Jump to content

Are you for or against death penalty?


Pelle

yes or no to death penalty?  

89 members have voted

  1. 1. yes or no to death penalty?

    • No
      50
    • Yes
      32
    • Undecided
      8


Recommended Posts

A serious and emotive topic but I would just pose this question; how many murderers, rapists etc have you all met? Unfortunately I have to deal with them in my job and has caused me to meet people who have hit the headlines in the last couple of years. I would rather not say where I work as it may be unethical or even againt prison rules(and half the 'turnkeys' there seem to be Villa fans) ! Please let me assure you than probably 60% who have murdered are thoroughly evil scum and I am really not convinced that.if and when released , they wont murder again. I have never met one who claims that he has been wrongly convicted but some have expressed fear of capital punishment . As regards the sentence; perhaps 12- 15 years for knifing a bloke to steal his Rolex, the same for killing someone while off your head on drink/drugs. Capital punisment probably would not deter the latter but it might make the man armed with a knife think twice.

Please dont consider this as an attempt to be 'clever' but an insight into some of this lot MIGHT change minds.

Many prisoners where I work dont know what offences their fellow inmates have committed; the rapists usually seem to claim that they are in for armed robbery!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having just watched Panorama and the Baby P case the sooner the death penalty is introduced the better.

How can you then assume the moral highground and separate yourself from the worst of human kind if you sink to their level and call for legalised murder to be introduced?

What moral and ethical right have you got to call for people to be killed in your name?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems the fear of capital punishment doesnt make any real difference to prisoners, I give you the US as an example. Indeed, the chances of an innocent homeowner ending up dead from shooting follwoing a simple crime like a mugging, burglury, as the perpetrator has go easy access to arms, means the death sentence is not a deterrernt.

surely the point of civilisation is to treat everyone equally, and everyone who has gone on the path of crimeshould have a chance to repent. Even a murderer can make something of themselves, later in life, if successful rehabilitation is undergone.

Lets not forget there are wide ranging cultural issues to be remembered. Our defenition of a paedophile is a hapilly married man in some parts of the world under some religious codes.

Surely we dont send the right message as civilisation by saying - "you killed, thats like, a really bad thing, so,er were going to like kill to makeit better!". We've worked out you can't even train dogs like that, so why we think its going to work on humans.

The humane thing is to put people to work and use, in prisons, until they are either properly safe to be released or to work them usefully as a reparation to socienty for life.

Punishment is not the sole point of the criminal sysyem, it also serves to rehabillitate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only objection I have to the death penalty is the exoneration issue.

Accordingly, I'd whole-heartedly support the death penalty if the prosecutor of the case, every juror, and the judge waiving any and all rights to trial on a murder charge (ie automatic conviction) and any and all rights to appeal a death sentence (with the mandatory minimum for a conviction on the charge of execution of the innocent being death).

That automatically places a far more stringent standard of proof than beyond reasonable doubt.

If you have the balls to order someone to be killed, it is only fair that you be willing to accept the same fate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having just watched Panorama and the Baby P case the sooner the death penalty is introduced the better.

How can you then assume the moral highground and separate yourself from the worst of human kind if you sink to their level and call for legalised murder to be introduced?

What moral and ethical right have you got to call for people to be killed in your name?

I take it you didnt watch the program then.

Torturing a toddler, swing him round by his ankles and smashing his head on the floor, breaking 8 of his ribs, breaking his back...need I go on. If that is your view of a civilised society then were **** basically. I would shoot the **** cowardly bastard in the face at point blank range and nor bat an eyelid.

Now if you really cannot see the difference then I'm lost for words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you then assume the moral highground and separate yourself from the worst of human kind if you sink to their level ...

I would shoot the **** cowardly bastard in the face at point blank range and nor bat an eyelid.

oh dear mykeyb.

level sunk to. Moral high ground foregone, in the name of revenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have and pay for 1000 guilty people locked away in jail than sentence any innocent person to death.

They system fails and some innocent people do get convicted for crimes they didn't commit. To kill them would be irreversable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or preventing the reoccurrance of a violent crime, and preventing the population from feeding, housing and clothing a violent criminal for oh 6 or 7 years before he is free to roam the street again and reoffend... Apparently it's a mental illness..

None of the above states whether I am for or against the death penalty as I am on the fence with this one... but this moral highground nonsense is getting on my tits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I agree, we should always take the moral highground. Prison is there to keep them off the streets. Eating just bread and water would be kiling them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They system fails and some innocent people do get convicted for crimes they didn't commit. To kill them would be irreversable.

And how exactly would you give them the years back that they served?

I couldn't, the system fails but there are people who've had their convictions overturned and they are freed. They aty least get to live the rest of their life. It's better than executing them. I cannot agree with the death penalty on those grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imaging how angry an innocent person would be after serving numerous years for a crime they didn't commit? It's enough to turn you to crime, which states to me the current Court system is ineffectual as innocent people are convicted time after time... sort that and you sort the death penalty issue, surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what method would you advocates use? There are those saying they would chop off their heads (I note no response to my question as to whether that was a serious point or not), some who would shoot them in the face at point blank range, some who would use electricity. And on what grounds do you make your decision on how to kill a human being?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what method would you advocates use? There are those saying they would chop off their heads (I note no response to my question as to whether that was a serious point of not), some who would shoot them in the face at point blank range, some who would use electricity. And on what grounds do you make your decision on how to kill a human being?

I don't have a method, I don't have the answers, the point is that the system is inherently flawed if one innocent person goes to jail for more than a minute... if there were a system that were flawless I wouldn't have a problem with the Death Penalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I hear you Nick. Wasn't aiming the question at you, as you initially said you were a bit on the fence on the issue.

However, now you've said you wouldn't have a problem with the Death Penalty if the system were flawless, I think it's fair to push you to come up with a method. Not having a go here, but I don't think one can say 'Yes, I'm for it' and then say 'I don't have the answers' on the practicalities of what is obviously a pretty major moral and philosophical issue.

Do you think it matters as to how the deed is done? Because the 'off with their heads' mob obviously don't. I'm thinking from the point of view of the witnesses who need to be present, the feelings of the families of the convicted, whether how humane it needs to be is an issue, cost, efficiency, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â