Should capital punishment be brought back?

No, what happens if someone is later found innocent as has happened recently with other cases. Oh sorry your found innocent now lets put that on your gravestone / urn.
 
If brought back it would only have to be used for premeditated multiple murders, where proof is proven beyond doubt. The latest case being what has prompted this thread.
 
Yes. But only for people who believe the myth that one can't perceive higher than 24fps.
 
Last edited:
neocon said:
No.

Prisons here appear to be out of control with drugs though. People should be locked up with no creature comforts. Any violence and they should get solitary for a long time.
Click to expand...
Even if we fully automated the prisons a human is involved somewhere in the chain and the less people involved in providing basic levels of care to the prisoners the more likely gangs will succeed in perverting them through bribes or blackmail.
 
No it's too permanent and full life is probably a worse punishment than death anyway in some respects.

There are aspects of life where I think corporal punishment might work though. Like service/retail workers should 100% be able to tase particularly bad customers.
 
Lightnix said:
No it's too permanent and full life is probably a worse punishment than death anyway in some respects.

There are aspects of life where I think corporal punishment might work though. Like service/retail workers should 100% be able to tase particularly bad customers.
Click to expand...

Do you support the converse, too?
 
Resident said:
100% emphatic yes.

Why should the state burden it's people of the cost of keeping absolute animals fed, clothed and housed for the rest of their life? Especially when we cannot do it for the law abiding citizens whom have paid their dues in service/taxes.

Murderers, rapists (especially child rapists) should be a no-brain decision, off they go.

The cases you reference were indeed miscarriages of justice however they were exonerated due to advances in evidence gathering, detection and procedural changes specifically implemented to prevent such.
Click to expand...

Do you really think the government should play god? Have you read 1984?

I wouldn't trust them for a moment.

The "prison is like a hotel" argument should only be read in the voice of a ******* idiot.
 
Last edited:
I'm strongly against it because its final and you cant undo it, i dont think its the place of a government that cant even find its left bollock to be killing people.
 
tonys said:
Why do a lot of offenders commit multiple offences just to stay in jail then
Click to expand...

Because they have lost (most likely never had it instilled in them in the first place) the ability to function in the outside world, that staying in is preferable, safe and familiar.

That's not to say inside is nice and cushty, it's more a failure of the system to rehabilitate, prepare and support offenders on completion of sentence.
 
tonys said:
Why do a lot of offenders commit multiple offences just to stay in jail then
Click to expand...


As Fubsy says either "institutionalised" or potentially mental health issues where they are sadly slightly more likely to get help inside.

Institutionalisation is something that I believe can be avoided with various well known methods in the run up to release, but is also known to affect those leaving the likes of the armed forces and POW's, basically where someone has been in a situation where they've had very little control over any/all things affecting their lives for so long they can't (at least initially) get used to making them again. IE you're so used to not being able to decide what you're doing and when for everything from getting up or meal times you've basically lost the ability to do so*.
I suspect most of the "cushy" jail stories are taking the conditions in the likes of the "prerelease" units that try and get long term prisoners in their last few months to the point where they're able to function on release/increase the chance of them not immediately reoffending and applying it to every prisoner.

I used to read a blog written by a team of Magistrates and IIRC they mentioned that you could also see a slight uptick in minor crimes that resulted in arrest in really cold weather, basically because we have quite poor provision for the homeless in anything but the worst cold weather it was noted that you'd get a few instances where someone might commit a crime just serious enough to be worth a night (or a few nights) in the cells because for some people the maths were fairly simple, get another minor crime on your record but a place inside with at least something to eat and some warmth, or risk dying of hypothermia. It's been at least 10 years since I read that blog so I don't know if it's still a thing, or got worse, but it was a damning indictment of the system that the only way some people could reduce their risk of dying was to deliberately get locked up.


*I'm fairly sure at several points (not sure if we do now), that the UK military has done things to help ease career soldiers etc back into "civvie life".
 
I am going to repeat here what I have said in other threads before. I believe that some crimes are just so heinous that the perpetrator forfeits their right to live in and be supported by a civil society and for those crimes capital punishment is the right solution.

However, I want the bar for the application for capital punishment to be set so high as for it to be really, really hard for it to be applied. There should be literally zero doubt as to the guilt of the person(s) involved and the crime should clearly be a crime of malice.

There is only one crime I can think of in recent history that would meet this criteria in my mind and that is the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby, I would be quite satisfied to see his killers swinging from the end of a rope.

This is the standard I require for the penalty to be applied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom