Death penalty

[Guest77]

I would have no issue with a shot to the head myself, as long as we do not have to feed them and give them television and ipods for the rest of their lives then the shot to the head will do for me and other pro death penalty wishers, again though I would only agree to it where it is caught on film or the evidence is so overwhelming there is no doubt, but anyone who plans to plant bombs in the street to hurt innocents and those fluckers who rape children deserve to die not live.

 

[BES]

The long drop hanging method developed in britian by william marwood in the late 1800's is still the most humane way if done correctly it seperates 2nd and 3rd vertebre and breaks the spinal cord.
Think ive read enough about hanging in britian to rig the gallows myself and id have no problem pulling the lever on the two who killed lee rigby.

 

[Tiny Spark]

This is something I have done much reading on over the years due to various reasons.

However my personal oppinion is that it should be brought back for certain crimes.
Most that stick in my mind have allready been mentioned, Lee Rigby's killers, ISIS etc.

There is of course the 2 main arguments against it, Those being 1 that you could condemn a inocent person and 2 it does not deter criminals.
Some argue a 3rd about it being against "Human Rights" In my mind the whole HR contract becomes null and void when you deliberatly go out to kill a un-armed soldier on the streets for no good reason.
You no longer have the right to call yourself a Human and become something else entirely.

However in regards to the other 2 arguments I have the following oppinions.

1) Crimes should be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, In the past "criminals" could be beaten to confession and shoddy evidence falseified to "prove" their guilt.
With all the modern forensics and assets the Police (and other crime agencys) now have at their disposal this should no longer be a issue.

2) Again Historically speaking the death penalty did not deter people as in ancient times gone by the chances of actually getting found out or caught red handed were rather slim. Even when Stealing carried the death penalty it was common for pick pockets to steal from people gathered at executions!
Again due to the modern policing techniques etc this should not be a problem.
Most Murderers and Pedo's etc are now caught.
But lets face it the worst they get is a few years in a cosy cell and their name put on a register.

So in summary, Yes I think Terrorists, Pedo's and other scum balls on the face of the earth should be eradicated from it for the good of all man kind.

 

[RogertheBodger]

That's a very emotive argument which is trotted out by pro death penalty advocates but (hopefully) it's a situation I'll never have to face because I, nor anyone else, can realistically answer it. I think I'd prefer for the person to spend the rest of his or her life in prison rather than getting a quick release at the end of a rope but like I say, I can't guarantee I'd feel that way.
That said, I have read articles where the families of victims have said the same because it doesn't bring the person back. Imo it's not a punishment, it's revenge and I don't think revenge has a place in the criminal justice system.
To my way of thinking you either support the death penalty or you do not. You can't say that person A should hang for his crime but person B shouldn't and there have been too many miscarriages of justice for me to be comfortable with it

You must be a forgiving man Trev, to feel that way. I don’t think I could be the same if it was one of mine, but as you say, hopefully we will never know.

It’s an emotive argument yes, much more so for the thousands of relatives of victims, who I imagine would be mostly pro death penalty advocates themselves were the option to be given at trial, I can’t say I’ve read any articles in which the victim’s families have said that they would reject the death penalty if it were available, in these days of political correctness they are highly unlikely to appear in print or on TV saying ‘We really wanted the B…… Dead, it’s just not done. But in private?
The rights of the above should be the priority issue in this debate, people with real involvement, if they want ‘Revenge’ payback, justice, call it what you want, why should they not have it? Why should the rights of a killer be put first.

I can’t agree with you that people are either for or against, quite a few posters in this thread have implied that they would consider change under certain conditions, i.e. Conviction beyond ANY doubt for the killing of Children, or the abduction, rape and Murder of young women, acts of Terrorism etc. and I would put myself in that group.

Every crime brought to court is treated on it’s own merits, the circumstances, evidence, mitigating factors etc. The punishment should fit the crime. And some people would get the death sentence, some would not, think of O.J. and Pistorius, killers who got away with it.

 

[Adam W]

That's fine, that's not any form of problem, they are dead and out of circulation.... If you are under the ill found impression that it encourages others, they have already been well and truly indoctrinated it make's no difference whatsoever, so why would you invest millions keeping this scum alive in prison (life sentence) and possibly creating other problems during their incarceration??

Why give them what they want?

 

[trev]

You must be a forgiving man Trev, to feel that way. I don’t think I could be the same if it was one of mine, but as you say, hopefully we will never know.

It’s an emotive argument yes, much more so for the thousands of relatives of victims, who I imagine would be mostly pro death penalty advocates themselves were the option to be given at trial, I can’t say I’ve read any articles in which the victim’s families have said that they would reject the death penalty if it were available, in these days of political correctness they are highly unlikely to appear in print or on TV saying ‘We really wanted the B…… Dead, it’s just not done. But in private?
The rights of the above should be the priority issue in this debate, people with real involvement, if they want ‘Revenge’ payback, justice, call it what you want, why should they not have it? Why should the rights of a killer be put first.

I can’t agree with you that people are either for or against, quite a few posters in this thread have implied that they would consider change under certain conditions, i.e. Conviction beyond ANY doubt for the killing of Children, or the abduction, rape and Murder of young women, acts of Terrorism etc. and I would put myself in that group.

Every crime brought to court is treated on it’s own merits, the circumstances, evidence, mitigating factors etc. The punishment should fit the crime. And some people would get the death sentence, some would not, think of O.J. and Pistorius, killers who got away with it.

So in such a system as practiced in the USA you're far more likely to be on death row after killing someone if you're black, poor, poorly educated or a combination of all three.
Is that justice?

 

[rapparee]

I would have no issue with a shot to the head myself, as long as we do not have to feed them and give them television and ipods for the rest of their lives then the shot to the head will do for me and other pro death penalty wishers, again though I would only agree to it where it is caught on film or the evidence is so overwhelming there is no doubt, but anyone who plans to plant bombs in the street to hurt innocents and those fluckers who rape children deserve to die not live.

What about
the guilford four
the birmingham six
the maguire seven
Brian shivers
Sally Clark
These were all innocent "terrorists" and "child killers"

 

[rapparee]

To give a republican/loyalist balance i should also add the udr four

 

[Guest77]

What about
the guilford four
the birmingham six
the maguire seven
Brian shivers
Sally Clark
These were all innocent "terrorists" and "child killers"

Were they caught on film and guilty without absolute doubt? um no so they won't be included, read the posts properly first.

 

[rapparee]

They were all guilty without reasonable doubt at the time and as far as photographic evidence i wouldn't trust it jean charles de menzes was being viewed on cctv and they thought he was guilty

 

[trev]

With CGI technology improving all the time............

 

[Guest77]

They were all guilty without reasonable doubt at the time and as far as photographic evidence i wouldn't trust it jean charles de menzes was being viewed on cctv and they thought he was guilty

I have no respect for the system back then, My view about the death penalty is if you can show a video in court from say a cctv camera on a shop front where you see a terrorist actually put a bomb into a bin for example, that type of murder should the bomb go off and kill someone could be called murder 1 for example similar to the states, murder 2 could be life imprisonment where no actual film or pictures available for evidence but the usual witnesses or forensics etc, there are a one or two IRA men who should hang but have been released, I bet the families of their victims would agree with me. However without photographic overwhelming evidence I would not want to see the death penalty because of the police fitting people up.

 

[Guest77]

Lee Rigby's killers for example where there is no doubt whatsoever should be executed.

 

[plugsandsparks]

With CGI technology improving all the time............

I think some on here think Avatar the film are real actors, lol -

 

[Guest77]

Oh no the tories have just crashed the thread, don't say anything, you may get hit with the bedroom tax.

 

[rapparee]

I have no respect for the system back then, My view about the death penalty is if you can show a video in court from say a cctv camera on a shop front where you see a terrorist actually put a bomb into a bin for example, that type of murder should the bomb go off and kill someone could be called murder 1 for example similar to the states, murder 2 could be life imprisonment where no actual film or pictures available for evidence but the usual witnesses or forensics etc, there are a one or two IRA men who should hang but have been released, I bet the families of their victims would agree with me. However without photographic overwhelming evidence I would not want to see the death penalty because of the police fitting people up.

I hear what you're saying, i'm not convinced i doubt i'll be able to persuade you. You say you had no faith in the justice system then but you do now brian shivers was convicted in 2012. I don't want to come across as an apologist for solely republicans i would feel the same if it was loyalists or islamic fundamentalists, rogue soldiers etc. The state should be seen to hold the moral high ground over men who kill.

 

[Guest77]

Well I don't think you are really listening either, you seem to be talking about the Irish troubles, I am reffering to murders caught without doubt on film for example like the lee rigby murderers,I was not really reffering to the IRA or Unionist murderers, if you really want to discuss Irish issues and need to get something off your chest because I feel you have something on your mind regarding it then start another thread about it and I will be happy to join in about that subject.

 

[trev]

Do any of the pro death penalty advocates believe in god?
Isn't the commandment "Thou shalt not kill"?
Not "thou shalt not kill unless it's a state sponsored judiciary backed killing"

 

[Guest77]

No I don't trev, I do believe though Jimmy saville deserved the death penalty for sexually abusing disabled children who were paralised in hospital, and I can assure you there will be millions of people who would agree with me regarding him.

 

[trev]

I'm sure there would be Mike, just like there would be millions of people who agree with me regarding the death penalty