Lets have a heated debate. Death Sentence: Yes or No

[pasty]

Following on from the Saddam thread, there seems to be a split on the death sentence. Personally, I am against it. I believe it to be nothing more than legalised murder.......

"We're going to try you for murder, which is illegal, and as a result we're going to kill you"

Thats apart from the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. A bit late if the person is killed is subsequently found to be not guilty.

What do you think.........

 

[Commander]

I really cant make up my mind. The more I think about it, the more complicated it gets. Fence for me, I'm afraid. Glad it's not up to me to make the decision!

 

[SJ's Love Monkey]

Its obviously how appalling you personally think the crime committed is. I have kids so the thought of crimes against children makes my blood boil, but some people may think other crimes area lot worse. Yet again personal choice.

 

[larus]

For an individual crime then no. There's always the risk of getting the conviction wrong.

For genocide, with clear proof then yes.

However, in relation to Saddam, should it also extend to the powers that supported/empowered/armed his regime before he became the enemy?

 

[Seagullible]

Why should my tax pay to keep a murderer alive. Hang the bastard imho

 

[Herne Hill Seagull]

Why should my tax pay to keep a murderer alive. Hang the bastard imho

How would you feel about your tax being used to pay for killing somebody who turned out to be innocent then, Seagullible? OK with that?

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I meant to pick fence, but voted No by mistake.

On one hand, I would like the perpetrator to know what it is like to face their own death and what sort of feelings must have gone through the mind of the victim/victims. However, I think that ending their life is ending their suffering and they should not be allowed to 'get away' with that. I would want them to live for the rest of their days with the memories of what they have done.

There is also the potential problem of miscarriages - a prime example being that of the British Asian who is sentenced to death, in Pakistan.

I don't buy the tax payer excuse for the death sentence!

I am with Commander. I can't make up my mind.

 

[Tooting Gull]

Must admit, can't quite see how the correct punishment for 'crimes against humanity' is to gas/behead the perpetrator. Rotting in jail would seem more appropriate.

And slightly o/t, what about Bush and Blair? One man's 'war on terror' is another man's 'crimes against humanity'...should they be up for the death sentence if Saddam is?

 

[tedebear]

I'm in the no camp, I've never agreed with an eye for an eye and far prefer people to sit in prison contemplating their actions than lop their heads off...Also we don't always get things right in court, you can't bring someone back from the dead and say "oops sorry mate, no hard feelings?"

 

[Napper]

YES , up for capital punishment. In this case though would rather see Saddam get numerous arse rappings and kickings in Prison though

 

[Seagullible]

How would you feel about your tax being used to pay for killing somebody who turned out to be innocent then, Seagullible? OK with that?

If someone is PROVED to be guilty, they deserve all they get. I think it is a punishment that would be for extreme cases like Ian Huntley or that guy who buried bodies under the house

 

[Guinness Boy]

YES , up for capital punishment. In this case though would rather see Saddam get numerous arse rappings and kickings in Prison though

Saddam won't get arse rappings and kickings though. His treatment would depend entirely on the security and segregation of the prison. If it was a free for all it would take no time at all for him to be killed by a Shi'ite or Kurd. If on the other had he was strictly segregated with othe Baath Party members he would effectively be running the jail and serving any sentence with a similar level of power within the jail as he had before the US invaded.

On the main question I am anti death penalty pretty much for the same reasons as Pasty and tedebear.

 

[Tooting Gull]

Obviously the confidence you have in the justice system is a factor here, just from looking at the posts.

And though I am against (more on moral grounds), I used to share the 'reliability of conviction' fears - but don't any more.

In the 70s and 80s, many people were wrongly convicted and would have died had the death penalty existed.

These days, the process from being a suspect onwards is so heavily biased in favour of the accused, if you end up being found guilty a) it's a minor miracle and b) you did it.

 

[bhaexpress]

I am for it where there is no doubt at all as say in Sadam's case. However, there are snags apart from the danger of exercuting an innocent person. Firstly the death sentence is no deterrent as the US has proved and also the appeals process there and presumably in most countries costs more than just banging up for life.

 

[Herne Hill Seagull]

If someone is PROVED to be guilty, they deserve all they get. I think it is a punishment that would be for extreme cases like Ian Huntley or that guy who buried bodies under the house

James Hanratty, Derek Bentley, the Guildford four and the Birmingham six were all 'proved' to be guilty. It only takes, as examples, somebody 'bent' on the case, who wants a conviction, or a dodgy witness with an axe to grind, and you could execute an innocent. This has already happened and is easily the most compelling reason against capital punishment, regardless of your feelings for the perpetrators of the crime.

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Maybe not for saddam


Bring back the rope let the paedophiles and the serial killers HANG. Hang the bastards. Better still f***ing shoot them.

Chances of a wrong conviction are now very slim. Its not the 1960s anymore.

 

[Tooting Gull]

It is a nightmare question all round. Even if you don't believe in the death penalty yourself, imagine being on a panel on TV/radio and having to justify to the mother of a child that's been killed by a serial paedo lunatic why you believe the man that did it has the right to live. The conversation is unlikely to go well.

 

[Grovesy]

Yes should be used on some of the worlds real nutters, tho should be a hell of a lot of red tape and evidence!!

 

[Shizuoka Dolphin]

Yes, for child rape, murder, genocide, and returning library books late, becuase that is REALLY annoying.

 

[Shegull]

I voted no.

I think hanging or whatever is too quick. I personally think that the accused should be locked up for life and when I say life I don't mean 6 or 7 years with the chance of getting out in 4. I also believe that they should not get "perks" that prisoners these days seems to get. They are in prison for a reason and not to get the latest technology or gyms to while away the hours. Nothing annoys me more than these prisioner right groups. If the tax payer has to foot the bill to keep them there the less they get the better. Give them plenty of spare solitude time to reflect on what they have done. Prison should be a deterent .