The execution of Gary Glitter

33893003.jpg
 
[FnG]magnolia;15283519 said:
And how do you ensure that? :)
Click to expand...

well it happens sometimes. eg gunmen caught on cctv or film. for example those ukranian kids who filmed themseleves murdering multiple people

people like that dont deserve to live another minute imo
 
My view is that what you take should be taken from you, luckily in prision peados and child molesters are the lowest of the low and are treated as such but the inmates.

My view also extends to if you take a life, your like shall be taken, if you are a petty thief, then things of yours should be taken (for example privilages, even robbing a car stereo should mean you are tagged and not aloud out after a certain time etc)

People say two wrongs don't make a right but i don't reckon that quite applies when it comes to law, you have to treat offenders in a way which other offenders will be put off by, if murderers get the death penelty then that's what they deserve and hopefully (but unlikely) other future offenders will see that penalty as a reason to think twice

(obviously the take a life, have your life taken isn't a set in stone view as you can't just kill anyone suspected of murder obviously, but for the worst of the bunch i feel death is appropriate, it would take ages to explain in full lol)
 
Dev2 said:
Public executions are barbaric. The only crimes that justify executing someone are treason and genocide. This is because such crimes can collapse a civilization. These crimes are in a different league to that of the rape and murder of a child which is commonly trumped as the worse case scenario.

I'm happy with the status quo.
Click to expand...

And crimes such as rape and murder which ruin the lives of the victim and all of those around them do not adversely affect society? If left unchecked they would destroy the community for lack of trust in one another. The punishment for such crimes at the moment is disgustingly leniant. On top of this, I also find it an insult the these sub humans commit such crimes and then are given what is basically a free living in prison. Provided with not only food and shelter, but education and entertainment. I admit that this form of punishment/rehabillitation is good for those who have fallen to petty crimes (non violent theft for instance), however, for those capable of rape and murder there should be no reprieve. They should die, not publicly or inhumainly, but they should die.
 
Ruin a life, lose your own.
Take a life, lose your own.

Along the same lines as prisoners moaning about their human rights when they have stifled someone else's. Bread and water and thirty year stretches I say, this country is too bloody soft.
 
why not toughen up prison sentances though, make life like (not 15 years then they only serve half for good behaviour), that way they suffer for that they done.

Surely in some respects the death penalty is the easy way out for them.

With the death penalty, what happens if someone who has been hanged is found to be inicient after new information if brought to light - to late then.
 
Technically two wrongs do make a right, if you see here my equations.

right =(2wrong-1)*4wrong
right = 4*wrong**2 - 4wrong
right =2+5(wrong-1)
right = 5*wrong - 3
right =(2wrong+5)+(5wrong-25)
right = 10*wrong**2 + 75*wrong - 125
 
Jonny L said:
Ha, thanks.

With regards to evidence, I would suggest that the death penalty be reserved for those with rock solid proof, such as DNA or several reliable eye witnesses etc.
Click to expand...

Neither is infallible (eyewitnesses especially),but given the current state of society in this country I believe this would be acceptable due to :
a.the deterence factor for would be murderers.
b.the lack of effective rehabilitation (if possible)/control of paedophiles.
No system of control/government is perfect.
 
Jonny L said:
And crimes such as rape and murder which ruin the lives of the victim and all of those around them do not adversely affect society?
Click to expand...

I never implied otherwise.

Jonny L said:
If left unchecked they would destroy the community for lack of trust in one another.
Click to expand...

Your confusing the magnitude of how genocide can damage a community and how the rape of child can damage it. Don't draw any parallels between the two.
Jonny L said:
The punishment for such crimes at the moment is disgustingly leniant. On top of this, I also find it an insult the these sub humans commit such crimes and then are given what is basically a free living in prison.
Click to expand...

Yes, rape and murder are offensive. Prison in this context of a natural life sentence can be seen to exclude such a person from society. Prison is always financially free for the prisoner.

Jonny L said:
Provided with not only food and shelter, but education and entertainment. I admit that this form of punishment/rehabillitation is good for those who have fallen to petty crimes (non violent theft for instance), however, for those capable of rape and murder there should be no reprieve. They should die, not publicly or inhumainly, but they should die.
Click to expand...

Killing someone is a difficult thing to justify. The crime must fit the punishment unfortunately an eye for an eye rarely is the best approach.

I'm not an expert or very knowledgeable regarding morality but my conscience tells me that a society grouping together to kill someone because they are grossly offended and hurt isn't right. I can live with a person rotting in gaol but I would feel awful knowing my country held executions.

Make no mistake this is a complex subject and one this thread won't scratch the surface. Nobody will convince anyone of anything. Things like this usually require years of thought or explicit first and second hand experience of various mentioned events to qualify yourself an authoritative opinion.
 
Last edited:
[FnG]magnolia;15283646 said:
Isn't that revenge rather than justice?
Click to expand...

i think of it as more of a deterrent. but revenge sounds good too

people have an easy ride in prison compared to what the victim and there family/friends go through
 
[FnG]magnolia;15283857 said:
Does it work as a deterrent in the US?
Click to expand...

I don't think there is much evidence of its effectiveness as a deterrent. Though punishment is also a factor in sentencing and although I'm mostly anti-death penalty I'd be in favour of the death penalty in a few very extreme circumstances. Basically where the person being sentenced is guilty of multiple murders in separate incidents. i.e. someone guilty of ethnic cleansing or a massive terrorist attack such as Serbian war criminals or Bin Laden etc...

I think for general cases, even for murder, the risk of an innocent person getting convicted or the incident being some gray area between murder/manslaughter is reason enough to not use the death penalty in general but perhaps have it on the books for only the most extreme cases that might only occur perhaps once in a decade.
 
"andy" said:
ruin a life , lose your life.

seems fair to me but only if youve got definite 100% proof.
Click to expand...
You mean like the killers of Ian Tomlinson & Jean Charles de Menezes?

What about the hundreds of people a year who kill someone or "ruin a life" on the roads?


I did tape the programme and look forward to watching it; hopefully if will be more debate than drama.
 
Execution is barbaric and not even necessary. It does not serve as a deterrent, and people should not refrain from crime simply because they fear punishment. That is flawed. If we want to work towards a better society we should work towards people not committing crimes because it is wrong, not because of the possible consequences.

Most execution calls are irrational and revengeful, no justice will ever be served if people like that get a say in the decision making of execution.

That aside I do not like the idea of giving any governing body the legal right to execute. It will only be abused, just like everything else is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom