99% in favour of bringing back the death penalty
Discussion
thebluebus said:
According to the newspaper this morning, a poll of 100,000 people had a 99% response in favour of bringing back capital punishment to 'clean up our streets'.
Apparently, these views are echoed in other recent media polls of public opinion. What do you think?
What newspaper was that? One with lots of pictures?Apparently, these views are echoed in other recent media polls of public opinion. What do you think?
t to me. I opinion is a lot more split than that.I don't believe you could get 99% of 100,000 people to agree on anything, let alone something as emotive as this.
Considering the number of miscarriages of justice there have been, I think legalised state murder isn't really a very brilliant idea. I for one wouldn't want to be falsely accused, falsely convicted, executed and then my loved ones told "oh, terribly sorry, it seems he didn't do it after all. Oh well, too late now, eh?"
Considering the number of miscarriages of justice there have been, I think legalised state murder isn't really a very brilliant idea. I for one wouldn't want to be falsely accused, falsely convicted, executed and then my loved ones told "oh, terribly sorry, it seems he didn't do it after all. Oh well, too late now, eh?"
It's a bad idea IMO, unless the person is guilty beyond absolute doubt. You kill an innocent man and somewhere there's a guilty one who knows the case is now closed. This also makes the state guilty of murder.
And what about the nature of punishment? Surely for someone who has murdered, taking away all quality of life but forcing them to live it regardless is more punishing than giving them a way out and killing them.
Life must mean life, but one solution to this might be to allow the prisoners to keep their belts. Life in prison, or hang yourself and see if we care. Either way, life should mean an end to your quality of life, for the rest of it.
And what about the nature of punishment? Surely for someone who has murdered, taking away all quality of life but forcing them to live it regardless is more punishing than giving them a way out and killing them.
Life must mean life, but one solution to this might be to allow the prisoners to keep their belts. Life in prison, or hang yourself and see if we care. Either way, life should mean an end to your quality of life, for the rest of it.
ATG said:
thebluebus said:
According to the newspaper this morning, a poll of 100,000 people had a 99% response in favour of bringing back capital punishment to 'clean up our streets'.
Apparently, these views are echoed in other recent media polls of public opinion. What do you think?
What newspaper was that? One with lots of pictures?Apparently, these views are echoed in other recent media polls of public opinion. What do you think?
One that others here at work buy, and I thumb through in incredulity much of the time.
I think it's a good idea. But I'd want to see several grades of 'murder' conviction, the death penalty should be there as an option.
For example those kids that stamped a father to death in the street. There's no question of guilt as far as I could tell, and what they did they did out of choice. They choose to kill someone, they should forfeit their own life in payment.
An alternative is a suicide option. I read that Steve Wright has been put on suicide watch. Why? If he wants to kill himself, good, infact give him a bottle of whiskey and 100 painkillers. It'll save the taxpayer alot of money keeping him locked up for the next 30, 40, 50 years is going to cost millions.
For example those kids that stamped a father to death in the street. There's no question of guilt as far as I could tell, and what they did they did out of choice. They choose to kill someone, they should forfeit their own life in payment.
An alternative is a suicide option. I read that Steve Wright has been put on suicide watch. Why? If he wants to kill himself, good, infact give him a bottle of whiskey and 100 painkillers. It'll save the taxpayer alot of money keeping him locked up for the next 30, 40, 50 years is going to cost millions.
In the past, the problem of properly identifying the correct culprit and also police corruption in bringing cases caused the death penalty to be shelved because the system wasnt water tight. Mistakes were made and a proportion of innocent people died.
today, the advances in scientific evidence and DNA data means we can be much more sure. But are we yet 100%? Wright for instance admitted to both knowing and having had sex with the prostitues that he murderred. Will it be shown in 15 years time that he was innocent? Hope not.
I think theres now a case for the removal of the likes of Huntley and these latest two (Wright and Dixie) from the planet.
Does that smack of revenge? Hmmm, yes, probably. But I could live with that in these cases. Could I live with the errors? No.
The truth for me is that in many cases the precense of DNA evidence seems to be the one thing that makes juries convict on evidence that isnt 100% positive and condeming. Not sure I trust the system enough to let someones life depend on it.
today, the advances in scientific evidence and DNA data means we can be much more sure. But are we yet 100%? Wright for instance admitted to both knowing and having had sex with the prostitues that he murderred. Will it be shown in 15 years time that he was innocent? Hope not.
I think theres now a case for the removal of the likes of Huntley and these latest two (Wright and Dixie) from the planet.
Does that smack of revenge? Hmmm, yes, probably. But I could live with that in these cases. Could I live with the errors? No.
The truth for me is that in many cases the precense of DNA evidence seems to be the one thing that makes juries convict on evidence that isnt 100% positive and condeming. Not sure I trust the system enough to let someones life depend on it.
thebluebus said:
Eric Mc said:
Did they interview 100% of the population?
No, just 100,000 of their own readers.It's likely to be a self-fulfilling survey: like when you get viewers of Film4 to vote on the best fim ever. You know it's not going to be ET.
Should kiddy-raping-murdering-terrorists be
a) shot, or
b) given a knighthood
Tony*T3 said:
The truth for me is that in many cases the precense of DNA evidence seems to be the one thing that makes juries convict on evidence that isnt 100% positive and condeming. Not sure I trust the system enough to let someones life depend on it.
There have been lots of cases where there is no doubt though. Fred West had a house full of dead bodies. Those kids kicked a man to death in front of his family. etc. To kill another person you've got to either be twisted in the head or pushed way way beyond normal thought processes. Since when was it morally right to kill off people that are mentally deficient? For example, if a mentally disabled kid wacked me round the head I wouldn't whack him back!!!
I therefore disagree with the death penalty regardless of the doubt in the guilty verdict. If someone was 100% proved to be guilty and admitted it themselves, I still wouldn't agree with it. I think it's barbaric for the state to kill someone in cold blood in a pre-meditated way.
I think this proves that 99% of the population can't think a complicated issue through properly!
I therefore disagree with the death penalty regardless of the doubt in the guilty verdict. If someone was 100% proved to be guilty and admitted it themselves, I still wouldn't agree with it. I think it's barbaric for the state to kill someone in cold blood in a pre-meditated way.
I think this proves that 99% of the population can't think a complicated issue through properly!
There's a number of "lifers" in Italy (300 I think) who are petitioning to bring back the death penalty for themselves.
I think it's not too bad a plan.
"You've been sentenced to life, you'll die in here, could be slowly of old age years from now, maybe a shiv in the yard. Or we can do it now, pretty painlessly." Give them the choice a year into their sentence, to get over the initial trauma of going to prison. See what they say.
Of course that throws up a whole other euthanasia argument.
I think it's not too bad a plan.
"You've been sentenced to life, you'll die in here, could be slowly of old age years from now, maybe a shiv in the yard. Or we can do it now, pretty painlessly." Give them the choice a year into their sentence, to get over the initial trauma of going to prison. See what they say.
Of course that throws up a whole other euthanasia argument.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff