snowychap Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Most definitely against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR.Smalljob Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 This guy should die very very slowly and so will I unless I learn to do short links properly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaceydeaceyaggro Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 eye for an eye Two wrongs don't make a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 This guy should die very very slowly link And I guess that there would also be people who would like this very slow death to be 'televised' just for the purposes of deterrence and education, honest guv'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 17, 2008 Moderator Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm against and having glanced at the topic and seem who has posted I'm sure the points have been made already so I'll not bore you any further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaceydeaceyaggro Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Some right blood thirsty nutters posting on this thread. Someone even called for murderers to be decapitated. Mercifully these prats will never see murder legalised in this country, and thank God for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Jon I think you have an admirable but misplaced faith in human nature. you're probably right AWOL. I do realise that there indeed a quite a few people out there who would quite happily do me over, probably for very little reason at all. I'd guess these people have virtually 0% moral fibre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Just the chance one 1 person wrongly killed is enough for me to say no never mind the ethics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 17, 2008 Moderator Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm against it as well, for the reasons espoused by Mike, Jon and Co. I can see an argument for the death penalty - people who torture and murder babies, crimes against the elderly and defenceless seem somehow worse than other crimes, but basically utter revulsion at that kind of sickness just highlights that killing people is not what any sane person n normal circumstances should do. I suppose you could argue that a hangman, electric chair switch puller or lethal injection giver is not in a "normal" situation, but really they are - they can go home on the bus and have their tea afterwards. I think that surely you have to be unbalanced to kill. Either temporarily or permanently. And as has been said by Mike, if you're unbalanced, you're not thinking about the consequences of getting caught. The death penalty might discourage "rational" crimes, but not the most serious - the taking of life. I can't really see any benefit to it, I can see a number of strong reasons not to have it - the downside far outweighs any deterrent value. Punishment should only be a part of any "justice" system. Other parts should be the protection of the innocent from further crime (the removal of the liberty of an offender) and re-habilitation, together with setting in place a mechanism for whatever led the person to offend to be removed. That might mean education, drugs addiction recovery, something to give a person a sense of having a future. Whilst it's true that some people are utterly beyond rehabilitation, you're then just looking, for these few individuals, at punishment. If killing is wrong, then killing them is wrong. We seem to have become a society where the default for any crime is "bang 'em up" (in a place where they are likely to learn how to re-offend, get drugs and continue a cycle of crime). There's not really much thought goes into it all. Politicians vie to seem the toughest on crime, and think that putting more people in prison reduces it, but it doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 17, 2008 Moderator Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm morally against the death penalty generally, but a quick cull of a couple of thousand of the worst prisoners might make room for all those scumbags that the courts keep releasing because we haven't got room for them. I'm against the death penalty and in favour of 30,000 more prison places, failing the building of new prisons then whatever we need to do make a bit of room is fine with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm against the death penalty, but I'm for life sentences to mean life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm morally against the death penalty generally, but a quick cull of a couple of thousand of the worst prisoners might make room for all those scumbags that the courts keep releasing because we haven't got room for them. I'm against the death penalty and in favour of 30,000 more prison places, failing the building of new prisons then whatever we need to do make a bit of room is fine with me. so, in summary, you're both against it, and in favour of it... :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 17, 2008 Moderator Share Posted November 17, 2008 I'm morally against the death penalty generally, but a quick cull of a couple of thousand of the worst prisoners might make room for all those scumbags that the courts keep releasing because we haven't got room for them. I'm against the death penalty and in favour of 30,000 more prison places, failing the building of new prisons then whatever we need to do make a bit of room is fine with me. so, in summary, you're both against it, and in favour of it... :winkold: No, I'm against it. I'm in favour of nine to a cell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starsailor9774 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 My view is that you keep rapists, child abusers, etc alive on bread and water....... just enough for them to survive. Then every so often they get taken out of their cell and tortured until they are close to death..... then they are sent back to their cell and have to wait until they are called again........ I would like to see them strung up but part of me thinks that if a paedophile or rapist knows that he is going to get executed if they are caught then this may encourage them more to kill their victims....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyvillan Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Against the death penalty ....But agree that life must be far longer than the laughable 10 years some people appear to be actually serving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 My view is that you keep rapists, child abusers, etc alive on bread and water....... just enough for them to survive. Then every so often they get taken out of their cell and tortured until they are close to death..... then they are sent back to their cell and have to wait until they are called again........ I would like to see them strung up but part of me thinks that if a paedophile or rapist knows that he is going to get executed if they are caught then this may encourage them more to kill their victims....... I don't think paedophiles think about the sentence and i don't think a more brutal punishment as you have proposed would act as a deterrent. They probably can't help themselves and hold a life sentence with the same degree of fear, as they would a lifetime of torture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaceydeaceyaggro Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 My view is that you keep rapists, child abusers, etc alive on bread and water....... just enough for them to survive. Then every so often they get taken out of their cell and tortured until they are close to death..... then they are sent back to their cell and have to wait until they are called again........ I would like to see them strung up but part of me thinks that if a paedophile or rapist knows that he is going to get executed if they are caught then this may encourage them more to kill their victims....... Are you a time traveller from the dark ages or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 My view is that you keep rapists, child abusers, etc alive on bread and water....... just enough for them to survive. Then every so often they get taken out of their cell and tortured until they are close to death..... then they are sent back to their cell and have to wait until they are called again........ I would like to see them strung up but part of me thinks that if a paedophile or rapist knows that he is going to get executed if they are caught then this may encourage them more to kill their victims....... Are you a time traveller from the dark ages or something? i lknow it's against site rules, but that line was so funny, it needs one of these Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 teh guys last sentence is totally correct if they have nothig to lose why not just kill anyway some peopel will always kill no matter the sentence which forme for the real serious cases should be life meaning all your life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 some peopel will always kill no matter the sentence they wouldn't kill twice though, would they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts