Ok ...Hanging & Capital punishment

[sooey]

The thing is though that the majority of 'murders' are not planned or are so called 'crimes of passion'.The argument of DP being a deterrent is therefore largely invalid.

I said it would make some think twice, not all.

 

[joe-90]

...and as I keep telling you, if you have a death penalty then jurors are loathe to find a person guilty in case a mistake is made - so murderers walk free, many to murder again.

So only advocate the death penalty in those cases which are proved beyond all doubt, not just "reasonable doubt".
It would be easy to start off with a life sentence which could be upgraded to the death penalty should better than circumstantial evidence come to light.

That would be an admission that the other convictions weren't safe and thus they would have to be freed to murder again.

 

[securespark]

To you & me, it would give us pause for thought, but then we wouldn't consider murder either, would we?

It would give anyone capable of thinking through the possible consequences of their future actions pause for thought.

Exactly!

For various reasons, people about to commit murder are not capable of rational thought.

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

As people keep trying to tell you. It's stopped murderers from murdering again.

Assuming everyone that has murdered will if given the chance would murder again? Every murderer is not a serial killer. More than likely the taking of a life will have been a one off event, therefore executing the murderer does not stop further killings, indeed it just doubles the amount of needless deaths, the victim and the accused.

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

I am not saying we release him unless we can cure him.

Cure for paedophiles, cut their manhood off, then cut their hands off too. Cured !!!

If he is not responsible for his actions then he is a victim too..

Time and time again, this has been the stock excuse for paedophiles in court. Strange how nowadays the guilty party is portrayed as the victim and is then afforded more rights than the real victim.

Cutting body parts off is not a cure, just makes the crime harder to do. Are you up for cutting the hands off thiefs? Want to bring about the civilised nature of the hardcore islamic nations where the death penalty and stonig etc are all the rage? Is that civilised?

If someone is abused in the family they are more likely to abuse their children, it is a circle of abuse that needs to be broken. If a paedophile was sexually abused as a child, then he was a victim then. What stops him being a victim? The abuse will have always happened.

Its about breaking the causes of crime, poverty, abuse... reactionary killings of criminals will not stop the crime, the crime has already been committed. To bring back hanging will be a move backwards morally, how can we condemn the murdered when we allow murder as a punishment?

 

[sooey]

...and as I keep telling you, if you have a death penalty then jurors are loathe to find a person guilty in case a mistake is made - so murderers walk free, many to murder again.

So only advocate the death penalty in those cases which are proved beyond all doubt, not just "reasonable doubt".
It would be easy to start off with a life sentence which could be upgraded to the death penalty should better than circumstantial evidence come to light.

That would be an admission that the other convictions weren't safe and thus they would have to be freed to murder again.

Not at all. Beyond reasonable doubt is the current yardstick for being found guilty I believe, so that could continue for cases where there is only circumstantial evidence, and the jury could be told beforehand that the death penalty was not being sought at present.
For certain cases where they are bang to rights the jury could be informed that the death penalty was an option.

 

[sooey]

More than likely the taking of a life will have been a one off event, therefore executing the murderer does not stop further killings in a lot of cases, but does in cases where the murderer is a murdering scumbag.

I've fixed that for you. In any case anybody who deliberately and premeditatedly takes a life should forfeit their own. Unless under certain circumstances of course.

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

More than likely the taking of a life will have been a one off event, therefore executing the murderer does not stop further killings in a lot of cases, but does in cases where the murderer is a murdering scumbag.

I've fixed that for you. In any case anybody who deliberately and premeditatedly takes a life should forfeit their own. Unless under certain circumstances of course.

No, they should not forfeit their own life. They should be questioned, analysed, given medical examination to see what made them a serial killer, in order to prevent future crimes. To execute a murderer is a waste and murder in its own right.

Killing to show that its wrong to kill, that is just stupid.

 

[sooey]

Killing to show that its wrong to kill, that is just stupid.

That statement is stupid. People don't need to be shown that it's wrong to kill, they already know.
So the killing of murderers would be done to show what is likely to happen them if they kill somebody and are caught.
With the added bonus of not having to pay for their imprisonment.

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

By paying for the imprisonment and study, by tackilng the causes of crime, you would be saving money by cutting down the potential offenders of the future.

Also not everybody knows it is wrong to kill, there are those, mentally ill or otherwise, who think their killing of someone is JUSTIFIED.

What is the best thing to with someone like Brevic who thought his killings had a purpose?

Kill him and you learn nothing, keep him alive, find out his motives, find out his upbringing, find out the incidents in his life that caused him to think like he does and then use that knowledge to stop further atrocities?

 

[sooey]

What is the best thing to with someone like Brevic who thought his killings had a purpose?

Harvest his organs for those who need transplants.

 

[UriBentMySpoon]

What is the best thing to with someone like Brevic who thought his killings had a purpose?

Harvest his organs for those who need transplants.

How will that stop future crimes?

Reactionary outrage and calls for blood help no one, it just brings us back to a less civilised time.

Identify the causes of crime and deal with them. Learn from the criminals. Stop the abuse, stop the hate.

 

[masona]

People don't need to be shown that it's wrong to kill, they already know.
So the killing of murderers would be done to show what is likely to happen them if they kill somebody and are caught.
With the added bonus of not having to pay for their imprisonment.

The death penalty is more expensive than imprisonment. Prison is more cost effective, however the bottom line is, the capital punishment is uncivilised

 

[sooey]

The death penalty is more expensive than imprisonment.

B0ll0X

The endless appeal system may be.

 

[sooey]

Identify the causes of crime and deal with them.

You think people can be talked into being good citizens.
Sometimes, the causes of crime are that some people are just bad bstrds who the world would be better off without.