US Lethal injection crim takes 2 hours to die

[Gecko1978]

Hackney said:

shep1001 said:

Oakey said:

Typical PH response. God forbid there is ever a miscarriage of justice, eh?

In this case his conviction was safe. Death penalty is fine in my book where there is no doubt as to the guilt of the offender.

They were all safe until it was found that actually they weren't.

Lee Rigby Killers do you think we got the wrong guys. Sometimes there is no doubt, other times we have life imprisonment to cover that.

[Oakey]

Gecko1978 said:

Lee Rigby Killers do you think we got the wrong guys. Sometimes there is no doubt, other times we have life imprisonment to cover that.

This is a daft argument, not all killers murder their victims in a street full of witnesses holding camera phones.

[McWigglebum4th]

Gecko1978 said:

Lee Rigby Killers do you think we got the wrong guys. Sometimes there is no doubt, other times we have life imprisonment to cover that.

Do i think we got the wrong guys = Nope

Is it possible we got the wrong guys = Yep


At what percentage of proof do you want before we kill someone?

[Esseesse]

McWigglebum4th said:

Do i think we got the wrong guys = Nope

Is it possible we got the wrong guys = Yep


At what percentage of proof do you want before we kill someone?

Is this enough evidence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622838/An...

Or when the killer is proud of what they've done?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/smirkin...

Edited by Esseesse on Friday 25th July 10:36

[AshVX220]

Esseesse said:

Is this enough evidence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622838/An...

Or when the killer is proud of what they've done?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/smirkin...

Edited by Esseesse on Friday 25th July 10:36

IMO, I don't think the first should face a death penalty, there's no doubt he committed the crime, however, it wasn't murder was it? I doubt h thought one punch could kill or intended his one punch to kill.

For the second story, then yes, I think it could be a considered punishment. For anyone who admits to what they've done it could be a suitable punishment. I do find that my view of the death penalty swings, depending on the day to be honest. But for very serious crimes, murder, rape and the grimmer elements of kiddy fiddling I think it should be a consideration. There are times when we can be in no doubt of the criminals guilt (Lee Rigby murder for example) and those crimes could be punished with the death penalty. I think PH has been round this particular buoy a lot in various threads. The nature of the subject does mean there will be very strong opposing views so a difficult subject to be sure and as I said, I swing between solutions dependant on the day almost.

For this particular subject, where the death penalty s legal and use, it should be as quick as possible, so my view is that a bullet to the brain is the easiect, cheapest and quickest solution.

If we just consider cost though as it's often used as an argument for. We think about the costs of keeping a prisoner alive for x number of years, which is un-doubtedly a lot. But, considering the costs of the appeals process etc which takes place for death-row in-mates, because they want to be as sure as they can be and the in-mates raise appeal, after appeal. I imagine the costs are probably higher (though I don't know for sure).

[simoid]

Esseesse said:

McWigglebum4th said:

Do i think we got the wrong guys = Nope

Is it possible we got the wrong guys = Yep


At what percentage of proof do you want before we kill someone?

Is this enough evidence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622838/An...

Or when the killer is proud of what they've done?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/smirkin...

Edited by Esseesse on Friday 25th July 10:36

They were the killers, but it does not mean they were guilty of murder.

HYPOTHETICALLY:

Perhaps they were hypnotised/mentally ill or any other number of scenarios.

Just because you see someone kill another man does not mean they are guilty of murder.

I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS THE CASE WITH LEE RIGBY

[Esseesse]

AshVX220 said:

IMO, I don't think the first should face a death penalty, there's no doubt he committed the crime, however, it wasn't murder was it? I doubt h thought one punch could kill or intended his one punch to kill.

If not murder then what? I've heard previously that a single punch can kill someone. Is a deliberate act to harm someone which results in their death not considered murder? (and manslaughter more unintentional death through carelessness e.g. unsecured scaffolding resulting in death etc?)

[audidoody]

The scum who hit the guy at the party in the park festival who later had his life support system switched off. Guillotine or 15 years?

[Esseesse]

simoid said:

They were the killers, but it does not mean they were guilty of murder.

HYPOTHETICALLY:

Perhaps they were hypnotised/mentally ill or any other number of scenarios.

I don't think being mentally ill makes something not murder. Define mentally ill? Is someone wanting to harm another who is not immediately threatening them mentally ill by definition? In any case, personally I'd rather those that might punch you for walking past them were not free to roam the streets whether they're mentally ill or not.

[simoid]

Esseesse said:

simoid said:

They were the killers, but it does not mean they were guilty of murder.

HYPOTHETICALLY:

Perhaps they were hypnotised/mentally ill or any other number of scenarios.

I don't think being mentally ill makes something not murder. Define mentally ill? Is someone wanting to harm another who is not immediately threatening them mentally ill by definition? In any case, personally I'd rather those that might punch you for walking past them were not free to roam the streets whether they're mentally ill or not.

OK then, hypnotised.

Point still stands: just because you see one man kill another does not mean it's murder, does it.

[Esseesse]

simoid said:

Esseesse said:

simoid said:

They were the killers, but it does not mean they were guilty of murder.

HYPOTHETICALLY:

Perhaps they were hypnotised/mentally ill or any other number of scenarios.

I don't think being mentally ill makes something not murder. Define mentally ill? Is someone wanting to harm another who is not immediately threatening them mentally ill by definition? In any case, personally I'd rather those that might punch you for walking past them were not free to roam the streets whether they're mentally ill or not.

OK then, hypnotised.

Point still stands: just because you see one man kill another does not mean it's murder, does it.

Yes. Hypnosis, whatever next.

[Hackney]

Gecko1978 said:

Hackney said:

shep1001 said:

Oakey said:

Typical PH response. God forbid there is ever a miscarriage of justice, eh?

In this case his conviction was safe. Death penalty is fine in my book where there is no doubt as to the guilt of the offender.

They were all safe until it was found that actually they weren't.

Lee Rigby Killers do you think we got the wrong guys. Sometimes there is no doubt, other times we have life imprisonment to cover that.

So how do you define "no doubt"..... isn't conviction and sentence enough for "no doubt"? Because surely if you look at any conviction there's no doubt at the time of conviction. How do you qualify that, who do you ask?
"I sentence you to 15 years but remember if it wasn't for this nagging doubt in my mind that you didn't do it I would have you executed"

Because we're sure those are the two men who killed Lee Rigby that proves every other case? Sorry, no.
How about this one?
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/15/carlo...

A single mistake means it's not worth it.

[MajorProblem]

You can't hypnotise people and tell them to murder people, you have to want to murder someone, hypnosis can't make you do it. Otherwise we'd have armies of hypnotised zombie killers roaming the streets.

[lamboman100]

Secretly, everyone loves the death penalty. It satisfies humans' primitive bloodlust and cleans the gene-pool.

But in a modern, civilized society, it has no place.

Too many wrong verdicts. Some claim 1% to 20% of all prisoners in the US / UK are mis-trialled or mis-convicted.

If it is wrong for 1 person to kill 1 person (private murder), then it is wrong for 300 million persons to kill 1 person (public murder).

Thankfully, the death penalty, like war, is going out of fashion. The trend worldwide is clearly heading towards zero in the long-term.

[simoid]

Esseesse said:

Yes. Hypnosis, whatever next.

Perhaps blackmail - "Kill this man or I'll kill your family. If you go to the Police, I'll kill your family and remove your testes."

Surely you agree that just because it looks like murder at the scene, doesn't mean it is?

[Gecko1978]

McWigglebum4th said:

Gecko1978 said:

Lee Rigby Killers do you think we got the wrong guys. Sometimes there is no doubt, other times we have life imprisonment to cover that.

Do i think we got the wrong guys = Nope

Is it possible we got the wrong guys = Yep


At what percentage of proof do you want before we kill someone?

Well in the above case I said we have life imprisonment you seemed to miss that. Lee Rigby case there is no doubt we got right people no doubt they planned it an no doubt they meant to kill and also no evidence to support they were seriously ill to an extent they did not understand there crime.

I maintain I can see an scenario where Capital punishment could be used but it would be rare. If you disagree thats fine its never coming back anyway. But don't assume I think every killer should face death penalty because I do not.

[J4CKO]

Guam said:

simoid said:

What's wrong with waiting til they fall asleep (or anaesthetising them) then getting a bullet/ bolt through the head? Or cutting it off?

I have an issue in understanding these problems, last year I had to have my old dog (16 years old) put down at home, I assisted in the process, one injection she nodded off, 3 minutes later she had slipped away.

Can someone explain why its not that simple with humans?

Yeah, I had to take our old Spaniel and was expecting her to slip away slowly, as soon as the vet pressed the plunger she was gone.

[McWigglebum4th]

Gecko1978 said:

Well in the above case I said we have life imprisonment you seemed to miss that. Lee Rigby case there is no doubt we got right people no doubt they planned it an no doubt they meant to kill and also no evidence to support they were seriously ill to an extent they did not understand there crime.

I maintain I can see an scenario where Capital punishment could be used but it would be rare. If you disagree thats fine its never coming back anyway. But don't assume I think every killer should face death penalty because I do not.

Well we aren't entirely certain you did it but we think you might of done it so we are sending you to jail for the rest of your life

[Gecko1978]

McWigglebum4th said:

Gecko1978 said:

Well in the above case I said we have life imprisonment you seemed to miss that. Lee Rigby case there is no doubt we got right people no doubt they planned it an no doubt they meant to kill and also no evidence to support they were seriously ill to an extent they did not understand there crime.

I maintain I can see an scenario where Capital punishment could be used but it would be rare. If you disagree thats fine its never coming back anyway. But don't assume I think every killer should face death penalty because I do not.

Well we aren't entirely certain you did it but we think you might of done it so we are sending you to jail for the rest of your life

there is the issue of beyond all reasnble doubt etc there is also the acircumstances i.e. kills someone over an argument in a pub there is mitigation, i.e. intent, level of intoxication, provocation etc. Hit someone in a car in the middle of the street drag them into the road and hack there head off then stand around waiting for the police. Totally different. Some crimes give rise to harsher sentences than others and I am saying I can see a case for the death penalty but not very often.

Other examples, rose west, bullet to the head, Iain Brady bullet to the head (maybe one to the nuts too), The lad who last year murdered anothe ryoung lad in a bakery in lewisham with a broke ashtray, Prison term. So whats the difference you ask, well simples really Rose an Iain are multiple murderers with loits of evidence agaist them and they planned out there acts, unnammed lad did something in heat of moment (though he did return to the shop hence murder no manslaughter) and did not display same level of planning and intent.

We don't have balanket rules and nore should we but sometimes I wonder if it would not be better to rid the world of certain people.

[BlackLabel]

Unless you believe in God, heaven, hell etc then why do people support the death penalty? So the killer dies and then what? The killer has left the victim's family with a lifetime of hell whilst they themself just get away with dying. Doesn't seem very fair to me.

The way American prisons are surely life imprisonment, no privileges and minimal contact with family/friends is a far worse punishment than death.