Death penalty

I would honestly gladly bring back death penalties for child molesters.
I'm aware my point of view is very extreme here and most disagree, but they are a waste of space and money.

I'd like to point out, only if there is a 100% evidence they did it. I know being wrongly prosecuted is a big issue.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 5

shamedan21

10

death penalty is not a bad option seeing as gang violence has risen scarily these past months

Reply 6

DrawTheLine

For murder and child crimes and possibly rape yes. Only if it was 100% though and there's no chance they are innocent e.g. being caught in the act of killing someone or doing things to a child.

Reply 7

Picnicl

15

Original post by ZombieTheWolf

I would honestly gladly bring back death penalties for child molesters.
I'm aware my point of view is very extreme here and most disagree, but they are a waste of space and money.

I'd like to point out, only if there is a 100% evidence they did it. I know being wrongly prosecuted is a big issue.

In what way is a potentially significant contributer to society in their occupation - say they're an architect , engineer - 'a waste of space and money'?

A fondle must mean the gallows? Have you not heard of criminal thinking ’Better to be hung for a sheep than a lamb'? i.e. if an even worse crime has the same punishment then criminals as a whole are logically more likely than they would have been to escalate towards the worse thing.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 8

Original post by Picnicl

In what way is a potentially significant contributer to society in their occupation - say they're an architect , engineer - 'a waste of space and money'?

Please, are you going to hire someone who rapes children?
Tell me, what decent business would.
I don't care if they're the next Nicola Tesla. They raped a ****ing child.
That person will be unhireable to most people, they're a waste.

Reply 9

Original post by DrawTheLine

For murder and child crimes and possibly rape yes. Only if it was 100% though and there's no chance they are innocent e.g. being caught in the act of killing someone or doing things to a child.

All convictions are already beyond reasonable doubt yet some are clearly shown, after the event, to have been made in error.

You cannot define your 100%, nobody can, so what happens to your conviction rates when the jury knows a guilty verdict condemns the accused to death?

So, do you convict on a confession?

Reply 10

DrawTheLine

Original post by DJKL

All convictions are already beyond reasonable doubt yet some are clearly shown, after the event, to have been made in error.

You cannot define your 100%, nobody can, so what happens to your conviction rates when the jury knows a guilty verdict condemns the accused to death?

So, do you convict on a confession?

Idk I'm not a lawyer.

Reply 11

Original post by DJKL

All convictions are already beyond reasonable doubt yet some are clearly shown, after the event, to have been made in error.

You cannot define your 100%, nobody can, so what happens to your conviction rates when the jury knows a guilty verdict condemns the accused to death?

So, do you convict on a confession?

Hold on. So from vaginal or anal swabs showing DNA of the person being accused isn't 100%? (Regarding child rape)

Reply 12

Entertainment Forum Helper, Debate & Current Affairs Helper

Original post by DrawTheLine

Idk I'm not a lawyer.

All you have to ask yourself is how would you feel if you had say served on the jury of the Guildford Four, they had been convicted and then hanged and years later it is determined their conviction is unsafe, they are dead, partly your decision, you cannot bring them back, this then haunts and ruins the remainder of your life.

Irrespective of the crime I would 100% prefer the convicted to rot in jail rather than have even the possibility of convicting and killing an innocent individual.

I am sure others will differ but frankly I could not bring myself to sit on a jury where a possible outcome was the murder of someone innocent, however remote the chance/probability etc, humans are fallible, they make mistakes, I could not live with myself making such a mistake.

Reply 13

Andrew97

20

For extreme crimes yes. I don’t want my tax money to go towards keeping people like Ian Brady in prison.

Reply 14

Original post by Andrew97

For extreme crimes yes. I don’t want my tax money to go towards keeping people like Ian Brady in prison.

Preach. Exactly what I'm talking about.

Reply 15

Original post by ZombieTheWolf

Hold on. So from vaginal or anal swabs showing DNA of the person being accused isn't 100%? (Regarding child rape)

I would say no, not 100%, incredibly probable yes, but I cannot conceive of all possible (not probable, possible) permutations of events that would possibly leave a DNA trace of say a parent re a very small child in their care.

You also have mistakes re chain of evidence to consider, malicious intent of others, collusion of authorities, errors, mistakes, all very unlikely, near improbable, but all reducing by the nth degree your 100% to something less than 100%.

Reply 16

Original post by DJKL

I would say no, not 100%, incredibly probable yes, but I cannot conceive of all possible (not probable, possible) permutations of events that would possibly leave a DNA trace of say a parent re a very small child in their care.

You also have mistakes re chain of evidence to consider, malicious intent of others, collusion of authorities, errors, mistakes, all very unlikely, near improbable, but all reducing by the nth degree your 100% to something less than 100%.

Sorry mate, the actual chance of it being anything other than rape (how else do you get DNA of your sperm or penis there?)
Is too low.

Reply 17

(e^iπ+1)^-1

9

We should. What's the point in spending millions in keeping these horrible people in a building for 30 years. It is much effective to get rid of them. I am actually doing a presentation in this topic.

Reply 18