the bar would have to be set high, and by that I mean that the offenders are genuinely innocent, not that they are guilty as sin but get off because of procedural errors.
 
George Hincapie said:
We should be doing our utmost to make society as safe as possible for those normal, law abiding citizens that live within it. I don't think the current system works.
Click to expand...
So you are not disagreeing that state sanctioned killing in the name of justice sets a moral standard than killing for justice is acceptable? That moral standard sanctions retaliatory gangland killings, the sort that escalate in to widespread violence, sucking in the innocent and otherwise harmless.

For most people killing is not something they can do without being put under extreme pressure, such as in the face of immediate danger, or for a primal sense of revenge. However, there are those that seem to kill for enjoyment or some other unknown reason. These are typically the people who kill multiple times, unprovoked, and in brutal fashions.

It is safe to say that, by most standards, these people are mentally unstable and 'unwell'; certainly not of a state of mind we consider 'normal'. The combination of their genetics and their environment and experiences have allowed them to grow in to something that is a danger to the rest of us. That said.. I don't really blame them for that - they are just a product of something else. If they cannot be rehabiliated, I'd rather we protected ourselves from them, and afforded them a reasonable and decent quality of life. They did not really choose to be that way, and it should be seen as a very sad thing that the situation arose that they are that way. I don't think killing them is the best we can do for each other as a species. If the individual considers incarceration worse than death, they should be allowed to conduct their own peaceful suicide.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom