Death penalty recipients?

[Silent1]

rudecherub said:

Silent1 said:

no-one, the risk of killing an innocent person is too high, you can release a wrongly convicted person, you can't bring them back to life.

Damn you're right I will throw away my car keys straight away, I can't possibly drive my car knowing that the chances of innocents dying in their hundreds every year as a direct result of the freedom to drive, the chances of innocents dying is too high.

I'm also going to stop them building any tall buildings too, death's in major construction projects are inevitable, life is too precious, it's beyond price...

And growing food. Agriculture is one of the most dangerous industries ,. stop Farmers now!

You can opt out of all the things you mention, you cannot opt out of the justice system

[Conian]

otolith said:

AshVX220 said:

Mira [sp] Hindley

I should think she's a bit manky by now, she's been dead eight years.

he suspected something was up, the sex was the same but the dirty dishes had started to pile up a bit.

[rudecherub]

Silent1 said:

rudecherub said:

Silent1 said:

no-one, the risk of killing an innocent person is too high, you can release a wrongly convicted person, you can't bring them back to life.

Damn you're right I will throw away my car keys straight away, I can't possibly drive my car knowing that the chances of innocents dying in their hundreds every year as a direct result of the freedom to drive, the chances of innocents dying is too high.

I'm also going to stop them building any tall buildings too, death's in major construction projects are inevitable, life is too precious, it's beyond price...

And growing food. Agriculture is one of the most dangerous industries ,. stop Farmers now!

You can opt out of all the things you mention, you cannot opt out of the justice system

Not so. No one is forcing anyone to be resident in any given country. Further cars kill pedestrians, you can only opt out of that risk if you never leave your home to walk on the street, and a bus could still crash into your house, or plane drop on your heard.
The reality is death is the price of life and our freedom, you can believe the likes of Sutcliffe et al have an absolute right to life, but to do so is value those who die daily to grease the wheels of commerce and defend freedom less than murdering b'stards IMO.

[StevieBee]

MiniMan64 said:

OnTheOverrun said:

anyone convicted of a terrorist action that resulted in one or more deaths.

Don't most terrorists these days take care of that themselves?

And if they didn't but society did it for them, then all society is doing is satisfying the terrorist's ultimate ambition in the first place. It would be more of a punishment to keep them alive - for as long as possible.

If the death penalty is considered a deterrent (which all punishment is) then it's never really going to work. It would not stop nut jobs running a muck in a playground with a gun as they tend to finish themselves off. It would not deter gang related murders as they couldn't care less anyway, nor drug related crime - would just up the ante and increase the money floating around in that world.

It would on the other hand, deter petty crime - shop lifting, mugging, TWOKing, etc. But as much as I would happily see perpetrators of such crimes get far harsher punishments, I don't think that nicking a shirt from M&S warrants the chair.

I've not seen any evidence to show that where it is still used, there is any reduction in serious crime. In the States, it costs more to impose than life imprisonment as the legal arguments can go on for years - often costing the tax payer millions. All it really does is satisfy the rabid fury of the lower ranks of society.

[Deva Link]

jmorgan said:

Too many people are being found innocent many years later for it to be re introduced.

Almost everyone seems to get off eventually, it just needs to go back to court enough times.

You have to look at the bigger picture though.

[BrassMan]

musclecarmad said:

I don't think one event should get you the death penalty unless it is ridiculously serious such as plotting a terrorist attack or mass murder.

i do think that repeat offenders and serial killers should get the death penalty.

Death penalty for conspiracy? Are you mad?

[RonnieP]

Footballers who drive expensive cars I can't afford - or am I just being envious amd should eat cake

[spaximus]

I can think of a few that I would nominate. Lets take the Ripper, Black Panther, Brady, Rose West,Huntley the London bombers. The list is endless of people where there is not the slightest doubt in anyones mind. These were not flimsey cases convicted on an Odd bit of evidence.

Where there is a conviction on such evidence then no death penalty,but life should mean die in Jail not 6 or 7 years.

I hear all the arguments of others which I respect, however I remain in favour with safe gaurds in place.

[OnTheOverrun]

StevieBee said:

MiniMan64 said:

OnTheOverrun said:

anyone convicted of a terrorist action that resulted in one or more deaths.

Don't most terrorists these days take care of that themselves?

And if they didn't but society did it for them, then all society is doing is satisfying the terrorist's ultimate ambition in the first place. It would be more of a punishment to keep them alive - for as long as possible.

If the death penalty is considered a deterrent (which all punishment is) then it's never really going to work. It would not stop nut jobs running a muck in a playground with a gun as they tend to finish themselves off. It would not deter gang related murders as they couldn't care less anyway, nor drug related crime - would just up the ante and increase the money floating around in that world.

It would on the other hand, deter petty crime - shop lifting, mugging, TWOKing, etc. But as much as I would happily see perpetrators of such crimes get far harsher punishments, I don't think that nicking a shirt from M&S warrants the chair.

I've not seen any evidence to show that where it is still used, there is any reduction in serious crime. In the States, it costs more to impose than life imprisonment as the legal arguments can go on for years - often costing the tax payer millions. All it really does is satisfy the rabid fury of the lower ranks of society.

I'm not really concerned about the deterent value, I just want to save some tax money by not having to feed and house them for 40 years so it will need to be a single trial and then bang, they sort you out the next day before you can appeal. Japan currently has over 50 people on death row - do you think they do it to placate 'the lower ranks' as you so charmingly dismiss them?

[andymadmak]

tank slapper said:

andymadmak said:

And the arugment that says one innocent life lost cos of an incorrect death sentence (assuming that were ever to happen given todays standards of evidence) ignores the 300 - 400 EXTRA innocent people who are murdered each year as a result of the rise in the murder rate per million head of population following the abolition of the death penalty

That is a massive oversimplification - Correlation does not equal causation.

There have been enormous societal changes in the same period which could just as easily explain the difference.

Hmm, thats convenient for you - societal changes that could explain etc. Of course, you then don't have to actually say which change that was, or what caused it... Society has always changed. In fact, over the 100 years prior to the abolition of the death penalty, when there were truly huge societal changes, the emergence of organised labour, two world wars, a great depression and so much more, the murder rate per million head of population remained steady (at about 7)
In the 40 years following abolition the rate rose inexorably to 14 per million head of population. But I would agree with you that a societal change caused that rise, in fact I'll go so far as to identify it - that change was the abolition of the death penalty for murder and the general softening of our police and criminal justice system which sent a signal to the crims that no matter what they did it would not cost them their own life.

Edited by andymadmak on Friday 6th August 09:13

[AshVX220]

Conian said:

otolith said:

AshVX220 said:

Mira [sp] Hindley

I should think she's a bit manky by now, she's been dead eight years.

he suspected something was up, the sex was the same but the dirty dishes had started to pile up a bit.

I actually forgot that she'd snuffed it, however, I think she shold have executed in the first place.

Unfortunately (and this is something the pink and fluffy brigade seem to forget) there are people on this planet and in this country that deserve to die for what they do and have done.

It amazes, most people don't really make much of a noise about our service personnel who are dying daily, fighting a rather dodgy war (as far as legality goes). Yet when the death penalty for convicted murderers, peado's and such is discussed, the public (in general) have a complete hissy fit.

Also, as has been said, life should mean life. The politicians and judges in this country have gone very soft. Instead of building more prisons and therefore accepting that in reality crime is on the up, they just dish out shorter term to provide the prison space they need.

[andymadmak]

StevieBee said:

I've not seen any evidence to show that where it is still used, there is any reduction in serious crime. In the States, it costs more to impose than life imprisonment as the legal arguments can go on for years - often costing the tax payer millions. All it really does is satisfy the rabid fury of the lower ranks of society.

Nice. So anyone who supports the death penalty is rabid and from the lower ranks of society. Remind me to hang on your every word in future. Your opinions are so clearly well thought through.

[andy400]

andymadmak said:

based on Home Office statistics

Probably bks then?

[AshVX220]

andymadmak said:

StevieBee said:

I've not seen any evidence to show that where it is still used, there is any reduction in serious crime. In the States, it costs more to impose than life imprisonment as the legal arguments can go on for years - often costing the tax payer millions. All it really does is satisfy the rabid fury of the lower ranks of society.

Nice. So anyone who supports the death penalty is rabid and from the lower ranks of society. Remind me to hang on your every word in future. Your opinions are so clearly well thought through.

In answer to the point about lenghty drawn out legal battles etc, then shorten the appeal process. You can appeal once, that's it. If you lose the appeal the penalty is carried asap. If you don't want to suffer the penalty, don't do the crime. Why is that so difficult to understand?

[andymadmak]

andy400 said:

andymadmak said:

based on Home Office statistics

Probably bks then?

Funnily enough, up to about 5 years ago it was really easy to go on the Home Office website, access the archive data and check the annual murder rates for England and Wales right back to before 1900, (from memory I think it went back to 1870 something) Now, its very hard to find that data.... Perhaps it was considered too embarrassing?

[stitched]

Well I naively hoped this wouldn't turn into a pro or con thread but for the record.
Predatory paedophiles.
Child killers.
Those who can be PROVEN beyond all doubt to have committed a calculated killing.


Bent coppers?

[AshVX220]

stitched said:

Well I naively hoped this wouldn't turn into a pro or con thread but for the record.
Predatory paedophiles.
Child killers.
Those who can be PROVEN beyond all doubt to have committed a calculated killing.


Bent coppers?

Just because some copper likes marching aroung Brighton in leather trousers, waving a multi-coloured flag doesn't mean he should be executed shirley?

[anonymous-user]

People who steal cars or even break into cars!

[jmorgan]

Deva Link said:

jmorgan said:

Too many people are being found innocent many years later for it to be re introduced.

Almost everyone seems to get off eventually, it just needs to go back to court enough times.

You have to look at the bigger picture though.

I was particularly thinking two cases. One of a chap that was incarcerated then proven innocent when a bloke was later found guilty. The person did 20 odd years then died just after being released.

Then there was a case in Cardiff where the people convicted were found innocent, completely, for a murder they did not commit and another was proved to have done it.

[Zod]

There is no evidence whatsoever that the death penalty affects serious crime rates.

None of those arguing for its reintroduction can manage much better thatn "it should be applied in cases where the defendant is clearly guilty". The standard of proof in a criminal court is "beyind reasonable doubt". There are cases in which the wrong verdict is reached.

What the death penalty adherents really mean is "hang those whom the Sun deems guilty".