Bring Back Death Penalty
Poll: Bring Back Death Penalty
Total Members Polled: 513
Discussion
The possibility of miscarriages of justice is a lousy argument against it in my view anyway. If we already lock people up for life then we ought to be very sure of our ground. If we don't have faith in the justice system to be right as often as humanly possible then we should be looking at changing and improving the system.
The fundamental issue is whether or not the state and the justice system ought to have the authority to impose the ultimate sanction in the most extreme cases.
The fundamental issue is whether or not the state and the justice system ought to have the authority to impose the ultimate sanction in the most extreme cases.
TheHeretic said:
Digga said:
Surely there are cases though, were the evidence is absolute? I'm thinking of situations where there are multiple witnesses and incontrovertible supporting evidence.
Ah, so only those where there is absolute proof? If there was any doubt, they would not be in prison in the first place, surely? The assumption that you have extra special cases where the death penalty is fine, but only for those special cases is absurd. Everyone in prison has been found guilty. If there was doubt, they would not be there. TheHeretic said:
AJS- said:
Not really. A man walking out of the woods with blood on his shirt killed the woman lying in the woods stabbed to death, beyond reasonable doubt. The man seen on CCTV kicking someone's head against the pavement until they die killed him beyond a shadow of a doubt. Of course every case introduces new variables, but I think judges and juries are sophisticated enough to make the distinction.
Clearly doesn't work in the states. AJS- said:
Not really. A man walking out of the woods with blood on his shirt killed the woman lying in the woods stabbed to death, beyond reasonable doubt. The man seen on CCTV kicking someone's head against the pavement until they die killed him beyond a shadow of a doubt. Of course every case introduces new variables, but I think judges and juries are sophisticated enough to make the distinction.
Or he could have been trying to save her,hence the blood. Or the guy on CCTV is of a similar build/look to the accused. Evidence needs to be better than thatEric Mc said:
At least a miscatrriage of justice which resulted in a prison sentence can be corrected.
When the state has killed somebody they shouldn't have - it's a bit late.
I hope AJS' DNA isn't sitting in a petrie dish stored in some sloppilly managed 'privately run' forensic lab.
More accurate?When the state has killed somebody they shouldn't have - it's a bit late.
I hope AJS' DNA isn't sitting in a petrie dish stored in some sloppilly managed 'privately run' forensic lab.
There was a case of a guy in the states who when it was discovered by DNA testing he was not the guy, they still tried to have him executed. 35 years of your life wasted because of a flawed justice system. Penn and Teller do a good episode on this. 4 times he tried to have his case looked at whilst in prison, after new laws came in allowing old cases to be reopened, and all 4 times it was refused.
Sorry, but the justice system cannot be trusted.
http://www.examiner.com/article/dna-evidence-frees...
Sorry, but the justice system cannot be trusted.
http://www.examiner.com/article/dna-evidence-frees...
AJS- said:
The fundamental issue is whether or not the state and the justice system ought to have the authority to impose the ultimate sanction in the most extreme cases.
Absolutely.Too much power to give to the state.
When an offender has been locked up he's been removed as a threat to society so there's absolutely no necessity. The public are safe.
No, for two reasons.
Firstly, there's no going back. There's no time for the accused to launch an appeal with fresh evidence. We have had countless problems with this as detailed before, and often in crunch-times we can't even trust those who collect the evidence (to this day we still don't know whether Mark Duggan was armed or not when he was shot). Also, there is this sense that once a 'wrong'un' has been fitted up for the crime, the case is closed. But look at Barry George - convicted of murder, wrongfully imprisoned for years, and only let out once it was revealed that the evidence that convicted him was tenuous at best but the only real lead the police had. The truth was that Jill Dando was probably killed by some organised crime syndicate, and now this has come to light the investigation can find the person who actually did it. But as it stands, had we had the death penalty, Barry George would have been hanged and a line would have been drawn under the whole thing.
And secondly, once people knew that arrest and conviction for certain crimes would mean the death penalty, there would be nothing to stop them being unimaginably evil. Having the death penalty has not altered the murder rate in the US one iota, but the US is known for spree killings and mass shootings. If someone is going to murder someone, chances are they'll do it anyway because they're sick in the head, but if they know that killing just one person will get them the death penalty, what's to stop them venting their frustrations by killing as many as they can? There must be a reason why this sort of thing happens so often in the US compared to other countries. If someone will kill themselves, be shot by a police officer or be executed once they've finished, the only variable is the number of people they can kill first. Same goes for gangsters having shootouts with cops.
Also, I reckon life imprisonment (when it is life and not just a token few years) is a fate worse than death for many of these people. If they've plunged to the very depths of life, dying probably seems like a welcome release. But having to spend every last year of your life behind bars, only really being able to contemplate what it is you did that put you there for decade after decade after decade - now that, to me, is terrifying.
Firstly, there's no going back. There's no time for the accused to launch an appeal with fresh evidence. We have had countless problems with this as detailed before, and often in crunch-times we can't even trust those who collect the evidence (to this day we still don't know whether Mark Duggan was armed or not when he was shot). Also, there is this sense that once a 'wrong'un' has been fitted up for the crime, the case is closed. But look at Barry George - convicted of murder, wrongfully imprisoned for years, and only let out once it was revealed that the evidence that convicted him was tenuous at best but the only real lead the police had. The truth was that Jill Dando was probably killed by some organised crime syndicate, and now this has come to light the investigation can find the person who actually did it. But as it stands, had we had the death penalty, Barry George would have been hanged and a line would have been drawn under the whole thing.
And secondly, once people knew that arrest and conviction for certain crimes would mean the death penalty, there would be nothing to stop them being unimaginably evil. Having the death penalty has not altered the murder rate in the US one iota, but the US is known for spree killings and mass shootings. If someone is going to murder someone, chances are they'll do it anyway because they're sick in the head, but if they know that killing just one person will get them the death penalty, what's to stop them venting their frustrations by killing as many as they can? There must be a reason why this sort of thing happens so often in the US compared to other countries. If someone will kill themselves, be shot by a police officer or be executed once they've finished, the only variable is the number of people they can kill first. Same goes for gangsters having shootouts with cops.
Also, I reckon life imprisonment (when it is life and not just a token few years) is a fate worse than death for many of these people. If they've plunged to the very depths of life, dying probably seems like a welcome release. But having to spend every last year of your life behind bars, only really being able to contemplate what it is you did that put you there for decade after decade after decade - now that, to me, is terrifying.
Every moral fibre of my being says no, however I am a massive hypocrite on this subject, as I suspect are many.
I was beaten and raped a few years ago, and fully expected to die that day - the guy had done it before, and if he is ever let out of prison I don't hold out much hope he wouldn't do it again.
If, in a hypothetical world, the death penalty had been available, I wouldn't have only wanted it to happen, I'd have wanted to do it myself. Time passes though, and things do change - I was angry as angry can be then, and although I will always suffer effects from it, I now have a brilliant fiancé and expecting our first child in December. I can't say with confidence that I'd be happy with a man's death, even his, on my conscience forever more.
The death penalty for me would have been born out of revenge and nothing more, and it wouldnt solve the problem - it wouldn't give me my life before back, and it wouldn't raise murder victims from the dead.
Leave the system as it is, it's never going to please absolutely everyone, but you never can.
I was beaten and raped a few years ago, and fully expected to die that day - the guy had done it before, and if he is ever let out of prison I don't hold out much hope he wouldn't do it again.
If, in a hypothetical world, the death penalty had been available, I wouldn't have only wanted it to happen, I'd have wanted to do it myself. Time passes though, and things do change - I was angry as angry can be then, and although I will always suffer effects from it, I now have a brilliant fiancé and expecting our first child in December. I can't say with confidence that I'd be happy with a man's death, even his, on my conscience forever more.
The death penalty for me would have been born out of revenge and nothing more, and it wouldnt solve the problem - it wouldn't give me my life before back, and it wouldn't raise murder victims from the dead.
Leave the system as it is, it's never going to please absolutely everyone, but you never can.
dandarez said:
Eric Mc said:
At least a miscatrriage of justice which resulted in a prison sentence can be corrected.
When the state has killed somebody they shouldn't have - it's a bit late.
I hope AJS' DNA isn't sitting in a petrie dish stored in some sloppilly managed 'privately run' forensic lab.
More accurate?When the state has killed somebody they shouldn't have - it's a bit late.
I hope AJS' DNA isn't sitting in a petrie dish stored in some sloppilly managed 'privately run' forensic lab.
harry010 said:
Every moral fibre of my being says no, however I am a massive hypocrite on this subject, as I suspect are many.
I was beaten and raped a few years ago, and fully expected to die that day - the guy had done it before, and if he is ever let out of prison I don't hold out much hope he wouldn't do it again.
If, in a hypothetical world, the death penalty had been available, I wouldn't have only wanted it to happen, I'd have wanted to do it myself. Time passes though, and things do change - I was angry as angry can be then, and although I will always suffer effects from it, I now have a brilliant fiancé and expecting our first child in December. I can't say with confidence that I'd be happy with a man's death, even his, on my conscience forever more.
The death penalty for me would have been born out of revenge and nothing more, and it wouldnt solve the problem - it wouldn't give me my life before back, and it wouldn't raise murder victims from the dead.
Leave the system as it is, it's never going to please absolutely everyone, but you never can.
Hell, that's awful and you have my sincere sympathy.I was beaten and raped a few years ago, and fully expected to die that day - the guy had done it before, and if he is ever let out of prison I don't hold out much hope he wouldn't do it again.
If, in a hypothetical world, the death penalty had been available, I wouldn't have only wanted it to happen, I'd have wanted to do it myself. Time passes though, and things do change - I was angry as angry can be then, and although I will always suffer effects from it, I now have a brilliant fiancé and expecting our first child in December. I can't say with confidence that I'd be happy with a man's death, even his, on my conscience forever more.
The death penalty for me would have been born out of revenge and nothing more, and it wouldnt solve the problem - it wouldn't give me my life before back, and it wouldn't raise murder victims from the dead.
Leave the system as it is, it's never going to please absolutely everyone, but you never can.
I think, as you allude, taking 'revenge' would later lead to guit. However, if the decision was out of your hands (which is different) and an offender who had (for example) killed a friend or relative was executed, I wonder if it would actually provide more of a sense of closure and peace?
Conversely, if life means life then these people should be fully segregated from any other section of the prison population that we (rightly) hope to restore to normal civillian life at some point.
Guam said:
Voted no, having done Jury service, there is no way I would want a typical Jury to have to decide on whether to kill someone.
I agree with this. I did jury service when I was younger and my fellow jurors were thick & had no experience or understanding of the situation that resulted in the trial. In retrospect (after more life experience) I think that we made the wrong decision for one of the case. Also look at the Jill Dando case for a reason not to have the death penalty.
Again, I'd bring the Anuj Bidve killing as a case in point. The killer did it, no question and showed no remorse - in fact showed contempt, laughing during sentencing. really, what's the point of keeping this sort of individual?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18...
the BBC said:
In the hours after the killing, Stapleton had checked into the Campanile Hotel, close to the crime scene, to observe the investigation, the court heard.
He also went to a tattoo parlour and had a teardrop design placed below his right eye - a symbol used by some gangs to mark that the wearer has killed someone.
Det Ch Supt Mary Doyle, of Greater Manchester Police, said the murder was "completely random and without motive".
He also went to a tattoo parlour and had a teardrop design placed below his right eye - a symbol used by some gangs to mark that the wearer has killed someone.
Det Ch Supt Mary Doyle, of Greater Manchester Police, said the murder was "completely random and without motive".
Digga said:
Again, I'd bring the Anuj Bidve killing as a case in point. The killer did it, no question and showed no remorse - in fact showed contempt, laughing during sentencing. really, what's the point of keeping this sort of individual?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18...
Not really sure why you picked out that particular quote? Checking into a hotel, and a teardrop tattoo have no bearing whatsoever on the absolute evidence of the crime, or is this just for dramatic effect? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18...
the BBC said:
In the hours after the killing, Stapleton had checked into the Campanile Hotel, close to the crime scene, to observe the investigation, the court heard.
He also went to a tattoo parlour and had a teardrop design placed below his right eye - a symbol used by some gangs to mark that the wearer has killed someone.
Det Ch Supt Mary Doyle, of Greater Manchester Police, said the murder was "completely random and without motive".
He also went to a tattoo parlour and had a teardrop design placed below his right eye - a symbol used by some gangs to mark that the wearer has killed someone.
Det Ch Supt Mary Doyle, of Greater Manchester Police, said the murder was "completely random and without motive".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff