capital punishment

[Brian Fantana]

So if you don't like state sponsered murder, you don't think we should have an army, navy or air force then?

If it stops just one murderer from killing then it must be worth it as it has saved one more life than if we didn't have it? YES/NO?

I have just answered the first part of your question in my previous post.

As for the second point I don't agree. You are actually killing someone to prevent the hypothetical death of someone else. Where is the logic in that?

 

[simmo]

I see your point but I would argue that they are different situations. For the most part our armed forced go into combat to protect us or our overseas interests; if killing is a by-product of that then so be it but killing is not their sole aim.

Executing a murderer serves no purpose other than revenge.

Executing a murderer may deter other murderers.

It may not, but it may and if it deters one then surely it is worth it?

Also for what reason should this individual today NOT be executed.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

How about we let the victims nearest and dearest decide?

Personally if someone murdered my daughter for example I would want that **** killed straight away. Give me the rope and I will hang the bastard. Or shoot him or gas him or whatever.

However one of you (if you suffered something like this) may feel that solitary confinement is enough or that it should just be life. Therefore they are still alive but locked away.

Sounds fair to me.

 

[User removed 4]

Why dont you tell us why it IS a deterent?

Because it would deter some but obviously not all people from committing murder.

 

[Brian Fantana]

How about we let the victims nearest and dearest decide?

Personally if someone murdered my daughter for example I would want that **** killed straight away. Give me the rope and I will hang the bastard. Or shoot him or gas him or whatver.

However one of you (if you suffered something like this) may feel that solitary confinement is enough or that it should just be life.

Sounds fair to me.

I am in the sad position of knowing a family who had a close relative murdered.

The subject of the death penalty came up and they were of the opinion that another death would be futile.

They wanted to victim to spend the rest of his life in prison and suffer for what he had done.

 

[bhaexpress]

Im just waiting for someone to trot out the argument that it isnt a deterrent.

Well it isn't is it ? Look at the number of people on various death rows around the globe, it speaks for itself. I think one thing that some people may not be aware of is that the murder itself was the end result of a catalog of previous attacks on the child and not a spur of the moment sitation.

Of course at some point social workers are bound to get the blame. At the end of the day, the mother has a two year suspended sentence when she did nothing to prevent the cruelty that was going on right in front of her. A suspended sentence seems more than a little lenient to be but there again, what would her incarceration achieve ?

 

[simmo]

Because it would deter some but obviously not all people from committing murder.

Some it will but some it will not, however, if it deters just one murderer from not killing, then is it not worth it?

 

[User removed 4]

They're not much use at the moment. They've started two wars they cant finish.

Neither of the two conflicts that the British armed forces are involved in at the moment can be classed as a "war", they are both counter insurgency operations , very different indeed to a conventional war, and you sound disturbingly close to gloating over the deaths and casualties taken by servicemen and women.

 

[Kaiser_Soze]

How about we let the victims nearest and dearest decide?

Personally if someone murdered my daughter for example I would want that **** killed straight away. Give me the rope and I will hang the bastard. Or shoot him or gas him or whatever.

However one of you (if you suffered something like this) may feel that solitary confinement is enough or that it should just be life. Therefore they are still alive but locked away.

Sounds fair to me.

The problem with that is that things would be done in the heat of the moment-how many times have you wanted to react in a certain way when pissed off or upset but when you calm down you would react differently? Obviously its hard to give precise facts but I would guess that most parents of children that were murdered would want to kill the perpetrator but once the grief had settled and they had come to terms with their loss, they may not feel such vitriol towards the offender.

 

[Brian Fantana]

Some it will but some it will not, however, if it deters just one murderer from not killing, then is it not worth it?

As I said a few posts ago I think that the answer is no. You have no proof that a murderer will strike again and you are proposing killing that person to prevent the hypothetical death of someone else.

 

[User removed 4]

Well it isn't is it ? Look at the number of people on various death rows around the globe, it speaks for itself.

the number of people on death row shows the people who werent deterred, i would be interested if anyone can show me an accurate way of determining people who were deterred ?

 

[Kaiser_Soze]

Some it will but some it will not, however, if it deters just one murderer from not killing, then is it not worth it?

People die from taking drugs-does that mean that if we force feed a drug dealer gear until they die and it stops one other person taking drugs its worth it??

Where do you draw the line in what is acceptable to prevent the loss of life to others? Banning all knives to stop stabbings?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Because it would deter some but obviously not all people from committing murder.

If you're prepared to kill someone I dont really see how an electric chair will influence much. Murders are not reknown for their mental stability and rational thinking.

Show me some research and I might change my mind.

 

[clippedgull]

I suggest life long solitary confinement with the basics.

Of course, hopefully he will get an agonising illness and die slowly in pain.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Just out of interest Bushy....what is your heart rate?

 

[bhaexpress]

the number of people on death row shows the people who werent deterred, i would be interested if anyone can show me an accurate way of determining people who were deterred ?

Good point but I think that the majority of murderers genuinely think they'll get away with the act, however twisted that logic may be. Spur of the momonet murders are typical of this. I do think that for all the justifiable uproar over knife crimes I'd like the perpitrators to know that instead of being able to walk out of prison in a few years time they face the very real prospect of the rest of their lives behind bars.

The death penalty is about revenge and I have to say that I'm sure I'd be happy to send somebody who murdered somebody dear to me to their death, I think that's a not unatural situation. However, it still won't bring the victim back will it ?

 

[simmo]

Well it isn't is it ? Look at the number of people on various death rows around the globe, it speaks for itself. I think one thing that some people may not be aware of is that the murder itself was the end result of a catalog of previous attacks on the child and not a spur of the moment sitation.

Of course at some point social workers are bound to get the blame. At the end of the day, the mother has a two year suspended sentence when she did nothing to prevent the cruelty that was going on right in front of her. A suspended sentence seems more than a little lenient to be but there again, what would her incarceration achieve ?

Your logic is completely wrong in the first half of your comment.

People will kill whether there is a death penalty or not. If you brought back the death penalty tomorrow in the UK there would still be murders. It is the level of murders that will be reduced because some potential murderers will be detered.

I am not certain how many murders there are in the UK per year, my guess would be around 1000, if you brought back the death penalty tomorrow I think that figure would be around 900. Thus saving 100 completely innocent lives.

Please, please, please do not bring the USA into this coversation and the death penalty, the USA does have the death penatly and it does have a lot more murders but that is because they have a clause in their constitution that allows any individual to carry a gun, therefore more people are shot dead in an argument rather than get a slap in the face in the UK.

You can only compare the same country before and after (usually abolition), for a much better example look at South Africa and how the murder rates soared after it abolished the death penalty in the early 90's

 

[simmo]

As I said a few posts ago I think that the answer is no. You have no proof that a murderer will strike again and you are proposing killing that person to prevent the hypothetical death of someone else.

Stil answer my quetion that I keep on putting to you and everyone whom is anti capital punishment.

Give me one good reason why the person that killed today should NOT be executed.

Why? He is as guilty as hell.

 

[User removed 4]

Just out of interest Bushy....what is your heart rate?

at rest 50 bpm , honestly ! and HT , you'e just as bitter and twisted as me just about different things !

 

[Man of Harveys]

Please, please, please do not bring the USA into this coversation and the death penalty

,
"Apart from that how did you enjoy the play Mrs Lincoln?"