If you could guarantee the verdict, would you pull the rope?

[ruggedscotty]

battered said:

Poor reasoning. If I were left to sentence someone who had harmed my family, I would hack him to pieces with an axe. Slowly, and with my own hands. Absolutely without remorse. Does this mean that sentencing should be decided by the victims? Absolutely not. It is not reasonable to allow me to hack a rapist to death even if I want to. This is the job of society to decide, and revenge is a poor motivator. Revenge is what starts blood feuds and wars, and it's what motivates things like Sharia law.

And Sharia law is so bad ?

The quote of someone having to execute the prisoner ? these days that isnt so. It could be very easily automated. And comparing to PTS that our soldiers suffer from ? A war scene is totally different to the sanitized modern execution chambers that exist these days, more like a dentist's surgery than a IED explosion beside your tank and having to deal with decapitated comrades that are still alive.

It would be very simple to gas / drug and dispose of a criminal. And I believe that these days we should be looking to dispatch the worst, those that have failed and committed gross crimes against people. A simple and quick way to deal with those and remove them would be welcome. Those two that walked down the street and killed that soldier ? we should tolerate and let them live ? Why ? And why do we persist with the thinking that we should be wanting to rehabilitate and sort them out ? even if we were able to then why should we be bothered, what about the person that they killed ? what about that. No Im very much for the sentence fitting the crime. very much for the death penalty being used where and when required. And it can be proved without doubt that the person is indeed the person that committed the crime. Sentenced to death. 48 months in prison before sentence carried out incase any doubt can be placed on the sentence.

[Einion Yrth]

ruggedscotty said:

And Sharia law is so bad ?

Yes.

ruggedscotty said:

decapitated comrades that are still alive.

What???

[ruggedscotty]

I was trying to convey the fact that the horrors of war and what is witnessed by squaddies can not be compared to the clinical despatch that the modern execution chamber provides.

[Munter]

Just change the system completely.

You get sent to jail for something serious. There is no max term. You have to be given the opportunity to improve yourself, and take that opportunity (Training in a trade, getting off drugs, etc). Then if you can secure gainful employment, or someone to vouch for you (who will be sent to jail, along with you, if you re-offend), then you'll be released.

Refuse to improve your attitude and take opportunities given to you. You'll stay there.

[King Herald]

Einion Yrth said:

ruggedscotty said:

And Sharia law is so bad ?

Yes.

ruggedscotty said:

decapitated comrades that are still alive.

What???

Interesting punishment on Documenting Reality right now, assume it is some cartel punishment. Guy has no face and no hands, still struggling, and they are trying to cut his throat with what looks like a blunt stanley knife.

Suitable demise for a child rapist I reckon.

[768]

Don said:

Nope. Death is too good for them.

I want them to suffer. Every day. Knowing that every day from now on is going to be exactly the same, dull, soul-destroying routine. Over and over again. Until they die.

+1

Bring back deporting them to Aus.

[toon10]

Lets show these scum that it's wrong to kill by, er, killing them. We have systems in place to deal with even the most horrific criminals. They may not be perfect but I'd rather that than live in a society that thinks it's OK to take life.

[HTP99]

toon10 said:

Lets show these scum that it's wrong to kill by, er, killing them. We have systems in place to deal with even the most horrific criminals. They may not be perfect but I'd rather that than live in a society that thinks it's OK to take life.

,

Pretty much my view.

[Vocal Minority]

valiant said:

Death penalty is an easy way out.

Lock those who commit heinous crimes up for life. Sooner or later a day will come where they will realise the utter futility of what they've done and on that day they will realise they have many, many more years inside to ponder and regret their wasted lives.

Besides, we live in a supposedly civilised society so why should we lower ourselves to their level of depravity just to quench our thirst for retribution.

Well it was PH superhero Winston Churchill who said you can judge a civilisation on how it treats its prisoners

Personally I don't think the state can reinforce 'killing is wrong' with state sanctioned killing.

[amancalledrob]

spaximus said:

Albert Pierrepoint did go off hanging as he saw many people who he did not truly believe were guilty being dispatched by him but he did not regret many of those he did as they were cold callous evil people.

There was a little more to his change of heart than that - as well as the below, he was also recorded to have said that he felt the reason the death sentence wasn't an effective deterrent is that the crimes it was used for were typically committed in the heat of the moment, at a time when people just don't stop and think about the consequences. After all in a heated argument that's become violent - say between two drunk men - which one is going to say 'hold on a minute, if we get into a fight and one of us dies, the consequences for the survivor could be quite severe you know' - most people in that situation don't think about it because they probably don't think it's going to go that far

Albert Pierrepoint said:

It is said to be a deterrent. I cannot agree. There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know. It is I who have faced them last, young men and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder.

[The Mad Monk]

amancalledrob said:

spaximus said:

Albert Pierrepoint did go off hanging as he saw many people who he did not truly believe were guilty being dispatched by him but he did not regret many of those he did as they were cold callous evil people.

After all in a heated argument that's become violent - say between two drunk men - which one is going to say 'hold on a minute, if we get into a fight and one of us dies, the consequences for the survivor could be quite severe you know' -

Albert Pierrepoint said:

It is said to be a deterrent. I cannot agree. There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know. It is I who have faced them last, young men and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder.

But that would be manslaughter, not murder, Shirley?

[amancalledrob]

The Mad Monk said:

But that would be manslaughter, not murder, Shirley?

I guess so, but I think the point still stands - even with premeditated murder, it's true that the consequences don't deter the murderer. After all, they don't think they'll be caught - or maybe they wouldn't do it.

[Hugo a Gogo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

the high security hospital

you know, for sick people

that's the place we are talking about yeah?

anyone who uses cost grounds to argue for killing someone should go to the last place where they argued that, Auschwitz

[The Beaver King]

Solid post and it does raise a good point; those that commit a crime worthy of the death penalty are generally not of the frame of mind to view death as a deterrent.

[Dr Jekyll]

Vocal Minority said:

Well it was PH superhero Winston Churchill who said you can judge a civilisation on how it treats its prisoners

Personally I don't think the state can reinforce 'killing is wrong' with state sanctioned killing.

But is it really any different from enforcing 'false imprisonment is wrong' with state imprisonment?
Or 'theft is wrong' by fines?

[amancalledrob]

The Beaver King said:

Solid post and it does raise a good point; those that commit a crime worthy of the death penalty are generally not of the frame of mind to view death as a deterrent.

Agreed, and in my opinion it's motivated more out of revenge than deterrent in any case

[EggsBenedict]

King Herald said:

Where I live, in the Philippines, the new president has orchestrated over 4000 'cullings' of drug suspects. Not convicted felons, not people under charge, just random suspects. Nobody here seems to see anything wrong with that. It seems acceptable to simply go shoot someone who you either think sells drugs, or more likely someone you don't like, or have some beef with.

We're not hearing anything about any murders being investigated either.

Just ironic to be reading a thread about whether to bring back the death penalty, in my home country, when all around me here people are dying like flies.

Edited by King Herald on Saturday 3rd December 16:08

That is surely mad. And shows (1) an astonishing disregard for life and (2) how badly law enforcement has failed in that part of the world.

In terms of the OP, no, I wouldn't want my country to start killing its own citizens. The definition of 'they definitely did it' is too difficult to nail down. It's worth also searching YouTube for 'Hislop death penalty' for a quite funny view of why we should not bring back this form of punishment.

[Jasandjules]

battered said:

Poor reasoning. If I were left to sentence someone who had harmed my family, I would hack him to pieces with an axe.

Actually it is quite normal jurisprudence. You see, we give up our rights to revenge (which historically we had even until fairly recently, duelling pistols weren't for tickling someone with) in exchange for the state taking action. It is part of the social contract.

[grumbledoak]

Dr Jekyll said:

But is it really any different from enforcing 'false imprisonment is wrong' with state imprisonment?
Or 'theft is wrong' by fines?

Nope. Nor does it make any sense that we happily kill tens of thousands of innocent people in Iraq as part of Operation Explosive Democracy or whatever they called it, but will not execute here a handful of people who have been proven to thoroughly deserve it. I wonder why the difference. Proximity, perhaps.

[spaximus]

amancalledrob said:

spaximus said:

Albert Pierrepoint did go off hanging as he saw many people who he did not truly believe were guilty being dispatched by him but he did not regret many of those he did as they were cold callous evil people.

There was a little more to his change of heart than that - as well as the below, he was also recorded to have said that he felt the reason the death sentence wasn't an effective deterrent is that the crimes it was used for were typically committed in the heat of the moment, at a time when people just don't stop and think about the consequences. After all in a heated argument that's become violent - say between two drunk men - which one is going to say 'hold on a minute, if we get into a fight and one of us dies, the consequences for the survivor could be quite severe you know' - most people in that situation don't think about it because they probably don't think it's going to go that far

Albert Pierrepoint said:

It is said to be a deterrent. I cannot agree. There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know. It is I who have faced them last, young men and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder.

I do understand the point and for some the death penalty was no deterrent. There is a world of difference between a cold blooded killer like Sutcliff and many others and those who go out tooled up to kill and the scenario you described. He was correct that many were committed in the heat of the moment but that was how it was then.

We will never go back to hanging, which I think we should, but if that is not the case then we should have sentences that mean whole life. The victims never get a second chance why should they?

Look at Lesley Grantham the actor killed a German cab driver with a gun and got life, in Germany but as he was in the forces he was transferred to HMPS. He did 10 years and then came out to have a career that gave him some fame and fortune, his vicitim and family got nothing?

An innocent persons life was worth 10 years or less these days, this cannot be seen as justice