Death Penalty: Your Views

Well it would because if you felt that you could be potentially killed for comitting crime I am sure people would be less likely to do it. Nowadays they usually get suspended senetences and maybe a victims chargewhich means they get let off really. Even a life sentence isnt life anymorel. If you stole something and had your hands cut off like people used to do you wouldnt ever do it again. Besides if somebody killed someone you really cared about then do they not deserve punishment.? Wouldnt you hate them and want them to be killed?

I don't think it is a case of statistics, although statistics could highlight certain subsets of the overall question. The first thing to realise is this is a huge question, with so many things that could influence a person to commit murder. Personally I think everyone is capable of murder, given the right circumstances. We don't really know enough of the why's, to formalise any list of questions that would give us an insight, so statistics are really not very helpful.

For the question of should we execute, like I said for theists, it can be left up to God, we are always told how terrible will be his judgment, I am prepared to leave it up to him. I think Atheists really have the problem, part of my Atheist belief is the sanctity of life, because it is all we have, I do not want to take that away from anyone, when I can get justice in better ways.

So in return the family of the murderer should face a life sentence too?

Well....that's what you say. If people look this are going to kill anyway, then the death penalty is completely useless as a deterrent.

Considering very few murders are commited in broad daylight on a London street by same people, I have no reason to change the legal system.

I never ever said the death penalty should be introduced to deter crime, you have mis-quoted me or simply mis-understood me. The reason for the introduction of the penalty is to act as a fitting punishment as well as saving money on prison costs. The fact is I believe someone as sick as this should face the highest punishment while you and various others believe a few years or life( which on many cases never means life) is enough. And from the friends I know in the prison industry too often their sentence is halved on good behaviour. So we have the situation where a grieving family faces life while the criminal can theoretically be out under 10 years, it's a complete joke

I have met a few Murderers, they are the easiest class of prisoners to rehabilitate, because most murderers do not go on to commit other crimes, unlike say, burglars. I have given great thought to my reaction to a loved one being murdered, I know I would never call for execution, why the pro death penalty mob use this argument is beyond me, it simply is not true. Most of us against the death penalty have thought about it deeply, we know the answers to the questions that are thrown around.

Although amputation was used in Britain, noses, ears, fingers etc. We have never had this punishment for Theft, in most cases this was dealt with by hanging then later by imprisonment. So where do you get your idea that amputation deters crime? There can be no evidence of this.

In what capacity have you met a lot of murderers?

Well it would because if you felt that you could be potentially killed for comitting crime I am sure people would be less likely to do it. Nowadays they usually get suspended senetences and maybe a victims chargewhich means they get let off really. Even a life sentence isnt life anymorel. If you stole something and had your hands cut off like people used to do you wouldnt ever do it again. Besides if somebody killed someone you really cared about then do they not deserve punishment.? Wouldnt you hate them and want them to be killed?

If you actually read my post correctly (which evidently you didn't ducky). I never said that amputation of hands should be introduced, I was giving the example that when this used to happen, people would fear punishment and would therefore not commit crime again.

I really don't see how criminals need to be rehabilitated. I am sure that if somebody actually did kill somebody you care about your argument would be different. You certainly would not be "oh its fine, they just need about 7 years and a bit of rehabilitation"

if we had a magical way of knowing whether people have definitely (and without a single part of doubt) murdered, tortured or committed bank robberies etc, then absolutely in favour. those kinds of people do not deserve their lives.

it wouldn't bother me one bit, man - just as long as there is proportional evidence for the crime accusation and its penalty
'wouldn't wanna punish the wrong people now, would we...

if we had a magical way of knowing whether people have definitely (and without a single part of doubt) murdered, tortured or committed bank robberies etc, then absolutely in favour. those kinds of people do not deserve their lives.

no we're not - we put people in prison for the most ridiculous things. we don't allow voluntary euthanasia. we put people in prisons for possessing intoxicants. we allow forced genital mutilation towards little boys. if we actually punished sadistic and evil criminals I wouldn't have a problem, but putting innocent peaceful people in prison? *that* I have a problem with.

You want to execute Bank Robbers? WTF.