Merseyside policeman struck and killed by stolen vehicle.
Discussion
bencollins said:
Regarding the death penalty "never coming back" - why? who says? who decided this for us?
The whole system is rotten from the inside with vested interests and the we-know-best-bourgeoisie deciding everything behind closed doors to suit themselves and their backers.
The public decides nothing. This is not democracy.
Democracy means "the public decide"
The term originates from the Greek d?µ???at?a (demokratía) "rule of the people"
I'm not sure who you think had the vote in Athens at the time of 'rule of the people'.The whole system is rotten from the inside with vested interests and the we-know-best-bourgeoisie deciding everything behind closed doors to suit themselves and their backers.
The public decides nothing. This is not democracy.
Democracy means "the public decide"
The term originates from the Greek d?µ???at?a (demokratía) "rule of the people"
The idea of the public voting on every issue is a practical impossibility in a large country and direct democracy hasn't been tried for hundreds of years.
I would take the point that MPs and parties say one thing to get elected and do another when they get in, but then the following election the same charlatans are voted in again. This is democracy in action. The main problem is the two party state we have. People vote for a party and not an individual, farcical though this sounds.
There has never been a time when more people as a percentage of total population had the vote in this country.
We are about as democratic as it gets. It is flawed, but workable.
bencollins said:
From your comment I see you dont trust the public to make the right call.
Democracy means "the public decide"
The term originates from the Greek d?µ???at?a (demokratía) "rule of the people"
Herein lies the problem with what you propose:Democracy means "the public decide"
The term originates from the Greek d?µ???at?a (demokratía) "rule of the people"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_major...
Thanks for the considered replies.
There would be no waiting to ratify laws, you could abstain through non vote/time limit or assign your vote block to preferred/trusted individual/society/union/party/organisation. Thus you could cherry pick the issues you care about and read up on them, the politicians would present their arguments then you would vote. The other issues you would assign your executive > with the important point being you always have the choice to vote and influence. This means when you read the news about something frustrating, the next time you can do something about it. And even more crucial when problems are created after a time it wouldnt be the "government what did it" but "us".
The issue with mob rule is interesting and acknowledged. The constitution should temper extremism and there would also need to be a mechanism to counter extreme voting, i.e. voting for 1 or 10 because you are hoping for 3 or 7 result.
We are at a certain point in democratic development (non landowners, women, younger people (now prisoners possibly) all getting the vote over time. So let us consider democracy as an evolution that is under process rather than "that's it forever". The independence vote for Scotland (organised in a horrendously expensive way) shows what is possible with public consultation and is the only fair and proper way to decide that issue, so well done UK on that one item.
There would be no waiting to ratify laws, you could abstain through non vote/time limit or assign your vote block to preferred/trusted individual/society/union/party/organisation. Thus you could cherry pick the issues you care about and read up on them, the politicians would present their arguments then you would vote. The other issues you would assign your executive > with the important point being you always have the choice to vote and influence. This means when you read the news about something frustrating, the next time you can do something about it. And even more crucial when problems are created after a time it wouldnt be the "government what did it" but "us".
The issue with mob rule is interesting and acknowledged. The constitution should temper extremism and there would also need to be a mechanism to counter extreme voting, i.e. voting for 1 or 10 because you are hoping for 3 or 7 result.
We are at a certain point in democratic development (non landowners, women, younger people (now prisoners possibly) all getting the vote over time. So let us consider democracy as an evolution that is under process rather than "that's it forever". The independence vote for Scotland (organised in a horrendously expensive way) shows what is possible with public consultation and is the only fair and proper way to decide that issue, so well done UK on that one item.
bencollins said:
Thanks for the considered replies.
There would be no waiting to ratify laws, you could abstain through non vote/time limit or assign your vote block to preferred/trusted individual/society/union/party/organisation. Thus you could cherry pick the issues you care about and read up on them, the politicians would present their arguments then you would vote. The other issues you would assign your executive > with the important point being you always have the choice to vote and influence. This means when you read the news about something frustrating, the next time you can do something about it. And even more crucial when problems are created after a time it wouldnt be the "government what did it" but "us".
The issue with mob rule is interesting and acknowledged. The constitution should temper extremism and there would also need to be a mechanism to counter extreme voting, i.e. voting for 1 or 10 because you are hoping for 3 or 7 result.
We are at a certain point in democratic development (non landowners, women, younger people (now prisoners possibly) all getting the vote over time. So let us consider democracy as an evolution that is under process rather than "that's it forever". The independence vote for Scotland (organised in a horrendously expensive way) shows what is possible with public consultation and is the only fair and proper way to decide that issue, so well done UK on that one item.
We can safely ignore the hype of Magna Carta, but we've had various systems of government and they've been progressive since William of Orange, where, like Athens, only a minority had the vote. As you say, we've moved over time from male land owners, male house holders and to the present day.There would be no waiting to ratify laws, you could abstain through non vote/time limit or assign your vote block to preferred/trusted individual/society/union/party/organisation. Thus you could cherry pick the issues you care about and read up on them, the politicians would present their arguments then you would vote. The other issues you would assign your executive > with the important point being you always have the choice to vote and influence. This means when you read the news about something frustrating, the next time you can do something about it. And even more crucial when problems are created after a time it wouldnt be the "government what did it" but "us".
The issue with mob rule is interesting and acknowledged. The constitution should temper extremism and there would also need to be a mechanism to counter extreme voting, i.e. voting for 1 or 10 because you are hoping for 3 or 7 result.
We are at a certain point in democratic development (non landowners, women, younger people (now prisoners possibly) all getting the vote over time. So let us consider democracy as an evolution that is under process rather than "that's it forever". The independence vote for Scotland (organised in a horrendously expensive way) shows what is possible with public consultation and is the only fair and proper way to decide that issue, so well done UK on that one item.
You mention the Scottish independence referendum. It gives rise to the main problem with such methods of voting.
We voted to join the EU. We will vote whether to stay in or not. In time there will be another referendum as to whether we agree with the vote that we all said last time. The SNP will demand another referendum if they retain all/most of their seats in the next GE. More horrendous costs. Yet is was a 'generation' vote. It, like the EU one, will be pushed by some people until such time as they get the result they want. More money.
There is no forever after.
With direct democracy / folkcracy voting costs would be a one off using a bank ID type dongle, or even your existing band ID card reader. Log on weekly, see what there is to vote for, follow your preferred executors recommendations, or read the arguments for the various multi choices and click your choice. Different issues each week or month, boiled down by the experts.
Real democracy, cheap as chips, fully engaged and interacted government and populous.
The old joke, ”it doesnt matter who you vote for, the government always wins” will no longer apply.
Real democracy, cheap as chips, fully engaged and interacted government and populous.
The old joke, ”it doesnt matter who you vote for, the government always wins” will no longer apply.
I'm not saying I agree with the death penalty, and I apoligise for it being a Daily Wail article, but six years ago this guy in Texas ran down and killed a police officer putting spike strips out and and he's just been put to death for it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3195990/Te...
I don't really approve of the death penalty but it shows rather different approaches to the same sort of crime. In this country a killing carried out with a motor vehicle often isn't even considered murder, even when the act of running someone down with it seems to have been clearly deliberate.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3195990/Te...
I don't really approve of the death penalty but it shows rather different approaches to the same sort of crime. In this country a killing carried out with a motor vehicle often isn't even considered murder, even when the act of running someone down with it seems to have been clearly deliberate.
Countdown said:
I'm not sure if people think that the death penalty would be some kind of deterrence. If that's the case then it's misguided. Even with DP the US has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world.
yes and no.they have the DP but it's so rarely used, what's the point?
Scuffers said:
Countdown said:
I'm not sure if people think that the death penalty would be some kind of deterrence. If that's the case then it's misguided. Even with DP the US has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world.
yes and no.they have the DP but it's so rarely used, what's the point?
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/execution-list-201...
It's not in the same league as China, for example, but it's still one every few days. Violence and death is ingrained in American culture though. The state kills people legally, the police shoot people dead on a regular basis and the criminals are more violent to fight against it. It's a vicious circle with each side thinking more violence is the answer to overcome the other.
In this particular case the guy executed was depressed and chose to waive his rights to further appeal after six years in prison because he basically wanted to commit suicide through the legal system. He's not the first person to do that either. Some people can be on death row for twenty or thirty years before being executed, so it doesn't keep down prisoner numbers and the appeals processes cost the state millions of dollars so it doesn't save money over keeping people in prison either.
Blakewater said:
Violence and death is ingrained in American culture though. The state kills people legally, the police shoot people dead on a regular basis and the criminals are more violent to fight against it. It's a vicious circle with each side thinking more violence is the answer to overcome the other.
Oh, from an observers point of view i'd say that the criminals are more violent and have such easy access to high powered weapons the cops are just that bit more nervous and their guns are out much more often than you'd find in a country like Australia. That and America has very strict laws and as mentioned, the highest rate of imprisonment in the world, so the crooks have extra motivation not be be arrested. 
.Blakewater said:
Scuffers said:
Countdown said:
I'm not sure if people think that the death penalty would be some kind of deterrence. If that's the case then it's misguided. Even with DP the US has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world.
yes and no.they have the DP but it's so rarely used, what's the point?
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/execution-list-201...
It's not in the same league as China, for example, but it's still one every few days. Violence and death is ingrained in American culture though. The state kills people legally, the police shoot people dead on a regular basis and the criminals are more violent to fight against it. It's a vicious circle with each side thinking more violence is the answer to overcome the other.
In this particular case the guy executed was depressed and chose to waive his rights to further appeal after six years in prison because he basically wanted to commit suicide through the legal system. He's not the first person to do that either. Some people can be on death row for twenty or thirty years before being executed, so it doesn't keep down prisoner numbers and the appeals processes cost the state millions of dollars so it doesn't save money over keeping people in prison either.
Also, note just how many years they take...
In a country of what? 280m?
There are a few studies which conclude the Americans have killed a fair few innocent people: http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7230
Doesn't seem like justice to me.
Doesn't seem like justice to me.
Countdown said:
Do you think using it more often would improve deterrence / reduce offending?
not much point in having DP if you're clearly not going to use it.it's like using an empty gun to stop your enemy (or to use todays context, having Corbin preside over the Trident launch button!)
there are people on death row in the stats that have been on it for 20+ years, what's the point in that?
My personal view is if you have the DP, you have to use it in a clear and unambiguous way, ie. say you have a Fred West, there is zero doubt he has committed multiple murders, then rather than letting him rot in jail for the rest of his days (at great expense), you carry out the DP in a timely fashion (like in days/weeks, not months/years).
I would suggest Kenneth Noye, Dale Cregan, Harry Roberts, etc are all prime candidates.
unless you are prepared to use a deterrent, it's no longer a deterrent.
Countdown said:
Scuffers said:
unless you are prepared to use a deterrent, it's no longer a deterrent.
The US uses it far more than we do. So do countries like China, Iran etc. They all have higher crime rates than the UK.So how is the DP a deterrent?
We as in the UK do not have the DP so of course somewhere that does will use it more!
If you want to look at the extreme, take the UAE, they have it and use it, crime is very low there, you can leave your car parked with the keys in it and the engine running, it will still be there when you get back.
the penalties there are draconian, and yes, they are a massive deterrent.
Scuffers said:
did you not read what I posted?
We as in the UK do not have the DP so of course somewhere that does will use it more!
You've missed the point. If the DP was a deterrence then the USA (and other countries which use it regularly) would have lower rates of crimes where criminals were going to be sentenced to the DP.We as in the UK do not have the DP so of course somewhere that does will use it more!
Scuffers said:
If you want to look at the extreme, take the UAE, they have it and use it, crime is very low there, you can leave your car parked with the keys in it and the engine running, it will still be there when you get back.
the penalties there are draconian, and yes, they are a massive deterrent.
Having the DP makes no difference to offending rates.the penalties there are draconian, and yes, they are a massive deterrent.
https://fullfact.org/blog/death_penalty_homicide_r...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff