Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Only found guilty of manslaughter. Disgusting. I am totally in shock that as a society we let someone like this behave like this unchecked for so long.

    I keep saying it, but we need the Death Penalty back. Every time the people like Philpott gets of lightly with stabbing someone 17 times, and then go on to MURDER 6 children the case for capital punishment grows stronger.
    I will always be apposed to the death penalty, because if one execution out of a thousand is an innocent man, then it isn't worth the cost.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I'm opposed to capital punishment, but 'life sentence' should mean longer than a minimum tariff or 15 years, especially in this case.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robocop1andahalf)
    Serious cringe and PMSL at all the PC **** whinging about the Daily Mail article that is merely telling it like it is.
    What that every innocent person who relies on the welfare system and uses it for its intended purposes is an deeply disturbed psychopathic killer who hatches lunatic plans to spite their ex mistress?

    Yeah that's definitely true.

    I think its a disgrace the Daily Mail uses one abhorrent man as an example as what everyone on benefits is like. That is simply not true.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    I keep saying it, but we need the Death Penalty back. Every time the people like Philpott gets of lightly with stabbing someone 17 times, and then go on to MURDER 6 children the case for capital punishment grows stronger.
    Nope. No no no no no. No way.

    Don't be ridiculous.

    Capital punishment is a terrible idea. Far better to have a murderer wrongly freed - with the chance that he won't kill again and maybe be found guilty later - than to have an innocent person convicted with the absolute certainty that they'll die.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    Nope. No no no no no. No way.

    Don't be ridiculous.

    Capital punishment is a terrible idea. Far better to have a murderer wrongly freed - with the chance that he won't kill again and maybe be found guilty later - than to have an innocent person convicted with the absolute certainty that they'll die.
    Sorry to break it to you, but forensic science has advanced a little since we last gave criminals what they deserved. So the chances of your ill thought out argument occurring are non existent.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Why do you thing two wrongs make a right?

    Sorry to break it to you, but society has advanced a little since the biblical days of an eye for an eye.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Sorry to break it to you, but forensic science has advanced a little since we last gave criminals what they deserved. So the chances of your ill thought out argument occurring are non existent.
    Are you seriously suggesting that in this day and age nobody is ever wrongly convicted for a criminal offence?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Sorry to break it to you, but forensic science has advanced a little since we last gave criminals what they deserved. So the chances of your ill thought out argument occurring are non existent.
    Just a heads-up to everyone, miscarriages of justice still occur in the UK and if this nutter I'm quoting had his way these innocent people would be dead:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/m...tice-susan-may

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20109311

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...f-justice.html

    Also check out:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/m...es?INTCMP=SRCH

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    Just a heads-up to everyone, miscarriages of justice still occur in the UK and if this nutter I'm quoting had his way these innocent people would be dead:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/m...tice-susan-may

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20109311

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...f-justice.html

    Also check out:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/m...es?INTCMP=SRCH

    Congrats, one credible source out of 4. I tend not to trust left wing mouthpieces like the BBC or the Guardian.

    1) I didn't say all murders should be executed, just the worst of worst.
    2) Other crimes, such as child rape and manslaughter should also be punishable to death in the right circumstacnes.
    3) Since you resorted to quoting individual cases, can you please explain without bias preferably how this man (link below) might be innocent. And if you can't, why he should not be executed?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-a-killer.html
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selnec)
    Why do you thing two wrongs make a right?

    Sorry to break it to you, but society has advanced a little since the biblical days of an eye for an eye.
    I would say it has regressed actually. See links below.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jeremy_Kyle_Show

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Only_Way_Is_Essex

    http://www.express.co.uk/comment/hav...ure-a-disgrace

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013...n_2969352.html
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    Congrats, one credible source out of 4. I tend not to trust left wing mouthpieces like the BBC or the Guardian.

    1) I didn't say all murders should be executed, just the worst of worst.
    2) Other crimes, such as child rape and manslaughter should also be punishable to death in the right circumstacnes.
    3) Since you resorted to quoting individual cases, can you please explain without bias preferably how this man (link below) might be innocent. And if you can't, why he should not be executed?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-a-killer.html
    1) You're wrongly assuming that the "worst of the worst" murders can be proved beyond all doubt, with zero chance of a wrongful conviction.

    2) You're wrongly assuming that child rape and manslaughter can be proved beyond all doubt, with zero chance of a wrongful conviction.

    3) Nope, he looks guilty beyond a doubt to me. Unfortunately many people who have been wrongly convicted also looked guilty beyond a doubt, or they wouldn't have been convicted in the first place.

    You have scored 0 out of 3.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    1) You're wrongly assuming that the "worst of the worst" murders can be proved beyond all doubt, with zero chance of a wrongful conviction.

    2) You're wrongly assuming that child rape and manslaughter can be proved beyond all doubt, with zero chance of a wrongful conviction.

    3) Nope, he looks guilty beyond a doubt to me. Unfortunately many people who have been wrongly convicted also looked guilty beyond a doubt, or they wouldn't have been convicted in the first place.

    You have scored 0 out of 3.
    1) I doubt this conviction is wrongful, so why should he not be executed.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soham_murders

    2) So if a child claimed they had been raped by an adult and they found fluids from said adult inside the child, then you a confident you could get them off? Because from where i'm sitting, that sounds like what you claiming.

    3) You failed to answer my second question. Let me say it again to save you scrolling up. If he is guilty beyond all doubt of a dreadful act, then why should be not be executed?

    Since you acknowledged one of my points is correct, I will aware you a mere 0.5 of a point. Congrats.

    0.5 / 3
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    1) I doubt this conviction is wrongful, so why should he not be executed.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soham_murders

    2) So if a child claimed they had been raped by an adult and they found fluids from said adult inside the child, then you a confident you could get them off? Because from where i'm sitting, that sounds like what you claiming.

    3) You failed to answer my second question. Let me say it again to save you scrolling up. If he is guilty beyond all doubt of a dreadful act, then why should be not be executed?

    Since you acknowledged one of my points is correct, I will aware you a mere 0.5 of a point. Congrats.

    0.5 / 3
    We clearly have different opinions on this matter and I somehow doubt arguing about it on an online forum is going to achieve much. Rarely does. Neither can be objectively ascertained as the 'correct' opinion and we're both clearly set in our ways so this is pointless.

    I'm dropping this discussion to go and do more interesting things. Besides, I still ended up scoring 0.5 more than you did
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm confused. In your first post you're all like ...
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    He deserves death.
    and now you're saying ..
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    Nope. No no no no no. No way.

    Don't be ridiculous.

    Capital punishment is a terrible idea. Far better to have a murderer wrongly freed - with the chance that he won't kill again and maybe be found guilty later - than to have an innocent person convicted with the absolute certainty that they'll die.
    Was your first post sarcasm or are you trolling or am I just not reading correctly (could be the case)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tu_es_jolie_x)
    Was your first post sarcasm or are you trolling or am I just not reading correctly (could be the case)
    Nope, you read them both entirely correctly.

    In my first post I said he deserves death.

    In my second post I said that despite this he should not be given the death sentence because capital punishment is a bad idea.

    Those two posts are in no way contradictory.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    My thoughts exactly.

    The mail is doing a good job today highlighting everything that is wrong with benefits britain and our soft justice system today.
    What it's actually doing is seeking to use the Philpott case as a tool to label all poor families as despicable.

    It's quite reminiscent of the anti-semitic campaigns the Mail carried out in the 30s, when it heaped vitriol on Jewish people.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    What it's actually doing is seeking to use the Philpott case as a tool to label all poor families as despicable.
    No its not... It would be illogical to attack a portion of its own reader base.

    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    It's quite reminiscent of the anti-semitic campaigns the Mail carried out in the 30s, when it heaped vitriol on Jewish people.
    Poor attempt at a smear there. Try again. :rolleyes:
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dj1015)
    No its not... It would be illogical to attack a portion of its own reader base.

    Poor attempt at a smear there. Try again. :rolleyes:
    Wrong on both counts. Mail readership is mainly middle class women. The DM had a long history of pro-Nazi and anti-semitic attacks and campaigns during the 1930s and was an avid supporter of Hitler right up to 1939 and the outbreak of war.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AvocatDuDiable)
    Nope, you read them both entirely correctly.

    In my first post I said he deserves death.

    In my second post I said that despite this he should not be given the death sentence because capital punishment is a bad idea.

    Those two posts are in no way contradictory.
    Okay I get you now. I agree with you btw was just confused as to whether we were on the same wavelength or not.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Wrong on both counts. Mail readership is mainly middle class women. The DM had a long history of pro-Nazi and anti-semitic attacks and campaigns during the 1930s and was an avid supporter of Hitler right up to 1939 and the outbreak of war.
    You are wrong actually.

    A news paper can change it position, hence why this poor smear has no bearing on it today.

    Secondly, I willing to wager my life's earnings on the fact that the mail have at least one reader who is working class somewhere in the UK. Maybe more.....
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 12, 2013
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.