[pshewitt1]

(Original post by dj1015)
if the evidence is good enough to lock them up, then its good enough to put them down.

please watch it again then... you clearly didn't get the message

[dj1015]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
please watch it again then... you clearly didn't get the message

I used to agree with that opinion. Now I dont.

One youtube video clip of someone who is clearly biased isn't enough.

[Mazzini]

(Original post by Miracle Day)
I'm not saying I agree with Capital Punishment but just to answer.

They're only put to death when they are convinced without any doubt said person is guilty.

But there is no way of being 100% sure of whether the convicted person actually did the crime. This is one of my qualms with capital punishment.

[Chaeli93]

States in America with the death penalty have the highest crime rates. Not all these 'extra' criminals are executed so that just creates more of an economic strain on the country because there are more criminals in the prisons. And do I really need to quote 'If you take an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth all you end up with is a lot of blind toothless people'?

[Miracle Day]

(Original post by amime)
^^I'm pretty sure this is what's supposed to happen anyway, yet there are still mistakes.

No it doesn't happen. For example if a camera see's someone murder someone it's beyond reasonable doubt.

[ArtGoblin]

(Original post by dj1015)
It isn't. 30 years is a slap on the wrist.

If life meant life, and locking people up was cheap. Then I would agree with you. But none of thats true.

30 years in prison is a slap on the wrist? I would hate to know what you think a punch in the face is.

[dj1015]

(Original post by ArtGoblin)
30 years in prison is a slap on the wrist? I would hate to know what you think a punch in the face is.

How is 30 years fair for murdering someone!!!!

Please tell me someone.

[WhatsHisFace]

If 30 years doesn't sway people against murder, it's not like death will.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by dj1015)
I used to agree with that opinion. Now I dont.

One youtube video clip of someone who is clearly biased isn't enough.

Ian Hislop isn't bias toward any side really, his agenda is simply what he thinks best for the country and mocks those who say things which he has thought out and come to the conclusion of being wrong. I would trust the voice of private eye over views from the daily mail

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by Mazzini)
But there is no way of being 100% sure of whether the convicted person actually did the crime. This is one of my qualms with capital punishment.

hence why i quoted him with Ian hislop :L

[dj1015]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
Ian Hislop isn't bias toward any side really, his agenda is simply what he thinks best for the country and mocks those who say things which he has thought out and come to the conclusion of being wrong. I would trust the voice of private eye over views from the daily mail

You brought up the daily mail.... I didn't.

[TheSownRose]

(Original post by dj1015)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...g-student.html

Please point to the mistake here.

He walked up to someone in broad day light and shot him a point blank range.

He then admitted it afterwards. So no reason not to execute him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans

Should he have been executed?

[Sabertooth]

A good number of US studies show that capital punishment does have a deterrent effect so I'm not sure why you would discount that argument from the start.

As for executing an innocent person, you could set the bar higher than the US. But also, let's use Ehrlich's study, by executing 10 guilty people you've saved 80 lives. You then execute 1 innocent person, well that's too bad but you're still 79 innocent lives up.

[dj1015]

(Original post by TheSownRose)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans

Should he have been executed?

IF and only if there is doubt, then no.

But the person I have brought your attention to is not in doubt. So I see no reason that he deserves to live.

[nickth]

I don't agree with capital punishment, but I think life should means life. Many murderers are seriously disturbed people who need to stay locked up and be monitored. Executing them is an easy way out, less expensive and could help the victims family seek 'justice', but it doesn't lay down punishment on the criminal as they are relieved of it usually quite quickly.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[dj1015]

(Original post by Sabertooth)
A good number of US studies show that capital punishment does have a deterrent effect so I'm not sure why you would discount that argument from the start.

As for executing an innocent person, you could set the bar higher than the US. But also, let's use Ehrlich's study, by executing 10 guilty people you've saved 80 lives. You then execute 1 innocent person, well that's too bad but you're still 79 innocent lives up.

I favour this purely from the economic benefits. A system that is designed save money can only be good for society.

[Sabertooth]

(Original post by -Neuro-)
When we kill someone for killing someone we are doing the same as them, it is murder!

And war is what exactly? Serial killing?

States have powers that individuals do not, that is undeniable.

(Original post by -Neuro-)
It's a bad concept. End of. And please nobody say this whole eye for and eye nonsense.

"An-eye-for-an-eye-for-an-eye-for-an-eye ... ends in making everybody blind." Mahatma Gandhi.

I don't know about you, but I've never put out someone's eye. Most people don't put out someone's eye so most people aren't going to have their's put out any time soon.

[Kiss]

No we don´t.

[419]

Adding my support for the no camp.

[OU Student]

We don't. It's the easy way out.