Triple child killer cleared for release

Triple child killer cleared for release

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

55 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Halb said:
What the heck has this thread turned into?
1 - a healthy debate about the justice system and capital punishment

2 - an online wake for a strange bloke

Penelope Stopit

11,209 posts

110 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Brooking10 said:
Penelope Stopit said:
Well you certainly put me on the spot
If it was up to me I would be happy for the man to remain and die in jail
Due to the crazy justice system that allows people like this man back into a society that doesn't want them, a death sentence would solve the problem but create many other problems
I hope that someone somewhere looks very hard at what is happening and stops the release of this man
You have captured my view on things pretty much exactly there
Let's hope

Penelope Stopit

11,209 posts

110 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
There is no point in commenting about the USA because..."you know"

Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
they're all nutso?

Red 4

10,744 posts

188 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Penelope Stopit said:
There is no point in commenting about the USA because..."you know"
What about Japan, then ?

Capital punishment is still used there.

Bigends

5,424 posts

129 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Red 4 said:
Bigends said:
One executed in the chair in Tennessee yesterday - took his chances over lethal injection for a painless end.
Did his eyeballs pop out ?

It's like being fried apparently.

Doesn't always work first time ...
Reading the account - this and the last they did went without a hitch - seems they may have got the system right at last with no flames or vomiting

Red 4

10,744 posts

188 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Bigends said:
Reading the account - this and the last they did went without a hitch - seems they may have got the system right at last with no flames or vomiting
To be honest I've never really understood why they don't use a bullet.

It all seems too much of a spectacle to me.

Penelope Stopit

11,209 posts

110 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Halb said:
they're all nutso?
I didn't comment this

Penelope Stopit

11,209 posts

110 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Red 4 said:
Penelope Stopit said:
There is no point in commenting about the USA because..."you know"
What about Japan, then ?

Capital punishment is still used there.
Yes it's still being handed out in many countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_b...

I remember when people would go for a drive to chop square in Riyadh Saudi Arabia to view the public termination of life, the thought of it made me feel sick and I did comment to those that visited chop square that they were sick in the head
Apparently the man with the sword could be given money to get the job done properly in one swing, the thing is I have no proof of this being fact, we all know how people spread nonesense don't we

anonymous-user

55 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
Isn't it nice to be able to post without Gammonbot derailing the entire topic.

Bigends said:
Red 4 said:
Bigends said:
One executed in the chair in Tennessee yesterday - took his chances over lethal injection for a painless end.
Did his eyeballs pop out ?

It's like being fried apparently.

Doesn't always work first time ...
Reading the account - this and the last they did went without a hitch - seems they may have got the system right at last with no flames or vomiting.
Seems slightly perverse that the system that is going to kill someone is so concerned with whether it'll cause them pain when it does so.

I understand some of the legal arguments have been around a painful death being unconstitutional, yet the death itself is constitutional.

Bigends

5,424 posts

129 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
La Liga said:
Isn't it nice to be able to post without Gammonbot derailing the entire topic.

Bigends said:
Red 4 said:
Bigends said:
One executed in the chair in Tennessee yesterday - took his chances over lethal injection for a painless end.
Did his eyeballs pop out ?

It's like being fried apparently.

Doesn't always work first time ...
Reading the account - this and the last they did went without a hitch - seems they may have got the system right at last with no flames or vomiting.
Seems slightly perverse that the system that is going to kill someone is so concerned with whether it'll cause them pain when it does so.

I understand some of the legal arguments have been around a painful death being unconstitutional, yet the death itself is constitutional.
Its the states role to kill them once sentence is passed - not to cause pain or unnecessary injury. English hanging ropes had the nooses lined with soft leather to avoid rope burns and marking the convicted persons body. The job of the hangman was to break the neck - not mutilate the body - strange but true.

anonymous-user

55 months

Friday 7th December 2018
quotequote all
It just seems morally inconsistent. Acceptable to kill, but not to hurt.

Red 4

10,744 posts

188 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
La Liga said:
It just seems morally inconsistent. Acceptable to kill, but not to hurt.
Not really, it's the most humane way to end a life.

Why inflict suffering if there is no need to ?

Injection/ chair/ bullet/ guillotine/ hanging. Job jobbed.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
Yes, but they're still killing someone. On the scale of ‘assault’ it’s rather higher than the pain they’re so concerned about!






grumbledoak

31,551 posts

234 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
La Liga said:
It just seems morally inconsistent. Acceptable to kill, but not to hurt.
It's not acceptable to torture them, either, though some of the crimes that merit execution deserve a fair bit of that too. But execution, for some crimes, is fine by me. None of this is morally inconsistent, though people try to claim that it is. It is a relatively simple line that, once crossed, you don't get a life. Nor do we have to pay for your bed and board. You don't deserve it.

We were manoeuvred out of capital punishment with the promise of life terms instead. But prison is very expensive. So they fob us off with large headline terms and quiet early release.


Halb

53,012 posts

184 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
Penelope Stopit said:
Halb said:
they're all nutso?
I didn't comment this
you left it open, so it could have meant anything, "overmedicated nuts."

Penelope Stopit

11,209 posts

110 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
Halb said:
Penelope Stopit said:
Halb said:
they're all nutso?
I didn't comment this
you left it open, so it could have meant anything, "overmedicated nuts."
Ok, I did want to post that the USA is different but thought better of it at the time

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
grumbledoak said:
It's not acceptable to torture them, either, though some of the crimes that merit execution deserve a fair bit of that too. But execution, for some crimes, is fine by me. None of this is morally inconsistent, though people try to claim that it is. It is a relatively simple line that, once crossed, you don't get a life. Nor do we have to pay for your bed and board. You don't deserve it.

We were manoeuvred out of capital punishment with the promise of life terms instead. But prison is very expensive. So they fob us off with large headline terms and quiet early release.
“Manoeuvred out of capital punishment “ ?




Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 8th December 10:17

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
La Liga said:
eath is the ultimate form of harm. It just seems odd to me to be wrangling over a lesser form of harm that may be occurring whilst administering the death.

In terms of cost, lots of studies in the US have concluded the death penalty costs more overall than life imprisonment. It'd be naive to think we would have the same legal issues and other additional areas which add to the cost.

According to Wiki, 150 people have been exonerated whilst on death row, and there's compelling evidence innocent people have been executed. Not a great error rate out of 7,800 who were sentenced to death.
That latter point is fundamental to my opposition to CP.

Mistakes are made. There is plenty of precedent.

A mistake over CP is irreversible.

Do the pro campaigners simply see that as collateral damage ?

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 8th December 2018
quotequote all
I can reply to this now like I wanted to, but feared a barrage of posts which would collectively depress the entire PH membership:

Volvo1956 said:
La Liga said:
The death penalty is definitely not a belief held by nearly all people.
Nearly all people..... Most people????
How are you defining that...
On what evidence are you basing your comments.
The survey you go on to quote and its history.

Volvo1956 said:
If it's the latest survey as outlined on here then 48% are in favour of capital punishment therefore 52% must be against.
It doesn't, because like most 'agree or disagree' surveys, there's a neutral response where the participant is neither for or against.

Volvo1956 said:
I'd hardly call 52% nearly all or the most.
Nor would you call 48%, which is the relevant %. If only 48% of people support the death penalty then when I write, 'The death penalty is definitely not a belief held by nearly all people', I am correct.

grumbledoak said:
La Liga said:
It just seems morally inconsistent. Acceptable to kill, but not to hurt.
It's not acceptable to torture them, either, though some of the crimes that merit execution deserve a fair bit of that too. But execution, for some crimes, is fine by me. None of this is morally inconsistent, though people try to claim that it is. It is a relatively simple line that, once crossed, you don't get a life. Nor do we have to pay for your bed and board. You don't deserve it.

We were manoeuvred out of capital punishment with the promise of life terms instead. But prison is very expensive. So they fob us off with large headline terms and quiet early release.
Death is the ultimate form of harm. It just seems odd to me to be wrangling over a lesser form of harm that may be occurring whilst administering the death.

In terms of cost, lots of studies in the US have concluded the death penalty costs more overall than life imprisonment. It'd be naive to think we would have the same legal issues and other additional areas which add to the cost.

According to Wiki, 150 people have been exonerated whilst on death row, and there's compelling evidence innocent people have been executed. Not a great error rate out of 7,800 who were sentenced to death.

Brooking10 said:
La Liga said:
eath is the ultimate form of harm. It just seems odd to me to be wrangling over a lesser form of harm that may be occurring whilst administering the death.

In terms of cost, lots of studies in the US have concluded the death penalty costs more overall than life imprisonment. It'd be naive to think we would have the same legal issues and other additional areas which add to the cost.

According to Wiki, 150 people have been exonerated whilst on death row, and there's compelling evidence innocent people have been executed. Not a great error rate out of 7,800 who were sentenced to death.
That latter point is fundamental to my opposition to CP.

Mistakes are made. There is plenty of precedent.

A mistake over CP is irreversible.

Do the pro campaigners simply see that as collateral damage ?
Time traveller!

I deleted that post so I could mash two together. It is just above this, though.