Death penalty????
- Thread starter masona
- Start date
Sponsored Links
He'd get my vote. The way I see it, the only argument against the death penalty is the rare occasion that an innocent person gets convicted. I'd argue that, under the current regime, even more innocent people are being killed by re-offenders, that the law is too soft to deal with.
Besides, it's cheaper. Why the hell should us tax payers foot the bill to house murderers for x number of years, at an exhorbitant cost, then allow them back out to kill again?
Then I have got rather psychopathic tendances when it comes to criminals. If I had my way, they'd all be put to work earning their keep. Put them to work down the sewers working as apprentices, get them cleaning the streets up, in gangs with chains around their legs.
How on earth did we develop this mentality that they should be kept for free. If some sort of profitable employment can't be found for them, at least lets see that untapped manpower be put to the good of the community that is financing their housing, food, security etc...
I know it's an unpopular stance in this modern day where we are supposed to be very respectful of the human rights of this scum. If that makes me a psychopath, so be it.
Besides, it's cheaper. Why the hell should us tax payers foot the bill to house murderers for x number of years, at an exhorbitant cost, then allow them back out to kill again?
Then I have got rather psychopathic tendances when it comes to criminals. If I had my way, they'd all be put to work earning their keep. Put them to work down the sewers working as apprentices, get them cleaning the streets up, in gangs with chains around their legs.
How on earth did we develop this mentality that they should be kept for free. If some sort of profitable employment can't be found for them, at least lets see that untapped manpower be put to the good of the community that is financing their housing, food, security etc...
I know it's an unpopular stance in this modern day where we are supposed to be very respectful of the human rights of this scum. If that makes me a psychopath, so be it.
B
Big_Spark
There is an easier way to achieve the same result. Change the Law so that the Killing of a Police Officer is treated as Treason, as it could be argued it is also an attack on the State as Officer represent the General Public in a fashion. Treason already carries the death Penalty.
Sponsored Links
Sorry that's a myth. There is absolutely no crime on the statute books, in the UK, that carries the death penalty anymore. (I only know because it came up as a question on QI). Besides, I'm with kendor on this one, I think all murderers should be slaughtered.Big_Spark said:
Another idea for the non murderous crims. Wouldn't our coal mines be profitable again, if the manpower were free. Could we perhaps rebuild our steel industry on the backs of these miscreants. It could also give them an alternative career to follow once they finish their sentence.
This could also give a new lease of life to the towns decimated by the closure of the mines. A mine that is manned by say 50% crims would have half of the payrol of a conventional mine. This would therefore give the other 50% of the workforce (professional miners) their carear back.
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,281
- Reaction score
- 1,997
- Country
I'm not in favour of the death penalty or routine arming of police.
The last person hanged in Britain was innocent:
Derek Bentley Page
This page is dedicated to Derek Bentley, who was hanged on 28 January 1953 for a murder he did not commit. Here is his story.
Bentley, completely unarmed and while being held by a policeman after an abortive break-in, is alleged to have called out to his accomplice "Let him have it, Chris". After a while, Chris Craig shot and killed a policeman. 16-year-old Craig was jailed - 19-year-old Bentley was hanged. The story has generated several books, a film and even some songs. It took 16619 days from Derek's death, but he has, at long last, been pardoned.
.........................................................
If you arm police routinely then it is just a matter of time before a stray police bullet hits and kills an innocent person. A police officer knows the risk when they apply for the job.
BTW, more taxi drivers are attacked than police officers - so should we arm all taxi drivers?
joe
The last person hanged in Britain was innocent:
Derek Bentley Page
This page is dedicated to Derek Bentley, who was hanged on 28 January 1953 for a murder he did not commit. Here is his story.
Bentley, completely unarmed and while being held by a policeman after an abortive break-in, is alleged to have called out to his accomplice "Let him have it, Chris". After a while, Chris Craig shot and killed a policeman. 16-year-old Craig was jailed - 19-year-old Bentley was hanged. The story has generated several books, a film and even some songs. It took 16619 days from Derek's death, but he has, at long last, been pardoned.
.........................................................
If you arm police routinely then it is just a matter of time before a stray police bullet hits and kills an innocent person. A police officer knows the risk when they apply for the job.
BTW, more taxi drivers are attacked than police officers - so should we arm all taxi drivers?
joe
It's actually knee jerk rubbish again.
The death penalty in the states hasnt stopped murders and i dont think it would have stopped this one.
If Britain hadnt made so many mistakes and killed inocents and those they shouldnt then there wouldnt be a problem but just watch the film " 10 Rillington Place " if you want the death penalty on evidence and then decide, and this wasnt a one off either.
The death penalty in the states hasnt stopped murders and i dont think it would have stopped this one.
If Britain hadnt made so many mistakes and killed inocents and those they shouldnt then there wouldnt be a problem but just watch the film " 10 Rillington Place " if you want the death penalty on evidence and then decide, and this wasnt a one off either.
I still stand by my point. Although it is, no doubt, a tragedy what happened to Derek Bentley Page. I wonder how many COMPLETELY innocent people have been killed since, by repeat offenders.
Derek Bently Page was just one man, and not totally innocent at that. I wouldn't mind betting that there have been hundreds of innocent victims, killed since, by murderers that have done a bit of stir and come back out. Hundreds of totally innocent victims that would have still been alive, if our laws were tough enough to deal with murderers, permanently.
One thug, caught in the act of armed robbery that didn't actually commit a murder, or hundreds of totally innocent victims. I don't think I'll be loosing much sleep over his plight. Personally, I think his case has done us all an injustice by leaving us with such a pathetic penal system.
Derek Bently Page was just one man, and not totally innocent at that. I wouldn't mind betting that there have been hundreds of innocent victims, killed since, by murderers that have done a bit of stir and come back out. Hundreds of totally innocent victims that would have still been alive, if our laws were tough enough to deal with murderers, permanently.
One thug, caught in the act of armed robbery that didn't actually commit a murder, or hundreds of totally innocent victims. I don't think I'll be loosing much sleep over his plight. Personally, I think his case has done us all an injustice by leaving us with such a pathetic penal system.
I think the death penalty cheapens any justice system - two wrongs don't make a right. "I know let's put him to death - that'll make it all OK."
And before someone says "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", that is the most widely misquoted passage from The Bible. It means "The punishment should fit the crime", not "If you do xyz to someone, we can do xyz to you too".
Yes, treason does not carry the death penalty, it was got rid of in 1998.
No, I don't think the police, or householders should be able to carry guns. We'll get the situation where householders get a gun, so burglars think "I'll get a bigger gun". So the householders get a bigger gun, so the burglars get a bigger gun and/or more violent. Same with the police: If they were armed, criminals will routinely carry guns, and the guns'll get bigger and bigger and the criminals more and more violent.
And before someone says "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", that is the most widely misquoted passage from The Bible. It means "The punishment should fit the crime", not "If you do xyz to someone, we can do xyz to you too".
Yes, treason does not carry the death penalty, it was got rid of in 1998.
No, I don't think the police, or householders should be able to carry guns. We'll get the situation where householders get a gun, so burglars think "I'll get a bigger gun". So the householders get a bigger gun, so the burglars get a bigger gun and/or more violent. Same with the police: If they were armed, criminals will routinely carry guns, and the guns'll get bigger and bigger and the criminals more and more violent.
Really, what you want to do is have all the good points of execution, without the bad-publicity and with a way of correcting an error if innocence is later proved...
Gulags.
Send criminals somewhere inhospitable and totally uninhabitable, somewhere they would die if they managed to escape, and put them to work and let them rot there.
Scotland perhaps? Or maybe abandoned oil-rigs. You would be best off finding something useful for them to do, but the fact they would be so remote would make that hard. The Soviet Gulags were used to build remote roads and so forth, but then it stops being remote...
Gulags.
Send criminals somewhere inhospitable and totally uninhabitable, somewhere they would die if they managed to escape, and put them to work and let them rot there.
Scotland perhaps? Or maybe abandoned oil-rigs. You would be best off finding something useful for them to do, but the fact they would be so remote would make that hard. The Soviet Gulags were used to build remote roads and so forth, but then it stops being remote...
It's one of those issues where everyone seems thorougly entrenched one side or the other. As abhorrent as it is for the possibility that our legal system could occasionally send an "innocent" to his death. Personally, I think the numbers stack up better that way.
No system is perfect. On the one hand you have potentially innocent people getting the ultimate sanction. On the other, you have potentially innocent victims being killed by a system that has let the killers back out on the streets.
As I say, IMHO it's just about numbers. Some would rather a hundred innocent civilians get killed by criminals than a single innocent be killed by the state. As far as I'm concerned a death is a death. Especially when you consider that the vast majority of any "innocents" unfortunately sentenced to death, are not totally innocent in the first place.
But I can see we are never going to agree on this. It's not a knee jerk reaction, just a subjective evaluation of the risks (rather than an emotive one brought about by some heart string plucking of one individual case).
No system is perfect. On the one hand you have potentially innocent people getting the ultimate sanction. On the other, you have potentially innocent victims being killed by a system that has let the killers back out on the streets.
As I say, IMHO it's just about numbers. Some would rather a hundred innocent civilians get killed by criminals than a single innocent be killed by the state. As far as I'm concerned a death is a death. Especially when you consider that the vast majority of any "innocents" unfortunately sentenced to death, are not totally innocent in the first place.
But I can see we are never going to agree on this. It's not a knee jerk reaction, just a subjective evaluation of the risks (rather than an emotive one brought about by some heart string plucking of one individual case).
TexMex said:
I'll give you an example now Tex and i am all for justice.
Down in Australia now there is a man on trial and the evidence against him is only by a remote DNA match from an expert ( so called ) 12000 miles away in Britain who is the only one in the world who claims to be able to match this DNA in this way. If Aussi had the death penalty and this man found guilty on this evidence then he would swing.
Around 10 women were convicted and sentanced for murdering their children in the past 20 years on one mans evidence an expert in his field just like the DNA bloke.
I believe all these woman may have swung i believe they are all free now and this EXPERT is shown to be the bozo he was and is.
And by the way their have been many wrongly executed people since the Christie time
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2005
- Messages
- 6,345
- Reaction score
- 269
- Country
If 1 in a million was statistically expected to match a profile, you keep taking samples until you get a match .... Either hang that poor bu##er, or stop and think, blimey! there are 20 million in Oz, so we continue sampling until we have done the lot .. Now we probably have 20 matches, so we have a 1 in 20 chance of being right, based upon the samples alone, gets you close tho'
... hmmm I guess hanging is still not on is it ?
Mind you, with 'real data' to work with it may be found that significantly more matches exist and then again perhaps the opposite ... dilemma.
Before anyone lobs their toys out of the pram ... if I were on a jury (twice so far) then this thought would be bugging me, if relevant... My right as a peer !
... hmmm I guess hanging is still not on is it ?
Mind you, with 'real data' to work with it may be found that significantly more matches exist and then again perhaps the opposite ... dilemma.
Before anyone lobs their toys out of the pram ... if I were on a jury (twice so far) then this thought would be bugging me, if relevant... My right as a peer !
Sponsored Links
