[Politics] Capital Punishment

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

It obviously has no place in society. Miscarriages of justice, showing that killing is fine etc.

However, I've always found it interesting that it is seen as the worst punishment. If I was going to be sent to jail for the rest of my life or offered the chance to just go sleepy bye bye and not have to go through that? I'd take the nap thanks.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

How can you possibly walk away from a meeting of minds such as this. Just think of your own edification, HT.

A good point. In my defence, it's Friday and almost half 4, I shall now continue my personal edification with beer. Friday edify-day.

 

[The Clamp]

It obviously has no place in society. Miscarriages of justice, showing that killing is fine etc.

However, I've always found it interesting that it is seen as the worst punishment. If I was going to be sent to jail for the rest of my life or offered the chance to just go sleepy bye bye and not have to go through that? I'd take the nap thanks.

Unless you were innocent, maybe? At least with a life sentence you may have a shot at getting your conviction overturned.
But yes, if there was no chance or if you were guilty, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

 

[Weststander]

It is shameful so many Nazi war criminals avoided prosecution. British historian Mary Fulbrook wrote in her recent book “Reckonings: Legacies of Nazi Persecution and the Quest for Justice”

“Of those perpetrators actually brought to court in the Federal Republic of Germany before the end of the twentieth century, only 164 individuals were eventually sentenced as perpetrators of murder, rather than for lesser crimes,” she writes. “In view of the hundreds of thousands of individuals who had been involved in the machinery of mass murder and the six million people who had died in what we now call the Holocaust, 164 convictions for murder is not an impressive total.”

Whereas far more Japanese nazi war criminals were executed, I believe.

There was also some summary justice handed out. I watched a doc once where the Allies had stumbled upon a lesser known concentration camp, it may’ve been in southern Germany. The kommandant was dead, but his wife was still there, belligerent and kicking Jews about. Her hobby for years was to set her huge Alsatian on tiny Jewish prisoners, to eliminate them.

The American being interviewed years later calmly said, with no regrets “I put a bullet to her head”.

 

[MattBackHome]

Whereas far more Japanese nazi war criminals were executed, I believe.

There was also some summary justice handed out. I watched a doc once where the Allies had stumbled upon a lesser known concentration camp, it may’ve been in southern Germany. The kommandant was dead, but his wife was still there, belligerent and kicking Jews about. Her hobby for years was to set her huge Alsatian on tiny Jewish prisoners, to eliminate them.

The American being interviewed years later calmly said, with no regrets “I put a bullet to her head”.

Do you remember what doc that was, perchance?

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

https://t.co/g4Ky1Uo9Nt

should we be protecting people like this


regards
DF

 

[Weststander]

Do you remember what doc that was, perchance?

It was 20 to 25 years ago! I had a craze of watching History and Discovery Channels docs when we first had cable.

I bet it’s still around.

I’ll have a peruse.

 

[MattBackHome]

It was 20 to 25 years ago! I had a craze of watching History and Discovery Channels docs when we first had cable.

I bet it’s still around.

I’ll have a peruse.

No worries, don't go to any trouble. if you happen across it just shout. Just particularly interesting to me seeing the contemporaneous (or near) experiences of the camp liberators - the stories are really varied, and it's like a bit of a coastal shelf in terms of understanding horror etc - and yer man didn't ring a bell. Cheers!

 

[paulfuzz]

Civilized nations don't kill people

No they call it collateral damage

 

[nickbrighton]

So difficult this one....

If someone tortured, raped then casually murdered your Wife, Husband, Son or Daughter would you not want them to pay for pointlessly and senselessly ending the life of someone you love in the most horrific fashion? Knowing their last hours on this earth were in agony and humiliation...

Would you really want the person who did that to them to spend the rest of their life watching TV in a warm cell, being fed three square meals a day, having exercise, studying, playing pool, having laughs - whilst WE paid for it out of the taxes we work bloody hard to pay.

I don't care if you say "Well, their liberty has been taken away... that's the biggest punishment!" because it's not.

Death is.

So, if they are 100% stone cold guilty - no doubts whatsoever, and they ended the life of someone I love, then I'm afraid I'd most likely wish the same fate upon them.

The argument against is that miscarriages of justice could occur. Yes, in the video Ian Hislop talks about wrongful convictions but the law, forensics, CCTV, crime scene investigation has all moved on in leaps and bounds. Would we really be that slapdash in 2022?

Then you have the moral argument. Who are we to take the life of a human? What right do we have to murder someone, even in the name of the law? All very commendable, but did the murderer ask him or herself "Who am I to take the life of a human. What gives me that right?"

The next argument is asking if it would make a murderer think twice about killing (assuming the person wasn't of unsound mind) if the thought of their own death would be the outcome? Maybe even that consideration would prevent some tragic outcomes...

I'm not completely in the "Hang the b*stards" camp, but I'm quite far away from the "they have human rights and should be locked up" one either....

IMO some of the big issues in your reply are the "Would we really be that slapdash in 2022?" i see nothing to make me think we wouldn't be. How many times do we see miss carriages of justice even now in the UK. there were a spate of rape cases recently where the 100% guilty were in fact completely innocent and the CPS and Police basically ignored the evidence that proved that.

In countries with the death penalty -USA for example it has proven to be very ineffective as a deterrent with murder rates far higher than here

Undoubtedly forensics are much better now, but we would be foolish if we think they are 100% accurate and there is nothing new to be found - after every advance in almost any field people are sure the "new" processes and theories are correct and yet time and time again someone comes up with the "ah but we didn't know then what we know now" angle and everything changes again. There is also the issue of simple error- cross contamination for example , or deliberate "error"

Forgetting the moral issue of whether anyone has the right to kill someone else there remain to many examples of wrongful convictions for there ever to be 100% certainty

Imagine a relative of yours being convicted and executed and after its found they were innocent- how would that compare to the opening scenario in your post?

 

[Chicken Run]

I've forgotten the question now....I am very strongly opposed to murder and find the idea of allowing the state to do it quite disgusting, if that helps

It doesn’t help , but we agree on the above, (thank god) otherwise you’d likely be rude to me [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Bold Seagull]

On many issues, I'm liberal. But when it comes to keeping people convicted of terrorism offences safe and well in prison, I'm very much in favour of capital punishment. In very extreme and rare cases, I think it's justified to terminate a life for the greater good but with a burden of proof which is absolutely unquestionable and unimpeachable. I'm not advocating frequent or regular executions, but if you commit an act of terrorism, like the Manchester bombing, you should be ended. As a punishment, and a future deterrent.

I'm not sure capital punishment is much of a deterrent to suicide bombers.

 

[drew]

On many issues, I'm liberal. But when it comes to keeping people convicted of terrorism offences safe and well in prison, I'm very much in favour of capital punishment. In very extreme and rare cases, I think it's justified to terminate a life for the greater good but with a burden of proof which is absolutely unquestionable and unimpeachable. I'm not advocating frequent or regular executions, but if you commit an act of terrorism, like the Manchester bombing, you should be ended. As a punishment, and a future deterrent.

So my understanding is that, in respect of jihadis, death is their ultimate goal, not only to be seen as a martyr but their passage to the other side accompanied by 72 Houris!!


Reminds me of the joke, what did the sadist do to the masochist?















Nothing!!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It doesn’t help , but we agree on the above, (thank god) otherwise you’d likely be rude to me [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes, yes I would

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

IMO some of the big issues in your reply are the "Would we really be that slapdash in 2022?" i see nothing to make me think we wouldn't be. How many times do we see miss carriages of justice even now in the UK. there were a spate of rape cases recently where the 100% guilty were in fact completely innocent and the CPS and Police basically ignored the evidence that proved that.

In countries with the death penalty -USA for example it has proven to be very ineffective as a deterrent with murder rates far higher than here

Undoubtedly forensics are much better now, but we would be foolish if we think they are 100% accurate and there is nothing new to be found - after every advance in almost any field people are sure the "new" processes and theories are correct and yet time and time again someone comes up with the "ah but we didn't know then what we know now" angle and everything changes again. There is also the issue of simple error- cross contamination for example , or deliberate "error"

Forgetting the moral issue of whether anyone has the right to kill someone else there remain to many examples of wrongful convictions for there ever to be 100% certainty

Imagine a relative of yours being convicted and executed and after its found they were innocent- how would that compare to the opening scenario in your post?

I agree with you but in a way it is a red herring. Deliberate premeditated killing, which is an irreversible act, is either wrong or it isn't. If it is, execution is wrong. Execution is an eye for an eye. It is not a deterrant. It is barely a punishment (unless it really, really hurts). It is simply the deletion of an existence.

If deliberate premeditated killing is not wrong, then execution can be justified for social engineering, if 'the greater good' is obtained. Why not? Then we can have a debate about what constitutes the greater good, and we can have political parties vying for votes over it.

I'd rather keep an absolutist position over this. I am not a fan of slippery slopes. It is because this all seems so bleedin' obvious to me that I can get so agitated about it. Apologies if this has offended anyone.

 

[Knocky's Nose]

IMO some of the big issues in your reply are the "Would we really be that slapdash in 2022?" i see nothing to make me think we wouldn't be. How many times do we see miss carriages of justice even now in the UK. there were a spate of rape cases recently where the 100% guilty were in fact completely innocent and the CPS and Police basically ignored the evidence that proved that.

In countries with the death penalty -USA for example it has proven to be very ineffective as a deterrent with murder rates far higher than here

Undoubtedly forensics are much better now, but we would be foolish if we think they are 100% accurate and there is nothing new to be found - after every advance in almost any field people are sure the "new" processes and theories are correct and yet time and time again someone comes up with the "ah but we didn't know then what we know now" angle and everything changes again. There is also the issue of simple error- cross contamination for example , or deliberate "error"

Forgetting the moral issue of whether anyone has the right to kill someone else there remain to many examples of wrongful convictions for there ever to be 100% certainty

Imagine a relative of yours being convicted and executed and after its found they were innocent- how would that compare to the opening scenario in your post?

As is sometimes the norm on NSC, you throw questions up here - and if people don't want to hear it, they throw a sh*t grenade at you....

I mentioned "100% stone cold guilty" - like the man in the images earlier who beheaded a soldier then walked down the street covered in blood, holding the murder weapon. Shall we pay around £47,000 a year to keep him locked up whilst homeless people with all manner of issues lay freezing on the streets? Is that money well spent looking after someone who despises the country he lives in and wants to murder the inhabitants? Why yes, that man has rights... doesn't he? Let our poor, disadvantaged and homeless be deprived of that money.

I also asked the question about accuracy, which was shot down. I'm not that stupid that if there was 1% of doubt then that's not 100%, and someone shouldn't face the threat of capital punishment.

I also realise that the death sentence in the USA doesn't seem to work wonderfully, but is that because they have guns.. and it's a hell of a lot easier to murder someone over there? Get high, get pissed, pull a trigger - and you're a murderer. Easily done in the heat of the moment.. Over here it takes a genuinely concerted effort to kill someone. Think about that...

Finally, I didn't actually say I fully supported the death sentence. I was merely throwing issues up for debate.

My views are my views, yours are yours, and everyone has good points. I respect them.

 

[GREASED WEASEL]

I agree with you but in a way it is a red herring. Deliberate premeditated killing, which is an irreversible act, is either wrong or it isn't. If it is, execution is wrong. Execution is an eye for an eye. It is not a deterrant. It is barely a punishment (unless it really, really hurts). It is simply the deletion of an existence.

If deliberate premeditated killing is not wrong, then execution can be justified for social engineering, if 'the greater good' is obtained. Why not? Then we can have a debate about what constitutes the greater good, and we can have political parties vying for votes over it.

I'd rather keep an absolutist position over this. I am not a fan of slippery slopes. It is because this all seems so bleedin' obvious to me that I can get so agitated about it. Apologies if this has offended anyone.

there is a difference

murder is illegal

execution is law (in some parts of the world)

for anyone that has watched programmes of prisoners on death row
they all hope that their sentence will be reduced to life
the fact they are on death row for years and not executed straight away
makes them live in fear,knowing one day it will be them
that's a punishment in itself
they had a choice,their victims didn't

 

[Seagull58]

I don't like all this moral inexactitude. If you favour capital punishment why not use it instead of prison? The nation would be a better place if we execute shop lifters, drink drivers and the like, surely? And it would save a fortune. We could even harvest organs for transplantation.

Jonathan Swift was a pussy.

Here's an idea; we could have the death sentence as the default punishment for the majority of crimes, especially sheep rustling and pickpocketing, but allow judges to consider the alternative of banishment to Van Diemen's Land for those whom they consider may be able to change their ways.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

there is a difference

murder is illegal

execution is law (in some parts of the world)

for anyone that has watched programmes of prisoners on death row
they all hope that their sentence will be reduced to life
the fact they are on death row for years and not executed straight away
makes them live in fear,knowing one day it will be them
that's a punishment in itself
they had a choice,their victims didn't

Not here it isn't.

And if being left to rot on death row for years (America) is punishment, why not go the whole hog?

Torture.

I'm sure that plenty will support it.

Those on death row had, after all, a choice.

 

[drew]

Here's an idea; we could have the death sentence as the default punishment for the majority of crimes, especially sheep rustling and pickpocketing, but allow judges to consider the alternative of banishment to Van Diemen's Land for those whom they consider may be able to change their ways.

Surely that would put convicted felons uncomfortably close to Mr T Biggums. Surely that would be too cruel on them!