death penalty

[tractorboy]

ok then after some thought i have voted yes

 

but this government or the next must get things right a change to prison system take away any rights and privilages for all in mates .and reintroduce hard labour make prison hell on earth . for serial killers automatic death etc etc .civilised society can get things right we have to stick together and lobby the powers that be for change.

 

rant over

 

 

tractorboy

[cubix]

Killing can be right or wrong. Wrongful killing is called murder.

 

The argument applies in the favour of those who do not kill wrongfully, and against those who do. It is absurd to compare the actions of a murderer with a robust legal system and all the safeguards that this entails. Human life is sacred, as is human liberty. However, this does not mean that a person may not forfeit these rights through their own wickedness. The retention of the ultimate sanction protects those who obey the law against wrongful killing.

 

A considered post , but 'wrong' is a moral position. The law prohibits certain actions, which are called 'wrong' but that does not make them 'morally wrong', or evil.

 

Killing is morally wrong. The issue here is premeditation and personal gratification. It's not about safeguards and getting the right man.

 

Consider this - a man decides that at 11.00 am on Thursday he will go and kill another person, he is not going there with the possiblity of killing another person, or knowing he may be called upon to kill in self-defence. He does it because he believes it is right that the other person should die. It is premeditated and unambiguous.

 

Who am I talking about here? Britains last hangman, or the Yorkshire Ripper?

 

I regularly get into arguments over this, I am against the death penalty. But I take some comfort from the fact that in my argument I am protecting the right to life of those are in favour of the death penalty, unlike them who are trying to remove my right to life - and they wonder why I get upset!

 

That's also why I had alot to say about the euthansia thread a month back.

 

All we need now is some of the knee jerk lazy thinkers to start accusing me of being sympathetic to child abusers! (Don't even think about hinting it).

 

Here's a laugh, why don't we make a CRB check compulsory for membership of the forum? It costs about £6.00.

[Kay]

I dont think being gay means your automatically a child abuser

 

Its a little bit like saying my childs going nowhere near a Dr in case theres another shipman & there not being treated in hospital in case theres another Allitt working for the NHS

 

Kay you are absolutely right . But i would keep my kids away from them just in case . Harnser .

 

I can see your point but none of us would bother getting up at all if we did a risk assesment for every second were awake

[Harnser]

I dont think being gay means your automatically a child abuser

 

Its a little bit like saying my childs going nowhere near a Dr in case theres another shipman & there not being treated in hospital in case theres another Allitt working for the NHS

 

Kay you are absolutely right . But i would keep my kids away from them just in case . Harnser .

 

I can see your point but none of us would bother getting up at all if we did a risk assesment for every second were awake

Again Kay absolutely right ,but risk assesment as to who looks after our chilldren should be our top piority . Harnser .

[Maiden22]

TWIMC. Let's try this for size.

 

Bring back the death penalty for murder. By the same logic the government should :

 

Send people round to burgle the houses of burglars.

Arrange to have muggers mugged themsleves.

Arrange to have rapists raped.

Have drunk drivers who knock down and paralyse someone knocked down and paralysed themselves.

 

Pre-meditated killing. You can't justify it, there isnt an argument to justify it - it doesn't exist. If you think you can justify it them you are closer to the murderers you want to hang than you think.

 

At least say what you really mean - it's revenge and a cheap alternative to prison, plain and simple.

 

I can't agree with the logic of this. Death is an appropriate way of punishing and deterring those who wrongfully and deliberately take life. They have performed the ultimate wrong against another person, and no other penalty is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of justice.

 

It does not therefore follow that the appropriate punishment for other crimes should be of the nature of the original crime. There are alternatives that are preferrable, as they might offer puishment, the chance of rehabilitation, and respite for the public from criminals. However, I (and I suspect many others) would support the concept of burglars being compelled to make financial restitution to their victims. This would not however be burglary - it would be restitution in accordance with the law and limited to the extent of the loss suffered.

 

I think that there are many arguments in favour of executing murderers, and would enjoy testing them with you. As a starting point, I beleive that justice demands it and it helps to protect the innocent against the violent and predatory.

 

Again, I confess that I cannot see the moral equivalence of a cold-blooded murder of an innocent victim, and the execution of a wicked person following due process of law.

 

I don't think that it is revenge - it is justice, and the two are very different. As for being cheaper, one of the arguments commonly used by the "anti" lobby is that, on the contrary, it is much more expensive. This is due to the cost of the necessary appeals process.

 

Robert

Edited June 28, 2008 by Maiden22

[Maiden22]

Killing can be right or wrong. Wrongful killing is called murder.

 

The argument applies in the favour of those who do not kill wrongfully, and against those who do. It is absurd to compare the actions of a murderer with a robust legal system and all the safeguards that this entails. Human life is sacred, as is human liberty. However, this does not mean that a person may not forfeit these rights through their own wickedness. The retention of the ultimate sanction protects those who obey the law against wrongful killing.

 

A considered post , but 'wrong' is a moral position. The law prohibits certain actions, which are called 'wrong' but that does not make them 'morally wrong', or evil.

 

Killing is morally wrong. The issue here is premeditation and personal gratification. It's not about safeguards and getting the right man.

 

Consider this - a man decides that at 11.00 am on Thursday he will go and kill another person, he is not going there with the possiblity of killing another person, or knowing he may be called upon to kill in self-defence. He does it because he believes it is right that the other person should die. It is premeditated and unambiguous.

 

Who am I talking about here? Britains last hangman, or the Yorkshire Ripper?

 

I regularly get into arguments over this, I am against the death penalty. But I take some comfort from the fact that in my argument I am protecting the right to life of those are in favour of the death penalty, unlike them who are trying to remove my right to life - and they wonder why I get upset!

 

That's also why I had alot to say about the euthansia thread a month back.

 

All we need now is some of the knee jerk lazy thinkers to start accusing me of being sympathetic to child abusers! (Don't even think about hinting it).

 

Here's a laugh, why don't we make a CRB check compulsory for membership of the forum? It costs about £6.00.

 

I agree with a lot of what you say, and I am also opposed to euthanasia. The sanctity of human life also leads to me to oppose abortion. But I think that the key difference is there is innoncence - the unborn child is innocent, whereas the murderer has made a decision to comit evil.

 

Absolutely, morally wrong and legally wrong may well be, and frequently are, very different things. But the law may be based on what a society judges to be morally right.

 

I don't beleive that killing is morally wrong. Would you not kill in self-defence, or in defence of your family or country? If not, then I accept that the discussion is over, and of course if you beleive that killing is always wrong, then so be it.

 

The hangman does not kill in self-defence in a narrow sense. However, I think that such killing serves to defend the innocent in society as a whole. So far from removing your right to life, I beleive that my stance protects it - assuming that you never murder someone.

 

As I said, I acknowledge that decent people oppose the death penalty based on both morality and reason. I think however that both are flawed.

 

Robert

[cubix]

They have performed the ultimate wrong against another person, and no other penalty is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of justice.

 

That is my argument in a nutshell. It is logically irreducible beyond this point.

[harpoonlouis]

Harpoonlouis........Personly i wouldnt put my children at that risk.There is lots of cases of social services giving people the benefit of doubt,another chance,time to sort things out where the outcome has been a dead child.It is this sort of thinking that is corrupting our country.If you want to talk the numbers game about 1 in a 100 being innocent,well that means 99 were guilty and how many innocent people would be saved if those 99 were never allowed to re-offend again ?? A LOT MORE THAN THE 1% we started with,so playing with numbers still means we would be better off with the death penalty.

Also putting your head in the sand and saying "just hope bad things dont happen to you"isnt really tackling the problem or making society a better place is it ?

 

 

I didn't take the opinions of any third party into account when making my judgement, and it was my judgment, on my children's safety. I read up on the actual notes of the case as far as they were available to the public and I talked to those involved. This woman had "snapped" in a situation that would have snapped any lesser person much sooner. She understood how she had been manipulated in an abusive relationship and she had paid the price for her complying with a bully. This woman is now probably the least likely person ever to allow herself to be damaged in this way again. She was a survivor and a victim and a perpetrator, that kind of lesson in life makes you stronger and better or it destroys you. Statistically there is someone in this discussion right now who is either abusing or being abused, they pose more risk as a silent participant than ever does this person. The bottom line was that the headline didn't reflect the real story in this instance.

 

 

Err, in the percentages game killing all murderers won't save that many lives, most people convicted of murder have killed in situations of domestic breakdown and are statistically no more likely to go on to kill again than any other member of society. Multiple murderers are unusual. To reduce the rate of murder you have to get into social engineering or the weird world of Minority Report which was of course a fantasy movie.

 

The deepest sand is that which you haven't put any thought into. I know there is no bottom to the pit of depravity that humans have created and I also know that there is no true way to be able to see all the threats in life however I don't think that dreaming up ways to savage criminals after the event is the way to prevent harm coming to my children, I don't want to arrive at the scene of the crime after the event I want to think how I can best prevent the preventable. I do take a lot of precautions to reduce risks to my family believe me but I don't kid myself that they will prevent all bad things. I am sure we both do everything that we think will make a difference.

[MM]

I firmly support the death penalty in cases of murder and treason. Without wishing to give offence, and whilst fully appreciating that many decent and thoughtful people oppose hanging, the arguments against capital punishment (especially the "mistake" argument) seem to me to be thoroughly feeble and rather naive.

 

Having said that, I even more firmly support the rule of law, and some of the comments on this thread are childish and crass beyond belief. In particular, the expression of support for brutality, torture and extra-judicial punishment is quite worrying in people who (presumably) consider themselves fit to lawfully hold firearms.

 

I am sure that I have just offended pretty much everyone, and so will add only one more comment. How many posters realise that this is an entirely theoretical debate, and why this is so? Everyone in the land, from the greatest to the basest, could be in favour of the restoration of capital punishment, and it would make not one iota of difference. This is because British laws no longer have primacy in Britain. Our entaglement in the cess-pool of corruption, waste and bureaucracy that is the European Union means that hanging is, and will remain, illegal, regardless of the wishes of the public or the legislature.

 

Robert

 

 

TWIMC.

 

It is no coincidence that as countries' social development advances they drop the death penalty. That's one thing the EU has got right at least.

 

 

What does TWIMC mean? I can't be bothered Googling it.

 

YOU say this is something the EU has got right. I on the other hand, don't think the EU ever has got anything right, or ever will.

 

I can't think of any good reasons for keeping paedos alive. Kill 'em all. **** 'em

 

 

 

its like you two are in my head reading my mind. i love you guys. not in a gay way of course, in a brotherly man love way

 

Treason and murder. the two worst things in the world this is an island, and a mighty one at that. so let send all the murderers and ****** to the Isle of man instead

 

if not,,,,,,,,, they know who comes out......................

 

 

 

 

its "Mr Socky"

[Maiden22]

They have performed the ultimate wrong against another person, and no other penalty is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of justice.

 

That is my argument in a nutshell. It is logically irreducible beyond this point.

 

Again though, one is innocent, and the victim of a wicked person. The other is guilty, and is being made to bear the consequences of his wickedness. I diferentiate between the two, as surely you must also.

 

Life is sacred, but the right to life is not absolute - witness the fact that most of us would agree with killing in self-defence. If you attempt to murder another person, and can only be stopped by being killed, you have forfeited your right to life. In the same way, I beleive that your right to life can be forfeited by committing murder.

 

Surely it does not follow from this that there is no right to life, or that a person carrying out a lawful execution forfeits his own life?

 

Robert

[Harnser]

Robert .

I n the good old days when we executed people for killing for gain or attempted gain ,the appeal system was very simple .An automatic appeal was available for any body sentenced to death . The sentenced person ( or the queer fellow as was known in prison parlance) would be allowed an appeal agaist the death penalty ,this would normally take place within a week of being sentenced . The whole due process of law was very swift after sentencing and if the appeal was unsuccessful the execution would take place within three weeks of receiving the death penalty . The appeal system was nothing like you hear about in the usa were an appeal againt a death penalty can take many years ,many court appearances and cost millions of dollers .

You will be taken to a lawful place of execution where you will be hung by the neck untill dead ,and may god have mercy on you soul .Take him down officer . All very simple . Harnser .

[Maiden22]

I firmly support the death penalty in cases of murder and treason. Without wishing to give offence, and whilst fully appreciating that many decent and thoughtful people oppose hanging, the arguments against capital punishment (especially the "mistake" argument) seem to me to be thoroughly feeble and rather naive.

 

Having said that, I even more firmly support the rule of law, and some of the comments on this thread are childish and crass beyond belief. In particular, the expression of support for brutality, torture and extra-judicial punishment is quite worrying in people who (presumably) consider themselves fit to lawfully hold firearms.

 

I am sure that I have just offended pretty much everyone, and so will add only one more comment. How many posters realise that this is an entirely theoretical debate, and why this is so? Everyone in the land, from the greatest to the basest, could be in favour of the restoration of capital punishment, and it would make not one iota of difference. This is because British laws no longer have primacy in Britain. Our entaglement in the cess-pool of corruption, waste and bureaucracy that is the European Union means that hanging is, and will remain, illegal, regardless of the wishes of the public or the legislature.

 

Robert

 

 

TWIMC.

 

It is no coincidence that as countries' social development advances they drop the death penalty. That's one thing the EU has got right at least.

 

 

What does TWIMC mean? I can't be bothered Googling it.

 

YOU say this is something the EU has got right. I on the other hand, don't think the EU ever has got anything right, or ever will.

 

I can't think of any good reasons for keeping paedos alive. Kill 'em all. **** 'em

 

 

 

its like you two are in my head reading my mind. i love you guys. not in a gay way of course, in a brotherly man love way

 

Treason and murder. the two worst things in the world this is an island, and a mighty one at that. so let send all the murderers and **** to the Isle of man instead

 

if not,,,,,,,,, they know who comes out......................

 

 

 

 

its "Mr Socky"

 

I also firmly support Mr Socky for the post of chief justice. He's looking very snappy today by the way .

 

Robert

[harpoonlouis]

harpoonlouis; If your children were abused, it would be interesting to know if you would still hold these views.

 

Bob300w, I think that the original question here was about justice not vengence.

 

I made long answer elsewhere but in short my reply was about life being more complex than "how would I feel if..."

 

I am sure that if my children had been subject to abuse I would feel many feeling including a thirst for vengence but that would be me satisfying my feeling AFTER the event. That is a luxury that I would rather do without.

 

My point is what can we realistically do to stop putting ourselves in the position of having to wreek vengence and those questions are a bit more complex and harder to answer than "Let's sting up everyone After the event" Wish I did have a simple answer to prevention, I really do for everyones sake.

[Maiden22]

Robert .

I n the good old days when we executed people for killing for gain or attempted gain ,the appeal system was very simple .An automatic appeal was available for any body sentenced to death . The sentenced person ( or the queer fellow as was known in prison parlance) would be allowed an appeal agaist the death penalty ,this would normally take place within a week of being sentenced . The whole due process of law was very swift after sentencing and if the appeal was unsuccessful the execution would take place within three weeks of receiving the death penalty . The appeal system was nothing like you hear about in the usa were an appeal againt a death penalty can take many years ,many court appearances and cost millions of dollers .

You will be taken to a lawful place of execution where you will be hung by the neck untill dead ,and may god have mercy on you soul .Take him down officer . All very simple . Harnser .

 

As it should be Harnser. What I meant was that in today's society I don't think that a process like that would be possible, however desireable it might be in many cases.

 

I think that the US system is quite cruel in its way - it seems that many condemned men serve what is in effect a life sentence before being executed.

 

Robert

[harpoonlouis]

I also firmly support Mr Socky for the post of chief justice. He's looking very snappy today by the way .

 

Robert

 

 

Robert, you sure you have the right picture there?

 

Isn't that Boris Johnson?

[harpoonlouis]

I dont think being gay means your automatically a child abuser

 

Its a little bit like saying my childs going nowhere near a Dr in case theres another shipman & there not being treated in hospital in case theres another Allitt working for the NHS

 

Kay you are absolutely right . But i would keep my kids away from them just in case . Harnser .

 

 

Harnser, just in case of what? My kids aren't going to turn gay because they meet gay people anymore than they are going to turn Scottish or Geordie! About 10% of our population are probably gay so which 10% of the forum are you going to keep away from just in case?

 

Anyways, nice knockabout discussion, off to kill something!

[Maiden22]

Harnser, just in case of what? My kids aren't going to turn gay because they meet gay people anymore than they are going to turn Scottish or Geordie! About 10% of our population are probably gay so which 10% of the forum are you going to keep away from just in case?

 

Anyways, nice knockabout discussion, off to kill something!

 

The Essex Mafia of course!

 

Robert

[Blackbart]

I dont think being gay means your automatically a child abuser

 

Its a little bit like saying my childs going nowhere near a Dr in case theres another shipman & there not being treated in hospital in case theres another Allitt working for the NHS

 

Kay you are absolutely right . But i would keep my kids away from them just in case . Harnser .

 

 

Harnser, just in case of what? My kids aren't going to turn gay because they meet gay people anymore than they are going to turn Scottish or Geordie! About 10% of our population are probably gay so which 10% of the forum are you going to keep away from just in case?

 

Anyways, nice knockabout discussion, off to kill something!

 

Off course they will !!Didnt you see the simpsons ? Bart had to be taken hunting to shoot a deer otherwise he was a deffo chutney ferret !

[harpoonlouis]

The Essex Mafia of course!

 

Robert

 

 

Don't make me laugh! I used to live in Benfleet and ran a pub in Leigh On Sea! Bunch of jessies, all speed boats and gold chains!

[Browning GTS]

I voted yes, i would have voted for my shed but the trouble is i cant get in it its full up.

 

Why should us tax payers have to feed the scum of this planet? HANG em high. I think the only let out is if they are given a choice to be used for medical tests, like drugs for cancer research ect, or new ways of operating on people, at least that way they would pay back a bit to decent people. Also i think this poll reflects what a national one would and that is why the goverment would never put it to the vote to scared of the truth

Edited June 28, 2008 by Browning GTS

[starlight32]

The Essex Mafia of course!

 

Robert

 

 

Don't make me laugh! I used to live in Benfleet and ran a pub in Leigh On Sea! Bunch of jessies, all speed boats and gold chains!

 

When I used to knock about there the ones with speedboats and gold chains were not jessies. In fact quite the opposite.

 

To be honest it was in southend that I picked up my first dyson hoover in a pub car park liquidation sale ......

 

I never see a speedboat but he had a big chain

[Chard]

The problem that I have with minority groups (perople who think it's wrong to kill paedos, vegans, bunnyhuggers, people who drive people carriers etc etc etc) is that they state their OPINIONS as though they were FACT. Have you noticed that? Somewhere, there's a book called How to Win Arguments and Influence People or something, and I reckon on page 545, second paragraph, it must tell people from said minority groups that if you shout your OPINIONS as though they were FACT, and sound fairly assertive, most people might be stupid enough to believe you

 

Doesn't wash with me though. I still can't think of any good reasons to keep paedos alive

 

It's all been argued before, and the majority of the population still support the death penalty and the rest (which includes all the politicians, who we all know are completely out of touch with reality) still shout their opinions loudly as though they were facts. The advice on page 545 paragraph 2, clearly works on the politicians though, because I don't think we'll ever see the death penalty in the UK again, despite what the people want.

[harpoonlouis]

Sorry Chard was that an OPINION or a FACT you were shouting at me, I got a bit confused with all those CAPITALS in there!

 

Propaganda! Ha, it's always the people you don't agree with that resort to propaganda isn't it!

 

Win friends and influence people, and if you can't HANG EM!

 

Does the majority of the UK population still believe in aliens by the way?

 

Or God?

 

Or the moon being made of green cheese?

 

If the majority votes for it it must be right mustn't it?

 

Baaaahhhhh!!! Baaaahhhhh!!!

 

Have enjoyed this more than I probably should have done, what's on next?

[Chard]

Sorry Chard was that an OPINION or a FACT you were shouting at me, I got a bit confused with all those CAPITALS in there!

 

Propaganda! Ha, it's always the people you don't agree with that resort to propaganda isn't it!

 

Win friends and influence people, and if you can't HANG EM!

 

Does the majority of the UK population still believe in aliens by the way?

 

Or God?

 

Or the moon being made of green cheese?

 

If the majority votes for it it must be right mustn't it?

 

Baaaahhhhh!!! Baaaahhhhh!!!

 

Have enjoyed this more than I probably should have done, what's on next?

 

Then when they've tried stating OPINION as FACT, they spit their dummies out

[harpoonlouis]

When I used to knock about there the ones with speedboats and gold chains were not jessies. In fact quite the opposite.

 

Er, as I remeber quite a few of those gold chain and Ralph Lauren polo tops were a bit psychotic. Maybe that's why I moved on to Surrey!