Death Sentence in the UK

[PAULJ5555]

2 questions.

1. Are you in favour of the death sentence, when 100% guilty?

2. If your daughter/son/mum/dad/sister/gran ect was raped, mutilated, murdered what would you want to happen to the person who did it?


Sorry Update. the guilty did it. 100%. DNA, on HD CCTV, caught at the scene, caught in the act. Obvoiusly the death sentence for these types. 100% guilty.

Edited by PAULJ5555 on Wednesday 14th August 13:12

Edited by PAULJ5555 on Wednesday 14th August 13:18

Edited by PAULJ5555 on Wednesday 14th August 13:19

[StevieBee]

1: No

2: Full life term. No parole. Sufficient to keep them alive until their natural demise and nothing more

[blueg33]

Yes................but, i am very concerned that the legal system is not 100% and that you may end up executing the wrong person.

Every year we see serious sentences over turned because of some failure in the system. I would be equally upset if my son was murdered by the state in error as I would if he was murdered by a thug in the street.

[matchmaker]

Bear in mind that following the passing of The Homicide Act, 1957, the death penalty for murder only applied in certain circumstances.

[dazwalsh]

Not if there was a sentence that kept them locked up for their entire life with no chance of getting out. There are some truly evil bds who can never be reintroduced into society again due to the shocking things they have done. I dont care if they are dead or behind bars.

[Grrbang]

Looking at the US, it’s just not pragmatic. Decades of appeals. Could end up costing the taxpayer more than life without parole.

Then there’s the matter of false convictions and institutional discrimination.

[designforlife]

1. Yes

2. See answer to question 1.

[Zirconia]

1. No. Mistakes are made.
2. Jail for life, end of life. Nothing to make your life brighter.

[AmosMoses]

1. Yes
2. Life in solitary confinement, tiny cell, tiny window, no socialization or visitors.

[Salmonofdoubt]

No

Still wouldn't want the death sentence to be passed by the state. If I was faced with a spend life in prison or let a loved one get hurt situation I'd take the first option. But unless there's cast iron evidence (eye witnesses with no agenda) how would you know that the sentence you're passing is the correct one? If I truly believed everyone in a prison cell was guilty of the charges put to them it may make the choice easier, but I'm not and never will be.

[Shuvi McTupya]

Grrbang said:

Looking at the US, it’s just not pragmatic. Decades of appeals. Could end up costing the taxpayer more than life without parole.

Then there’s the matter of false convictions and institutional discrimination.

Do away with the appeal process. The death sentence is final and carried out 'immediately' but only ever used when there is 100% concrete evidence and/or a confession of a heinous planned crime.

[PAULJ5555]

The problem is that if they are given life in the UK. They will get 3 meals a day, TV. ect ect ect, It costs us the same as a trainee nurses salary every year to keep them.

That money could go to saving lives elsewhere.

[Mothersruin]

No, but mainly because I don't have faith in the legal system to get it right and too many idiot do-gooders bleating on about human rights. A minor example of this would be the morons preventing aircraft from taking off with legitimate deportation cases on board.

Severe sentences, prisons that punish first, rehabilitate second once it's been earned.
Keep offending, small box, throw away the key.

[Trophy Husband]

1. No. It makes murderers of us all and is utterly ridiculous to do the same thing to somebody as they're being punished for. Where is the logic in that?
2. Life without parole. No luxuries. No visits. No socialisation.

[Robb F]

1. No
2. A slow and painful death

[Prizam]

1. No

2. Proper life imprisonment. Made to work prison jobs to be able to feed themselves. Put them to work in fields, cleaning road signs etc...


Killing someone because they hurt you in some way is revenge. not justice.


That said, if I were in the receiving end of something bad like this, that warranted a death sentence. I would want to be the person dispensing it with my own hands. So I can kind of see it from both sides.

[Castrol for a knave]

1. Are you in favour of the death sentence?

No. You don't underline the sanctity of life by taking life. I am not aware of any reliable evidence that suggest capital punishment leads to an overall fall in offending *

More pertinently the potential to execute an innocent person(s) is just too high.

People who clamour for the death penalty remind me of the pitch fork mob from the Simpsons....



2. If your daughter/son/mum/dad/sister/gran ect was raped, mutilated, murdered what would you want to happen to the person who did it?

The legal process should be objective, and victims, understandably, are not objective. So, life.

• apart from the offender, obviously.

Edited by Castrol for a knave on Wednesday 14th August 13:20

[coldel]

No

Remember Jean Charles de Menzies. Chased by police, apparently he vaulted ticket barriers and ran to a tube and tried to get away, police had to shoot him as he reached into his jacket? All sworn testimony by those officers involved...turns out he just wandered down and was putting his music on oblivious to anything and it was all made up. Too much institutionalised crime happening within the police force to trust anyone to dish out an end of life sentence.

And I think its much worse a punishment to stick them inside without a chance of getting out.

[CzechItOut]

Grrbang said:

Looking at the US, it’s just not pragmatic. Decades of appeals. Could end up costing the taxpayer more than life without parole.

Then there’s the matter of false convictions and institutional discrimination.

The US system also shows there is absolutely no evidence what so ever that the death penalty acts as a deterrent.

[daddy cool]

In principle I am for it.

However, due to issues of practicality, bureaucracy and not having 100% confidence in the legal system, i'd have say "no" (grudgingly).