The Student Room Group

Should the death penalty be brought back in the UK?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by JordanL_
You want the death penalty for drug dealing? Christ...


not like a little bit of pot no but like pablo escobar stuff then sure
you'll get life for a kilo of coke so might as well be quick rather than waiting for it to come forever
Reply 21
Avatar for Hann95
Hann95
11
Original post by jamesthehustler
this is my point that only terrorism, murder, human trafficking, major class A drug dealing and sex crimes would be death penalty crimes
but well in case of reprieves most were caused by laws that have since been change such as prosecution laws in the bentley case and in the evans case to be fair he did confess but these days people with mental health issues are given more support the same can be said about ruth ellis


Look up the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four. They were terrorism offences. They were also massive miscarriages of justice. It was bad enough what those men had to endure, add the death penalty on top and there's simply no argument for it
Original post by Hann95
Look up the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four. They were terrorism offences. They were also massive miscarriages of justice. It was bad enough what those men had to endure, add the death penalty on top and there's simply no argument for it


i have research terrorism at depth only murder and serial killers but look at lee rigby's killers for example
Reply 23
Avatar for Hann95
Hann95
11
Original post by jamesthehustler
i have research terrorism at depth only murder and serial killers but look at lee rigby's killers for example


Your argument is severely flawed. At the times those crimes were committed, they were as big atrocities as Lee Rigby's murder and had the death penalty been available, I'm sure there would have been high call for it. Those men were completely innocent. Massive miscarriage of justice, so simply saying "only these offences" doesn't circumvent the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. It's bad enough to take away someone's liberty for god knows how many years, but for someone to have been put to death to then be revealed to be innocent years later is simply a risk that shouldn't be taken.
Original post by Hann95
Your argument is severely flawed. At the times those crimes were committed, they were as big atrocities as Lee Rigby's murder and had the death penalty been available, I'm sure there would have been high call for it. Those men were completely innocent. Massive miscarriage of justice, so simply saying "only these offences" doesn't circumvent the possibility of a miscarriage of justice. It's bad enough to take away someone's liberty for god knows how many years, but for someone to have been put to death to then be revealed to be innocent years later is simply a risk that shouldn't be taken.


the power of dna analytics these days mean that failure is only possible 1 in 100,000 case at the most
Reply 25
Avatar for Hann95
Hann95
11
Original post by jamesthehustler
the power of dna analytics these days mean that failure is only possible 1 in 100,000 case at the most


How would DNA evidence have helped to prove that those men didn't plant those bombs? How would DNA evidence prove who planted the bombs in Brussels airport? (Without the CCTV and other evidence of course)
"killing people is bad so we're going to kill you if you do it"

hmmmmm nah I'm not feelin it
Original post by Unorganisedaf
Bloody citizenship GCSE right here.


There's GCSEs in citizenship?

The education system is a ****ing joke.
Original post by Alien Warrior
??


No, just 2 points:

-Too much money can cost 2x the amount to kill someone compared to keeping them in prison.

-Imagine if someone who hadn't commited that crime and they get KILLED imagine if that was you, dying for something YOU have never even done. No so wrong.

Counter;

- Although if the criminal does not have a mental condition and is 100% sure that they commited the crime perhaps it is justified especially in mass killings or brutal killings.
(edited 7 years ago)
Despite the fact that some people deserve it I think it's archaic.

As above it's bad enough someone being wrongly locked up but there's no going back from a wrongful execution.
Reply 29
Avatar for 41b
41b
5
Some highly seditious traitors ought to be killed. Being a traitor should definitely carry the death penalty - it still does, technically, but is no longer enforced.
No but not because I have sympathy for evil people who murder, rape, etc. Its because whats worse being killed, or rotting in jail cell for life? I would say the second one. Although I think people should get longer sentences, because some are ridiculously short, and they should be given less luxuries in prison. I have no sympathy for scum, if you want to be treated humanly then act humanly, this only goes for murderers, serial killers, pedophiles, rapists, people like that. But then again it would be cheaper to just get rid of them?
Original post by Retired_Messiah
"killing people is bad so we're going to kill you if you do it"

hmmmmm nah I'm not feelin it


There's GCSEs in citizenship?

The education system is a ****ing joke.


I wasted hours of my life on the subject. Mate it's not even funny how useless it is in my life right now. Just added exams that people did eff all for in terms of revision. Waste of time. Oh and! It wasn't even a full GCSE! IT WAS HALF A GCSE!!! >:frown:
Original post by inhuman
How so? It would take them directly to their maker where they can repent directly to Him.

In fact, we should all kill each other so we can go to heaven faster.


You have to receive forgiveness from Jesus Christ before you die in order to have eternal life in Heaven.
Original post by jamesthehustler
the power of dna analytics these days mean that failure is only possible 1 in 100,000 case at the most


No it isn't. There is no possible way the odds of an error in a process as complicated as gathering, verifying and bringing to court evidence for a crime is as low as 1 in 100,000. That's a fantasy on par with NASA claiming their catastrophic failure rate for the space shuttle was 1 in 100,000.
Original post by Trapz99
No. People should be given time to repent and be forgiven of their sins through faith in Christ. The death penalty might get in the way of this.


In general, isn't it a bit arbitrary that some people have more time to repent and find the right way than other people? Seems kind of unfair.
Original post by idontknowmedoyou
No but not because I have sympathy for evil people who murder, rape, etc. Its because whats worse being killed, or rotting in jail cell for life? I would say the second one. Although I think people should get longer sentences, because some are ridiculously short, and they should be given less luxuries in prison. I have no sympathy for scum, if you want to be treated humanly then act humanly, this only goes for murderers, serial killers, pedophiles, rapists, people like that. But then again it would be cheaper to just get rid of them?


Quite apart from any ethical considerations, no, it would not be cheaper to just get rid of them. The number of appeals that must be granted a defendant and the amount of judicial rigamarole associated with executing people "humanely" means that executions are much more expensive than lifelong incarceration.
Original post by 41b
Some highly seditious traitors ought to be killed. Being a traitor should definitely carry the death penalty - it still does, technically, but is no longer enforced.


What would one have to do to be a traitor?
Reply 37
Avatar for 41b
41b
5
Original post by mojojojo101
What would one have to do to be a traitor?


Work at the BBC, for example.
Reply 38
Avatar for BBC Two
BBC Two
2
Original post by z33
Is it :eek: they can't do that if we stay in the EU can they? X_X am movin to Canada who's comin?

Speaking of Canada, Canada and also Australia and New Zealand get by just fine without the death penalty, and they are countries we often look up to for inspiration on how to better our own society here in the UK.
Original post by BBC Two
Canada and also Australia and New Zealand... are countries we often look up to for inspiration on how to better our own society here in the UK.


Hmm. I've never heard of anyone in the UK looking up to any of those three country cousins as an aspirational model. New Zealand, Australia and Canada are respectively Great Britain in the 1950s, 1980s and the early 2000s.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you