Do you think the death penalty should be introduced in the UK Watch
- Thread Starter
- 18-01-2015 23:58
- Thread Starter
(Original post by zippity.doodah)
- 19-01-2015 00:00
I really don't mind to be fair with you - if there are actually people, for example, who are killing to mass-murder and torture/mutilate, who cares if they're gone? who will miss them? those kinds of people are the scum of the earth
rather than the state killing them, though, I'd rather their victims got to do it
however, again, I'm more concerned about harsher prison sentences in these current times.
Thank you!!!! Hallelujah
Posted from TSR Mobile
- 19-01-2015 00:05
1. It doesn't work as a deterrent.
2. It's more expensive than a life-sentence.
3. There is the risk you would execute innocent people.
Why on earth would you want the death-penalty?
- 19-01-2015 00:10
Yes and we should let a poll on Facebook determine the suspect's innocent.
This way more people are involved in the decision making process so that fewer mistakes are made.
Also all bankers should serve life sentence. There should be specific prison for bankers.
My best ideas usually come at this time of night.
I think we should also use a Facebook system so that more youth are involved in the general election.
- 19-01-2015 00:17
NO just NO
(Original post by R Dragon)
- 19-01-2015 20:02
You didn't specify that in your earlier post. Besides, that's pretty unwanted.
Time prisoners spend on death row is horrible, void of any humanity. They tend to spend 23 hours a day alone. So that's pretty dang excruciating.
The reason it takes so long, is because prisoners on death row file appeal after appeal after appeal. Which lengthens the process. to "do our own thing" and shorten their time on death row, would essentially mean denounce their rights to file appeals, which is inhumane on a different level and just completely unfathomable.
Your discussion seems to be stemming towards the logistics of that which isn't really the point.
- 30-01-2015 16:39
You could kill an wrongly convicted innocent person?
Murders, Rapists and Peadophiles should be locked up for life imo
- 01-02-2015 12:02
I believe there should be a death penalty simply because there are some people, however small a number, who simply can't or won't be rehabilitated. Realistically, if you're a mass murderer, a religious fanatic butchering people or a war criminal who enjoys a bit of ethnic cleansing (as just a few examples) I'm not particularly worried about trying to "reform your character". I'm not even particularly interested in some quaint notion about "punishing" you by locking you up for many years or the rest of your life and looking after your welfare and needs. You're probably the sort of person who just needs eliminated.
Some have posted in this thread about the death penalty not being a "deterrent". Neither is prison for a lot of offenders but that's not an argument for doing away with prisons. There has to be a debate about whether a death penalty needs to be a deterrent. I'd say it's simply a means to an end if we're being practical. See the first paragraph.
Still others have rightly pointed out you could execute an innocent person. This is true if you have a justice system that is corrupt, inept or "loose" in its application of the death penalty. If, however, you're someone like the nutjobs who murdered Lee Rigby in the street, essentially live on camera, there isn't really much doubt about guilt is there? If you decided you wanted to emulate Zdravko Tolimir and engage in mass extermination of people by the thousands, I'm wholly unconvinced of the need to consider your treatment, welfare, punishment or rehabilitation. If the guilt is so entirely clear and the crimes so heinous then execution would seem to be appropriate and required.
You can be discerning and sure about who you sending for execution these days. In other cases forensic evidence is at a stage where, with the right checks and balances, you can be as close to 100% certain of a correct decision as you're likely to get. It's also entirely possible to jail someone incorrectly for a period of time. Perhaps an exceedingly long time. Again, that's not a reason to do away with prisons is it? Sure you can release the person eventually. Maybe even apologise profusely and even give them a stack of cash as "compensation". Doesn't really change the fact their life is ruined though.
People can gesticulate about the length of time it takes or the expense as "supplementary" reasons against a death penalty. Of course these people are invariably referring to the USA. Rarely do these same people mention places like Saudi Arabia or North Korea where executions are rather less cumbersome or pricey. Obviously I don't advocate such flippant use of the death penalty as occurs in those countries. It's merely to illustrate it can be done really efficiently and if it's used on relatively small people like the sorts highlighted above I don't see the "American affliction" being an issue. It's really of no relevance to look at how a situation plays out in another country to be honest.Last edited by technik; 01-02-2015 at 12:03.
- 01-02-2015 13:48
No. There is zero evidence that it acts as a deterrent from crimes. Infact the opposite almost seems true.
It also costs substantially more than putting someone in prison.
The two main reasons for it are both fallacious.