Bring back the death penalty!

Scroll to see replies

I have a question. What do you think the crime of murder is? Please define *exactly* what it is.

Also add whether you think there are any relevant defences to murder.

What do you mean I don't understand the first question. And no there is no way to stop murder in my opinion, clearly the person is in the wrong frame of mind and something mentally is not there, weather it's a serious mental condition, depression or just generally upset. The people need to seek professional help but a lot of them are in denial so nothing can happen, which leads to them murdering people. ALL murders are caused because the person is mentally disturbed, serve or not serve, hitmen do it because they have been brain washed to do such thing, look at all of us, none of us are mentally disturbed to go around killing people, also I think people need to know right from wrong.

Reply 21

gethsemane342

Original post by Travis1

I mean, what act and what intention is needed to commit murder. Judging from what you say, you don't actually know the correct definition. I'll give you a hint:

Most murders are accidental.

Reply 22

sinbad23

what if your brother was born in a poorer part of the world and then grew up around surroudings that told him that stealing was neccessary to survive then someone tried to kill him so he killed them first.

Im sure youd support the death penalty for that right?

What about big companies that support wars for oil, surely they should all be killed?

What about judges that give the death penalty but were bribed, because there was no legitimate case? Surely they should be killed.

What about police that accidently/not accidentally kill a person. They should be killed.

Reply 23

awais590

Original post by Katq

I think I'd rather die than having to spend the rest of my life in jail. I think life-long sentence in a strict prison is worse than death.

Not necessarily, many people who commit horrendous crimes would much rather prefer to spend the rest of their lives in prison because, what have they got to live for? They would get looked after in prison w/ food, water, shelter as well as other essentials?

And if you look at the prisons of today, they even have luxuries in them, like tv, pool tables etc.

:rolleyes:

Reply 24

Travis1

Original post by d123

What about the families of the person accused of the crime? They often have spouses, children, parents, siblings and friends as well.

I'm sure the families would be disgusted with the person who committed the crime. I certainly would, if my son killed someone for what ever reason I wouldn't class him as my son, he would be gone, killing someone is such a viscous crime but not all people realise it, think of the friends, the mum, the dad, the brother, the nan, the grandad, the sister, the cousins, the aunt, the uncle, that has been effected by the murder.

Reply 25

d123

Original post by Travis1

I also agree that a life, literally your whole life, not the 25 years you get which is reduced to 12-14 years on good behaviour, for killing someone would be better so that they rot in prison, but the death penalty is good for families who have experienced their loved ones being killed ect as they can finally have closure and once the person who committed the crime has been executed they can forget about their traumatic experiences.

And a few people said not all people found guilty are guilty, that's true, but it most be topping 99%. And most criminals who've committed serious crimes are found guilty using DNA, forensics, video footage etc.

Due to all the countries which are known to have the death penalty but where details about their executions aren't known, we can't be sure how many innocent people are executed, but you can be pretty sure that it's more than 1%, The number would be even higher if you include those who are held on death row or its equivalents in the despicable conditions there who, while they may escape execution, are still undergoing the pain of being held there, and on release, life would not be easy, despite their innocence.

There's some facts and figures here - http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty

Reply 26

Travis1

Original post by gethsemane342

I mean, what act and what intention is needed to commit murder. Judging from what you say, you don't actually know the correct definition. I'll give you a hint:

Most murders are accidental.

Do you really think most murders are accidental?

Reply 27

d123

Original post by Travis1

Well, I'm glad I'm not related to you. What if they were innocent?

I'm not condoning murder, but disowning someone for it is extreme.

Reply 28

gethsemane342

Original post by Travis1

Do you really think most murders are accidental?

A huge amount, under UK law, are, in that a huge amount of "murderers" had no intention of killing their victim.

Reply 29

.Ali.

Original post by Travis1

I'm generally outraged and disgusted with the British justice system and how they treat criminals in this day and age. You get people like Ian Huntley who go out and kill two girls who were enthusiastic young girls enjoying life. What is society coming to these days? If someone does such a crime they should be sentenced to death or in my opinion literally spend the rest of their life in prison without the possible chance of parole. I also think that the death penalty would prevent some people committing their crimes, not a lot, but some. I wish we had the same justice system as Texas, if you kill someone there whilst stealing their possessions you instantly get charged with capital murder and therefore sentenced to death. Anyone agree? If so share your views.

I agree with this, I support the death penalty, and corporal punishment in schools. Why should the taxpayer pay for criminals' xboxs and satelite televisions? Also, when you violate someone elses human rights, in my eyes, you lose yours.

However, I would say that the death penalty can only be used when there is no doubt that the accused has committed the crime. If the evidence is questionable, then obviously we shouldn't use it. There should have to be either CCTV footage, eye witnesses, DNA, etc.

Reply 30

Travis1

Original post by sinbad23

No I wouldn't trying to defend your own life, even if it means killing them in the process is acceptable, that's why there's laws in the US saying you can kill someone if they try to take your life, but hey, look at the UK, we don't get that! We have to use 'reasonable force'. You have to understand the british justice system, and law, is dispicable.

You're in a wrong planet or something, judges do NOT get bribed.

No, the police should not be killed, clearly there is a problem for the police to shoot, and kill, a human. Like the man on the tubes in London, don't get me wrong the armed police made a wrong mistake but they suspected he was carrying a bomb so they shot him in the head, what if he had a bomb in his bag the police would be praised and praised, over and over for doing the right thing, which is saving the public. But yeah what they did was wrong but it's not classed as murder, murder is where you take someone's life intentionaly, which that did happen but they are enforcing the law.

Reply 31

Square

to be honest, i would prefer an american style justice system without the death penalty. 30 years for burglary, solitary cells where you are locked up for 23.5 hours a day etc.

Unfortunately prisoners here go on about their 'yoooman rights bruv' and there are thousands of disgusting lawyers willing to make money by getting large compensation payments for convincted rapists/murderers etc.

Reply 32

Manitude

The justice system does need tightening up. I've heard about cases of murder where the offenders get something like 5-10 years in prison for stoning a kid's father to death, in front of the kid!
Not sure if the DP is always the answer though. In some cases, yes, but only when there is no doubt whatsoever in the person being guilty. And of course, extreme cases only.

Also what needs to happen is prisons should not be an easy ride at all - as it stands prisoners can buy access to TVs and playstations and whatnot (they aren't all provided by the taxpayer, if any) and they get three meals a day for free. They should really be working for their meals. It's a prison, a punishment, it's not supposed to be pleasant. I'm sure there is some sort of scheme prisoners could go on where they do something which is actually useful for the country and involves them working for their meals. That way everybody wins, except the prisoners themselves.

Reply 33

Katq

Original post by awais590

I don't mean one of those nice prisons where they put people with milder crimes, and give them opportunity to watch tv, read books, and even get education.

I'm talking about those where you're in a small cell with another person, hoping everyday not to get stabbed, raped or killed.

I think I'd rather die than spending the rest of my life in one of those. (However I don't have first-hand experience, so I don't know what actual murderers think)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrqaWiicr-8

Reply 34

M1F2R3

Original post by d123

Well, I'm glad I'm not related to you. What if they were innocent?

I'm not condoning murder, but disowning someone for it is extreme.

This.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Williamson

Reply 35

sinbad23

There should be MUCH more focus on rehabilitian and preventing crime from happening in the first place. People come here from their snobby, well to do educated backgrounds and judge people who have commited crime because its all theyve seen in life. How about lowering unemployment, increasing education, mental wellbeing, empowerment etc

I also think your reasoning behind the death penalty has little to do with love for your fellow man rather it is hate.

Reply 36

Travis1

Original post by .Ali.

I agree with everything you've just said.

Reply 37

Lintu93

Nope. Two wrongs don't make a right.

You say you dissaprove of murder, yet you would be willing to lower yourself to the same standard as a murder in order to kill him? So it's against the law for citizens to kill someone, yet perfectly fine for the state to kill people?

Sounds a little bit hypocritical if you ask me...