Bring Back Death Penalty

[XCP]

otolith said:

Agreed.

So where does your suggestion about water cannon fit in? Controlling lifers who have absolutely no incentive to behave well?
You are a joke.

[ViperPict]

Surely the bottom line is that, at a societal scale, the death penalty does not work as a deterent.

It's also more expensive than keeping someone in prison.

Itis also self-defeating by some arguments, sending out the implicit signal that killing (and often the punishment for a previous killing) is OK.

[otolith]

XCP said:

So where does your suggestion about water cannon fit in? Controlling lifers who have absolutely no incentive to behave well?
You are a joke.

Water cannon was an extreme suggestion to illustrate that there are more ways of ensuring compliance than letting murderers out after serving ridiculously short sentences, which appears to be your position. Are you really so thick that you can't think of any other possibilities?

[Ozzie Osmond]

ViperPict said:

It is also self-defeating by some arguments, sending out the implicit signal that killing (and often the punishment for a previous killing) is OK.

^^^^ This

[andymadmak]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Bedazzled said:

in my opinion their life has no meaning whatsoever, they are literally just a waste of oxygen.

Fortunately your opinion is easily recognised as that of an extremist, out of touch with civilised thinking and behaviour.

My my, you do like to stifle debate. Extremist? Out of touch with civilised thinking and behaviour? Just because he doesn't agree with you and others?
How about engaging with some facts and proposals rather than simply being insulting? If you want to change the opinion of a pro DP person such as myself or Bedazzled you would need to do better than you have so far in terms of debating the subject. If your only tactic is ridicule, insults and stifling the debate I might venture to suggest that you've lost the factual side of the arguement?

[Sleepers]

Voted yes and would happily apply for the job.

Unsure why so many no votes as it not like our govt does not kill people already i.e. all the wars we have involved ourselves in where we kill both evil and innocent people regularly.

I feel there is no real deterrent in this country to serious crime.

If the evidence is absolute then let's get on with it...

[Ozzie Osmond]

andymadmak said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Bedazzled said:

in my opinion their life has no meaning whatsoever, they are literally just a waste of oxygen.

Fortunately your opinion is easily recognised as that of an extremist, out of touch with civilised thinking and behaviour.

Extremist?

I'd say describing some people as sub-human ("life has no meaning") and fit only for extermination ("just a waste of oxygen") was an extreme opinion.

If you disagree it would be interesting to hear why.

[Twincam16]

Ozzie Osmond said:

andymadmak said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Bedazzled said:

in my opinion their life has no meaning whatsoever, they are literally just a waste of oxygen.

Fortunately your opinion is easily recognised as that of an extremist, out of touch with civilised thinking and behaviour.

Extremist?

I'd say describing some people as sub-human ("life has no meaning") and fit only for extermination ("just a waste of oxygen") was an extreme opinion.

Psychopathic, in fact. Not so different to the murderers and rapists in spirit.

Then again, I see psychopathic tendancies in a lot of NPE posters who seemingly want a country where a considerable proportion of the working class shouldn't be able to afford food and shelter, so there you go.

[XCP]

otolith said:

Water cannon was an extreme suggestion to illustrate that there are more ways of ensuring compliance than letting murderers out after serving ridiculously short sentences, which appears to be your position. Are you really so thick that you can't think of any other possibilities?

I am not thick thank you. I do however have experience of dealing with murderers in custody, unlike most who post rubbish on here.
My position is life should mean life.
I am however against water cannon.

[andymadmak]

Ozzie Osmond said:

I'd say describing some people as sub-human ("life has no meaning") and fit only for extermination ("just a waste of oxygen") was an extreme opinion.

If you disagree it would be interesting to hear why.

For some people, the notion that murderers have "rights" is an anathema. I don't quite fall into that category, but I do strongly believe, as I said in a lengthy post earlier in this thread, that the Policing and Criminal Justice systems in this country are now fundamentaly flawed. Some criminals no longer fear for the consequences (for them) of their criminal actions. Murder is difficult to discuss because in every debaters head there is a different picture of a murderer. For some, the image is of a person driven to an extreme act by circumstance ( for example an abused woman) whilst for others the term conjurs up images of the monsters like Harold Shipman, Fred West et al. Between those extremes will lies a whole raft of different experiences and circumstances...all of which have resulted in murder.
Now, as part of that debate it is not unreasonable to identify some people as sub human. It's the context that is important.
Is a severely abused woman who murders her abusive partner sub human? No. Is a woman who murders her partner just because he is boring and she wants to get her hands on his money so she can run off with the gardener sub human? Yes.
Should the first one hang? No. Should the second one hang? Yes. And yes, there is an element of "pour encourager les autres" in my reasoning there.
Now, I could be pursuaded that the DP should not be reinstated, but only if I could be confident that those serving life (lady number 2 for example) really DID serve life, and that it would be under tough, minimalist existance conditions. I would also want to be as certain as I could be that those who were responsible for guarding those prisoners were not placed under any additional danger as a result of the hopelessness for their existance that the murderers would be faced with.

You are entitled to say, if you wish, that those opinions make me inhuman or extreme. However, my only concern is the protection of the public and the preservation of the rule of law. We are getting very close to a significant chunk of society believeing that the law does little or nothing to protect them from the criminal element. If that idea gains traction then we will have people taking the law into their own hands.. This has to be avoided.

[mattnunn]

The death penalty does not deter murder and violent crime there is no evidence to suggest it does. When people commit crime they either do it in the belief they will get away with it or during a period of irrational intention (a crime of passion).

There may be a number of professional criminal types who modify their behaviour as to avoid the possibilty of murdering someone due to the detterent of being hanged, but I'd suggest equally life in jail isn't exactly a heart warming prospect and many would prefer the death penalty.

Jurys are much less likely to convict a muderer if they know the likelyhood is that the criminal will receive the death penalty - reintroduction of the death penalty is likely to lead to more murderers walking the streets not less. This leads to special death qualified jurys in the US which is contradictory (imo) to the ethos of the jury system, this is a serious constitutional question and it was one of the biggest factors in Britain removing the death penalty, it in effect creates a two tier legal system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death-qualified_jury

And finally, the death penalty is an easy way out, it is not a great a punishment to life in jail, it would be a glorious release for some of the murdering scum in our jails who should be left to rot.

The only real argument for it is one of economics, but there are ways around that, it doesn't have to cost a lot to keep a man under lock and key.

[thinfourth2]

Bedazzled said:

So can someone explain why Myra Hindley's life matters?

Maybe you should look at her partner in crime

Ian brady

He is currently trying to do everything he can to be allowed to die. He wants release by dying but we won't let him. We keep him alive by force feeding him for the past 13 years which can't be pleasant


Under your world we would of given him a nice painless injection and would of got his wish.

[andymadmak]

mattnunn said:

The death penalty does not deter murder and violent crime there is no evidence to suggest it does.

Well, actually there is evidence that the DP DOES deter murder and violent crime. It is open to interpretation, it is complex, and you can take a differing view on it, but asserting that there is no evidence is simply wrong

mattnunn said:

When people commit crime they either do it in the belief they will get away with it or during a period of irrational intention (a crime of passion).

.

yes....and there are those that think that even if they do get caught the punishment is likely to be bearable.
I wonder what the breakdown is between the various groups...

[thinfourth2]

Bedazzled said:

thinfourth2 said:

...Under your world we would of given him a nice painless injection and would of got his wish.

Quite right, I've got no interest in torturing him; death is ample punishment and he should just cease to exist.

So you want to punish him by giving him exactly what he wants

[thinfourth2]

Bedazzled said:

I don't care what he wants, his life, his rights, his requirements are all irrelevant; he should be put down and forgotten, imho. I find it amazing people think execution is barbaric yet they revel in the idea of petty torture.

So you want him removed from society

So why do you want the death penalty instead of life in prison

[Ozzie Osmond]

Bedazzled said:

I don't care what he wants, his life, his rights, his requirements are all irrelevant.

There you go again....

[mattnunn]

thinfourth2 said:

Bedazzled said:

I don't care what he wants, his life, his rights, his requirements are all irrelevant; he should be put down and forgotten, imho. I find it amazing people think execution is barbaric yet they revel in the idea of petty torture.

So you want him removed from society

So why do you want the death penalty instead of life in prison

As I said above, the defence of this argument usually resolves to the question of economics with the pro death penalty people arguing that the cost of keeping people alive need not be met by a civil society.
There is really no coherant argument to reintroduce the death penalty, it's nonsense argued by people who really haven't thought it through.

[Digga]

mattnunn said:

thinfourth2 said:

Bedazzled said:

I don't care what he wants, his life, his rights, his requirements are all irrelevant; he should be put down and forgotten, imho. I find it amazing people think execution is barbaric yet they revel in the idea of petty torture.

So you want him removed from society

So why do you want the death penalty instead of life in prison

As I said above, the defence of this argument usually resolves to the question of economics with the pro death penalty people arguing that the cost of keeping people alive need not be met by a civil society.
There is really no coherant argument to reintroduce the death penalty, it's nonsense argued by people who really haven't thought it through.

Clearly your hypothesis fails to consider those who have thought it through who say that in a civilised society, justice should not be handed out on a purely 'lowest cost' basis.

[mattnunn]

Digga said:

mattnunn said:

thinfourth2 said:

Bedazzled said:

I don't care what he wants, his life, his rights, his requirements are all irrelevant; he should be put down and forgotten, imho. I find it amazing people think execution is barbaric yet they revel in the idea of petty torture.

So you want him removed from society

So why do you want the death penalty instead of life in prison

As I said above, the defence of this argument usually resolves to the question of economics with the pro death penalty people arguing that the cost of keeping people alive need not be met by a civil society.
There is really no coherant argument to reintroduce the death penalty, it's nonsense argued by people who really haven't thought it through.

Clearly your hypothesis fails to consider those who have thought it through who say that in a civilised society, justice should not be handed out on a purely 'lowest cost' basis.

Eh?

[andymadmak]

mattnunn said:

As I said above, the defence of this argument usually resolves to the question of economics with the pro death penalty people arguing that the cost of keeping people alive need not be met by a civil society.
.

Got any stats to back that up? You keep asserting it, but that does not make it true.