Pelle Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Sorry, another poll here but after Trims thread about the last meal I was wondering if people on here are for or against death penalty. I'm generally against it, but on the other hand when it comes to persons like Hussein and the top nazis I think they got what they deserved, well,m those who finally got punished at least. But in general, I'm against it. It's not a very human penalty and doesn't show that we're better than the criminal. I guess it's not the death itself that is the worst part, but to go and wait for it. And as it's so definite there's no room for a mistake with the punished actually being innocent. Otherwise I like the american way to really give criminlas heavy penalties, but sending them to death is way over the line for me. But that's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissmith921 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 eye for an eye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 there's no room for a mistake with the punished actually being unguilty. :? innocent? :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artetasgirl Posted November 17, 2008 Visiting Supporter Share Posted November 17, 2008 I am in some ways but not in others so I'm undecided. I'm all for national service for criminals/unemployed (thos who dont even try and get a job I mean) though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 i'm massively against it, for many reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 17, 2008 VT Supporter Share Posted November 17, 2008 Against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted November 17, 2008 Author Share Posted November 17, 2008 there's no room for a mistake with the punished actually being unguilty. :? innocent? :winkold: Shut it, it's my thread and I call it whatever I want. Can't understand why I didn't use that word. :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 eye for an eye makes the world go blind ? as for bliblical quotes, is not one the 10 commandments 'thou shalt not kill' so do we kill the exectioner as well ? and carry on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 yes, definitely. 5-10 years on Death Row (to give them a chance to think about what they've done). painful death or humane death - depends on the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 eye for an eye makes the world go blind ? Hey, I like that response Ian. Very apt, and very wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I am in some ways but not in others so I'm undecided. I'm all for national service for criminals/unemployed (thos who dont even try and get a job I mean) though... Sod National Service, we have a very professional army and it doesn't need crims or wasters. For the death penalty in certain cases. Child murderers, serial killers, terrorists who commit or attempt to commit mass murder, mulitple rapists. String them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I tend to come down on either side, you'd always run the risk of an innocent man/women being punished, but when you think of hard working tax-payers paying for Ian Huntley's internet connection I wouldn't lose too much sleep over him going for the chop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artetasgirl Posted November 17, 2008 Visiting Supporter Share Posted November 17, 2008 I am in some ways but not in others so I'm undecided. I'm all for national service for criminals/unemployed (thos who dont even try and get a job I mean) though... Sod National Service, we have a very professional army and it doesn't need crims or wasters. I didn't mean put them directly in the army, I meant make more prisons more like army camps, or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ricardomeister Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I am not religious, but to me voting for the death penalty makes me just as bad as the murderer. I would rather impose a life sentence with no chance of parole, in a jail that doesn't ressemble a holiday camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenjos Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 im for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCLaura Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I think with crimes all being very different - it's very hard if not impossible to draw the lines in regards to where we would and wouldn't issue a death penalty. And I do agree with earlier points posted by Pelle - it is frightening that it would be possible for an innocent person to be punished by death. I believe prevention is better than cure - maybe by re-instating the death sentence, it would cut crime rates...? It would certainly slash the amount of re-offenders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 No way should they get the easy route out. For example, Ian Huntley. Most people I suppose would like him dead for what he did (and his missus) but I like to think that every few months someone gives him a dig or glass in his food or unfortunate fall down the stairs etc (remember he knew what he was doing and where he would end up)..... It is something our jails are famous for from both the screws and the inmates that due pain will be dished out. He will never be released so he has 35 years of this left which by no means brings the kids back or does anything for the family and friends but is better than letting him sleep well forever. Another example is Ian Brady, would love to die but the good old prison service won't let him. He could let us know whee the last body is but no, he thinks he's a funny guy. Yes my view is based on things that should not happen in prison but I see no other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I tend to come down on either side, you'd always run the risk of an innocent man/women being punished, but when you think of hard working tax-payers paying for Ian Huntley's internet connection I wouldn't lose too much sleep over him going for the chop. sometimes you ought not believe what is in tabloids .. and as for money it would cost as much to hang someone then to keep them because of the numerous legal fees that would go on as for any deterrent effect it has, I doubt it would have stopped Huntley or child P's killers just like we still have mass murders in the states so no detterent, does nto save money one thing left is the revenge factor and that does no one any good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm for it, in extreme cases. If there's any chance of rehabilitation then obviously not.. but some people are persistent offenders and feel no remorse for their crimes. If they are a danger to society then I think the death penalty is the best thing. A life in prison is not a life anyway - all it does it cost the government, and consequently us, to keep them alive. I think prisons are an all-to-easy solution to criminal punishments. There should be a big reform in which more minor offences are worked off as a debt to society, doing horrible jobs no-one wants to do... and at the other end of the scale the Harold Shipmans need to just be killed. There is no way people like that will ever be allowed back into society, so why pay thousands of pounds a week to keep them alive at her majesty's pleasure? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant-Major Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 For - however the conviction would have to be 100% watertight to guard against executing an innocent man. If we had a death penalty it might make those who choose to carry guns and knives think twice, if they thought that by using a weapon would mean "a long drop and a sudden stop" on the end of a rope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts