Jump to content

Capital Punishment


Winston72
 Share

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, figgy said:

 

I am totally for it’s return along with public birching. Branding and other deterrents. Think of the cost saving to the tax payer. All the youths who have never been chastised and think they can do as they please wouldn’t do it a second time. Murderers who are bang to rights guilty deserve it.  As for the odd one who didn’t do it is a life sentence any better.  Look at war inocents have always been casualties but it’s accepted as par for the course. 

Others won’t agree with my views but I don’t care. We all have an opinion. 

You might have a different view if it was you or a family member that facing the hangman's rope, if wrongly convicted. 

Quote

As for the odd one who didn’t do it is a life sentence any better.

I don't know i have not murdered anyone or done a life sentience, have you. The difference is you can receive a life sentience and be out in a year if its proved you were innocent, that becomes more difficult if you are dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There are a few who I think deserve it but I don't think there is any place for it in any civilised society.

I do think there should be a complete media ban on the convicted. The publicity given to "famous" murderers for years after they are sent to jail must be a terrible burden to the victims family. The criminal gets the publicity while the victim is completely forgotten, that should never be allowed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

So you don't have a issue with innocent people being executed by the state. And yes i would object to it for anyone, i would support life without parole. 

I cited Myra Hindley and Ian Brady and asked a straight question. I can only conclude, from your simplistic answer, which avoided the direct question, that you think they were innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Innocent people were undoubtedly hanged, but then forensics have improved significantly in the last 50 odd years too so the chances of it happening again are almost nil.

The names quoted above, Hindley, Brady, the terrorists who killed Lee Rigby absolutely 100% deserve to die. What use are/were they to society?

Edited by walshie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, walshie said:

Innocent people were undoubtedly hanged, but then forensics have improved significantly in the last 50 odd years too so the chances of it happening again are almost nil.

The names quoted above, Hindley, Brady, the terrorists who killed Lee Rigby absolutely 100% deserve to die. What use are/were they to society?

I’m of a similar opinion. Genetic fingerprinting has proved beyond all reasonable doubt the guilt of many murderers. 

Only yesterday the bloke who ran into a crowd of Muslims ( killing one ) in a van was convicted of murder. Any doubts anyone? The killers of Lee Rigby....any doubts? There are child killers and all manner of other murderers in our prisons, some of whom are released to kill again, and I hear on the National and Iocal news on an almost daily occurrence of yet another conviction for a murder of some sort or another. 

Are we not restoring capital punishment because we claim to be civilised or is it that we can’t totally be confident in our own judicial service?

Perversaly we seem to have the confidence to release convicted killers back into society. Weird eh? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Scully said:

I’m of a similar opinion. Genetic fingerprinting has proved beyond all reasonable doubt the guilt of many murderers. 

Only yesterday the bloke who ran into a crowd of Muslims ( killing one ) in a van was convicted of murder. Any doubts anyone? The killers of Lee Rigby....any doubts? There are child killers and all manner of other murderers in our prisons, some of whom are released to kill again, and I hear on the National and Iocal news on an almost daily occurrence of yet another conviction for a murder of some sort or another. 

Are we not restoring capital punishment because we claim to be civilised or is it that we can’t totally be confident in our own judicial service?

Perversaly we seem to have the confidence to release convicted killers back into society. Weird eh? 

Totally agree. 

Capital punishment wasn't about executing murderers, it was supposed to be a deterrent and now we have none.

I agree executing one innocent person is one too many, but I wonder how the numbers stack up against innocent people being killed by murderers released back into society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where it is established that murder has been committed beyond any doubt - forget the reasonable - where there is zero chance of an innocent person being hanged, are some still using that excuse? If they don't agree with capital punishment - just say so, but stop hiding behind "what if etc".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, catchthepigeonmutley said:

My feeling too, the legal system is by no means infallible.  It didn't seem to be much of a deterrent when we had it, and doesn't seem to be so in the US either.

The US is proof it doesn't work, their whole legal system is shot!

Edited by keg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, keg said:

The US is proof it doesn't work, their whole legal system is shot!

I’m not sure if anything is a deterrent; people were still murdered when we had capital punishment. 

As I’ve said; I’m not too bothered about a deterrent, I just want people like the Ian Brady’s ( and others ) of this world out of existence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Where it is established that murder has been committed beyond any doubt - forget the reasonable - where there is zero chance of an innocent person being hanged, are some still using that excuse? If they don't agree with capital punishment - just say so, but stop hiding behind "what if etc".

I think Gordon has it spot on here.  In the very few times the conviction is beyond ANY doubt i.e. Lee Rigby killers where he was arrested still wielding the knife at the scene, then yes I would support it.  In every other case of conviction where it is  beyond REASONABLE doubt then no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Juries would simply not return guilty verdicts if they know they were sending someone to the gallows. Even if they were totally convinced of the person's guilt. Too many bleeding heart musili eaters out there, they have not got the required strength of character. They would rather let a guilty man go free than sentence him to death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, keg said:

The US is proof it doesn't work, their whole legal system is shot!

I'm not so sure about that, in some states a first burglary conviction gets you seven years, a second gets you fourteen, a third gets you life. Their burglary levels are much less than a tenth of ours. There is some evidence that dracionian sentences do act as a deterrent 

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think, that first and foremost, a sentence should be about punishment first and rehabilitation second, turn prisons back into a place to be feared.

As for corporal and capital punishment, my veiw is simple, don't break the law and you have nothing to fear. Now I do understand that the law makes mistakes (just look at the recent rape cases where the police withheld evidence), so these punishments should only be used when the proof is 100%, like metioned before Lee Rigby's murderers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Now I do understand that the law makes mistakes (just look at the recent rape cases where the police withheld evidence)"

That's a mistake?

With apologies to members of an atheistic bent, the solution to this sort of thing was worked out millennia ago.

Deuteronomy 19:18–19
The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. 
So you shall purge the evil from your midst.


I suspect we'd see rather less "fitting up" if the culprit automatically got the sentence prescribed for the offence they falsely accused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, serrac said:

That's a mistake?

Yeah, maybe a poor example of a mistake, but the point I was trying to make, is if it wasn't for his barrister the kid/man would've probably gone to prison convicted by a jury on the evidence presented, and that would have been a huge miscarriage of justice, or in other words a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Newbie to this said:

I personally think, that first and foremost, a sentence should be about punishment first and rehabilitation second, turn prisons back into a place to be feared.

 

Thats the crux of the matter.

You go out ,murder someone, if you get caught, whats the worst that could happen ?
Maybe 15 years behind bars, maybe more, but fed, clothed and kept warm at night for free, and a chance to confer with like minded people ?
A gym, TV , maybe some education for when you get out, even sex if youre inclined.

Prison is no deterrent to people of that mindset, maybe even hanging isnt, but at least we wouldnt have to pay for their 40k a year keep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, muncher said:

Ian Brady wanted to be executed,they punished him more by keeping him in  the cell all those years.

Don’t you believe it . Brady did not want to die ,he wanted to be a thorn in the legal systems side for as long as he could . He was a very clever man with out any remorse what so ever for the heinous crimes that he committed . He was the most obnoxious self centred ,manipulative person that you could ever meet .  I would have gladly assisted in his execution should he have been given a capital sentence ,

harnser

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harnser - I had a colleague who had first hand professional dealings with Ian Brady and her view is that you are 100% correct. I also agree with your sentiment.

Vince - I agree that most juries would have anti-capital punishment people serving on them. perhaps a change in law to cover this - ie. convict of murder, but with no death penalty - would cover those who hadn't the backbone to do what the legal system required of them. They are there to judge guilt or innocence, not decide the penalty, but there are those who wish to have a pick and mix system. If we go down that road, those who don't believe in prison sentences would acquitting almost anyone - not light years away from where we are actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...