Death Sentance

[the hitman]

Would you bring back the death sentence for murderers? and other major crimes?

Personally i think i would, if for instance a gang member was to stab someone to death then why should the taxpayer pay to keep them in prison. There is no place on this earth for them as far as i'm concerned. If a dog was to attack someone they would be put down.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Smithy24]

Yes

 

[Dirk lovelace]

I'd bring it back for poor spelling.

 

[Don Quixote]

Bit of a biased poll don't you think? Murderers don't always go free.

 

[bhaexpress]

Would you bring back the death sentence for murderers? and other major crimes?

Personally i think i would, if for instance a gang member was to stab someone to death then why should the taxpayer pay to keep them in prison. There is no place on this earth for them as far as i'm concerned. If a dog was to attack someone they would be put down.

What are your thoughts?

Following the American model their appeals system can keep a felon on death row for well over ten years and the legal fees and court costs end up being a lot more expensive than just keeping them behind bars. I prefer the idea of sentencing a person to solitary confinement but giving them the option for suicide if they want it. Of course that would be inhumane. Still, what is the point of trying to rehabilitate the likes of Ian Huntley or Dennis Neilson ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

No.

I don't trust our justice system to ensure that no innocent people would be put to death so the answer has to be no.

 

[auschr]

considering the consistent failures of modern governments its lol to trust them with someones life

 

[the hitman]

No.

I don't trust our justice system to ensure that no innocent people would be put to death so the answer has to be no.

i feel it would decrease the amount of innocent people dieing, look at it this way, a murderer would think twice if they knew that it is likely to result in death for them, meaning less innocent people getting murdered in the first place

 

[highway61]

When my only child was murdered three years ago it could have changed my views on capital punishment. i usually avoid these threads, or any that are a bit too close to home. but i just would like to say that i would still vote against it.

 

[The Wizard]

Only for especially hideous crimes. (Murder, rape, paedophilia ect) and must be 100% proven by D.N.A ect.

 

[Whitterz]

thread no. 45698 on this subject.

 

[ATFC Seagull]

i feel it would decrease the amount of innocent people dieing, look at it this way, a murderer would think twice if they knew that it is likely to result in death for them, meaning less innocent people getting murdered in the first place

These threads always end up the same so I am going to avoid getting dragged in on this occasion, BUT...whilst the deterrent concept is completely unmeasurable, the murder rate in countries such as the USA suggest that its not necessarily true.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

i feel it would decrease the amount of innocent people dieing, look at it this way, a murderer would think twice if they knew that it is likely to result in death for them, meaning less innocent people getting murdered in the first place

I doubt very much that a potential murderer thinks about the sentence they will get before deciding to commit murder.

Put yourself in the position of being that innocent person found gulity. Think how you would feel as they took you from your cell ................

 

[ATFC Seagull]

Only for especially hideous crimes. (Murder, rape, paedophilia ect) and must be 100% proven by D.N.A ect.

Ok last point on this thread from me. But, as we have discussed before, EVERY crime should be 100% proven. If a murderer is convicted, but not 100% enough for the death penalty, then their conviction should be overturned.

Anyways...

 

[jevs]

When my only child was murdered three years ago it could have changed my views on capital punishment. i usually avoid these threads, or any that are a bit too close to home. but i just would like to say that i would still vote against it.

That's left me quite speechless.

Against it for me. Too many miscarriages of justice, too much "capital punishment for terrorists and child killers but not for others" etc etc.

Life should mean life....hard labour, no human rights and no chance of getting out.

 

[Acker79]

i feel it would decrease the amount of innocent people dieing, look at it this way, a murderer would think twice if they knew that it is likely to result in death for them, meaning less innocent people getting murdered in the first place

Hasn't worked that way in America.

Murder is rarely rational. People don't tend to stop and think "ooh, if I kill him, I'm only going to get 25 years in prison, maybe be out in 12 years on good behaviour, it's totally worth it!"

Murders are either spur of the moment emotional reactions, with little thought or planning, or they are predetermined and planned, and with the exception of mentally ill (psychotic, psychopaths, etc who don't concern themselves with responsibility and repercussions despite pre-planning) the thought tends to be either "I have to do this, regardless of the risk of getting caught" or "I'm not going to get caught"

 

[Acker79]

Ok last point on this thread from me. But, as we have discussed before, EVERY crime should be 100% proven. If a murderer is convicted, but not 100% enough for the death penalty, then their conviction should be overturned.

Anyways...

Wouldn't that lead to pretty much all criminals getting out bar those caught in the act, having been watched throughout the act and leaving the scene to avoid the .000001% chance it's a bizarre comedy moment (like so often happens in TV shows where some woman sees her husband hug another woman, kiss her on the cheek and assume he's having an affair only to learn it's his sister), and those that confess?

How do you prove a crime 100%

 

[Acker79]

Why don't the criminals pay for their time in prison themselves. If they can not pay force them to take out a loan and charge them extortionate interest until they pay it back.

That way we don't pay for them to sit in prison, and might make some money off them too.
Everyone wins.....well apart from the criminals.....but thats OK.

Where does the loan money come from? What incentive is there for a private company to loan money to people locked up with no way of paying it back, at least until they get out?


I prefer the idea of manual labour, like the old chain gangs in america, inmates working and the money made from this is used to contribute. Instead of cheap sweatshop labour of kids in china, why not make cheap labour in prison where some degree of working standards can be upheld?

 

[Acker79]

Government could loan it? Most people have houses that can be claimed and sold by the government to pay for the time in prison as well. We do it with the elderly why not criminals too?

And the government gets their money from our taxes, so we'd still be paying, especially when so many will leave prison and still be on benefits, unable to get a job because their criminal record puts employers off.

 

[Acker79]

But we get it back with interest added on. Think of the money! And if they don't start paying it back we start taking it back, houses, savings cars, withdrawals of benefits.....make them suffer financially for our gain.

That's great if they own a house, if they have savings, etc. but most of them won't, and withdrawing benefits won't get us our money back. I just can't see a loan system working for the general prison population.