Bring back the death penalty!

I'm generally outraged and disgusted with the British justice system and how they treat criminals in this day and age. You get people like Ian Huntley who go out and kill two girls who were enthusiastic young girls enjoying life. What is society coming to these days? If someone does such a crime they should be sentenced to death or in my opinion literally spend the rest of their life in prison without the possible chance of parole. I also think that the death penalty would prevent some people committing their crimes, not a lot, but some. I wish we had the same justice system as Texas, if you kill someone there whilst stealing their possessions you instantly get charged with capital murder and therefore sentenced to death. Anyone agree? If so share your views.

Reply 1

Katq

8

I think I'd rather die than having to spend the rest of my life in jail. I think life-long sentence in a strict prison is worse than death.

Reply 2

Aphotic Cosmos

17

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

You're going on the assumption that all convicted criminals are actually guilty. Such a system could end up killing a number of people who did not actually commit a crime.

This.

That's all that need be said.

Reply 3

PaddySWYD

Original post by Travis1

I'm generally outraged and disgusted with the British justice system and how they treat criminals in this day and age. You get people like Ian Huntley who go out and kill two girls who were enthusiastic young girls enjoying life. What is society coming to these days? If someone does such a crime they should be sentenced to death or in my opinion literally spend the rest of their life in prison without the possible chance of parole. I also think that the death penalty would prevent some people committing their crimes, not a lot, but some. I wish we had the same justice system as Texas, if you kill someone there whilst stealing their possessions you instantly get charged with capital murder and therefore sentenced to death. Anyone agree? If so share your views.

I'd rather be killed via capital punishment than be locked in a cell for 10+ years and treated like an animal.

Reply 4

Drunk Punx

19

This should be fun.

:cookie:

Reply 5

TruthJS

What's the benefit of the Texan style system in which a person who kills another whilst stealing the others posessions recieves a sentence of death?

Reply 6

PaddySWYD

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

You're going on the assumption that all convicted criminals are actually guilty. Such a system could end up killing a number of people who did not actually commit a crime.

Just to be devil's advocate, the vast majority of these people will have committed the crime, because of nowadays technology, yes?

Reply 7

Drunk Punx

19

Original post by Ape Gone Insane

You're going on the assumption that all convicted criminals are actually guilty. Such a system could end up killing a number of people who did not actually commit a crime.

What if it happened to only people who had a mountain of evidence against them?
CCTV, no alibi, several eye-witnesses, forensic evidence, etc etc.

I do agree with you though, because even if the death sentence was given to such people who had loads of evidence against them, there will inevitably be a grey area, and some judges are bound to make the wrong call some time.

Reply 8

Aphotic Cosmos

17

Original post by PaddySWYD

Just to be devil's advocate, the vast majority of these people will have committed the crime, because of nowadays technology, yes?

No.

Professor Sir Alec Jeffreys - the genetics researcher who developed DNA "fingerprinting" in the 80s - has said many times that it is an imprecise technique with known errors even with the advances made since his development of it.

CCTV is also only used in a statistically negligible number of convictions according to dozens of reports.

Technology gives us more tools with which to evaluate criminal activity, but it does not provide more certainty as to whether those accused actually committed a crime or not.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 9

Rational Paradox

9

Problems with the death penalty:

There isn't always a 100% guarantee that the criminal is guilty

It is just as expensive, if not more expensive than jail-time

The state shouldn't ever be allowed to decide wherever a person lives or dies, especially if the evidence can be flawed; It could also end up as a precedent for loose application of the death penalty for ridiculous "crimes" , such as for homosexuality (Uganda for example)

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 10

Travis1

OP

I also agree that a life, literally your whole life, not the 25 years you get which is reduced to 12-14 years on good behaviour, for killing someone would be better so that they rot in prison, but the death penalty is good for families who have experienced their loved ones being killed ect as they can finally have closure and once the person who committed the crime has been executed they can forget about their traumatic experiences.

And a few people said not all people found guilty are guilty, that's true, but it most be topping 99%. And most criminals who've committed serious crimes are found guilty using DNA, forensics, video footage etc.

Reply 11

gethsemane342

11

You also overestimate the ease at which a murder lifer can be granted parole.

If you commit murder, you are given a minimum tariff for a life sentence - but this can be increased and often is.

You must serve this time. THEN you must prove to the parole board that you are no longer a significant risk to the public. You have to complete certain courses to show this and at some prisons, it is actually impossible to complete the correct set due to understaffing and resource issues. The parole board are also extremely cautious so you can spend years attempting to prove it, even if you're at the correct level. To make it even more difficult, they are streched and appeals can take months or even years to go through.

If you actually manage to be released on parole, you are on licence - if you breach *any* of the conditions, you are recalled to prison.

The majority of lifers in for murder are not going to see freedom for at least most of their lives.

Reply 12

blue acre

1

It would certainly lessen our worries regarding overpopulation.

Reply 13

PaddySWYD

Original post by blue acre

It would certainly lessen our worries regarding overpopulation.

Implying there are at least several million prisoners in the UK.
Implying that all of those have committed crimes worthy of capital punishment.

Reply 14

blue acre

1

Let's just start a fresh yeah?

Reply 15

Travis1

OP

All I'm saying I think it's sickening knowing you get "life" imprisonment when really you spend 12-14 years just for being 'good' in prison. In my opinion if you take someone's life your life should be taken from you, death or not death you should either be executed or actually sentenced to life imprisonment without the chance of parole. Also, if you commit a murder clearly you have something wrong with you, mentally, no one in the right frame of mind goes around killing someone, I'm sure none of us would on here. I think you are ALWAYS a threat to the public, if you've killed someone before then you're capable of doing it again, which is a fact.

Reply 16

d123

17

The death penalty doesn't work. There's no evidence that is has a deterrent effect, it can cause serious problems with miscarriage of justice, it's inhumane, it doesn't allow for rehabilitation, which should be the primary aim of a justice system.
Also looking at the death penalty in America, it's a shockingly bad system. There have been numerous accusations of racism, in addition being held on death row is almost like torture, in that often prisoners are taken to be executed, then have the execution postponed at the last moment, only to be finally killed later on - this is horribly psychologically damaging.

Due to imprisonment on death row, it could also be argued that the death penalty is in effect punishing the person twice - firstly, they get an undetermined jail sentence, and then they are killed.

In addition, there is evidence that the death penalty has a brutalising effect on society.

Of course, if you're strongly in favour of the death penalty, none of these arguments are likely to convince you, because you'll likely be approaching the justice system from a position of punishment rather than rehabilitation.

Reply 17

gethsemane342

11

Original post by Travis1

All I'm saying I think it's sickening knowing you get "life" imprisonment when really you spend 12-14 years just for being 'good' in prison. In my opinion if you take someone's life your life should be taken from you, death or not death you should either be executed or actually sentenced to life imprisonment without the chance of parole. Also, if you commit a murder clearly you have something wrong with you, mentally, no one in the right frame of mind goes around killing someone, I'm sure none of us would on here. I think you are ALWAYS a threat to the public, if you've killed someone before then you're capable of doing it again, which is a fact.

I have a question. What do you think the crime of murder is? Please define *exactly* what it is.

Also add whether you think there are any relevant defences to murder.

Reply 18

d123

17

Original post by Travis1

I also agree that a life, literally your whole life, not the 25 years you get which is reduced to 12-14 years on good behaviour, for killing someone would be better so that they rot in prison, but the death penalty is good for families who have experienced their loved ones being killed ect as they can finally have closure and once the person who committed the crime has been executed they can forget about their traumatic experiences.

And a few people said not all people found guilty are guilty, that's true, but it most be topping 99%. And most criminals who've committed serious crimes are found guilty using DNA, forensics, video footage etc.