Death Penalty

[merledogs]

For most of my adult life I have been staunchly opposed to the death penalty, believing it to be legalised murder. However, with age my opinions on various subjects are beginning to change, especially when I read about things like this

 

I don't believe in "an eye for an eye" but sometimes I think (regardless of whether the death penalty is actually a deterrent) the world is just a better place without some people in it

 

So what are your views?

Edited October 23, 2007 by madmerle

[Trallwm farm]

The death penalty WAS a deterent which we have lost and the price has been the death of many innocents and the course of life and quality of life changing forever for those family members left behind plus those that will never now be born.

 

But of course its one of those subjects that was simply used as a vote catcher with no thought or care for the concequences. Now the UK is in disaray with feral humans running amok and an anything goes with no payback system firmy entrenched in our culture.

Where the mind goes the body follows and it only takes one person to do something vile and the rest follow like sheep wanting to be part of "something".

 

This woman did this despicable crime because the theft of babies from the womb has been documented for over ten years in America and people do get away with it.

 

In the UK about once a week a child seems to be shot with ilegal weapons.

 

If there was still a death penalty imposed then from early childhood the killers would have had a parent,school, media drumming it in that thier is a death penalty, kill and you die too.

The fact that there is consequences lifts the whole moral code of the uk.

 

Yes to the death penalty back

[Red Rotties]

I do but not at the moment. Our justice system needs a complete over haul. We seem to live in a country where a crime that involves large amounts of monies will often involve a sentence much larger than one for taking a life.

 

I feel strongly that people taking life lose their human rights and dont see why my taxes should pay to care for them for the however long they live.

 

But if you look at America in the States that have the death penalty it doesnt really work as a deterent, they still have large numbers on death row

[owl]

I think that a system of punishment where life meant life would be more of a deterrent. The death penalty was used for all manner of crimes including theft of minor items for centuries and it didn't stop crime.

 

Innocent people have been executed in the past, and with the state of criminal justice at present it might well happen again even though our forensic knowledge is better.

 

As for our taxes supporting murderers, they only form a very small proportion of the prison system.

 

If capital punishment applied here, what about all the women who were found guilty of killing their babies on the evidence of a consultant who was later discredited?

 

I am very much anti, too many mistakes. And I don't trust the jury system either, having heard worrying things from people who have sat on juries.

[boosboss]

Nay! In the States, too long is spent on deathrow, while conviction appeals, clemency appeals etc take place and the risk of a mistake or corrupt investigation is just too great to take a life. Derek Bennet was convicted and hanged, only to be given a posthumus pardon (I think). Pothumusly 'sorry' is just not enough! It's too loate to undo the wrong! Anyone convicted of a crime where the death penalty may be a consideration and in my opinion any crime that attracts a custodial sentance and those that attract a community service order, should include a term of hard labour, not allow anyone to sit back and just do their time, often in moderate comfort. I don't think the withdrawl of liberty is enough, but if errors are made, at least there's then the opportunity of making reccompense.

However, fortunately I haven't been directly affected by a terrible crime, so may change my opinion.

[khanu]

Nope.

Either you believe you have the right to terminate someones life or you don't. You can't have it both ways.

 

To my mind it's very similar to smacking a child for hitting (with more serious consequences obviously) you can't punish them with the same method that you are punishing them for (that sentance doesn't quite make sense, but you get my meaning )

[reds]

I have shared your feelings Alex.

 

Death penalty though is no answer. If not a general deterrent (which it isn't - the US is complete testament to that) then there really is no use for it in my opinion. It would be society and Agencies washing their hands - how would we ever improve if we could simply 'exterminate' those we didn't like. There would be no pressure on us to do so.

 

Prison should ONLY be used for those who really need keeping away from others due to their dangerousness. Prisons are at their highest EVER capacity and re-offending rates are 90 plus percent = it doesn't work! What people forget is that a prison sentence does Not end when the person is released. That person will have their lives affected for a very very very long time to come. They may be unable to travel abroad, get work, maintain a family, find housing...Their record goes WITH them. This is not a sob story, far from it. Point is that if we want offenders to turn themselves around and not to offend again then they're going to need a fighting chance, not be put back into a vicious merry go round. There's little room for ideals, i.e. only the 'good' getting the jobs and houses etc. We either lock everybody up and throw away the key (which would be impossible as there would Never be enough prison spaces and the countryside would become taken over not by new housing developments but by custodial institutions) or we look for ways to prevent people from choosing illegitimate pathways. And that's NOT going to be cost-effective or vote winning so it's up to the population in a nutshell to put in the demand for REAL change in the Criminal Justice System.

[BeadyP]

An interesting fact I found out the other week.

If a jury believe that the sentence is too harsh for the crime committed,then they tend find the defendent not guilty.

Thinking about it in regards to the death sentence, there will be the people on the jury who oppose the death penalty,(or maybe they could be exempt from jury service, but then you may get a biased jury) so they wont vote in favour of killing him. Also the people who when it comes down to it, can not say guilty,knowing that they are sending someone to their death.Thats something that you will carry with you forever.

So what may happen is that more people who are guilty of heinous crimes will be found not guilty, and let free.

Whereas if it stays the same,and murderers get a jail sentence, at least they will be put away from the general public.

[Jemimap]

I don't really know where i stand.

 

As a deterrent i don't think it works - but then i can't think of anything that would - Noone commits a crime expecting to be caught.

 

However, whether prisons don't help people rehabilitate is by the by. It is a punishment.

[reds]

However, whether prisons don't help people rehabilitate is by the by. It is a punishment.

 

Agreed, that's the infliction of suffering theory of punishment which is perfectly valid.

But that's also when you get the 'revolving door' syndrome as people just go in and out of prison. Where's the learning involved in that? Where's the benefit to society?

Edited October 23, 2007 by reds

[greyhound pal]

Agreed, that's the infliction of suffering theory of punishment which is perfectly valid.

But that's also when you get the 'revolving door' syndrome as people just go in and out of prison. Where's the learning involved in that? Where's the benefit to society?

 

Because there are those out there who 'like' being in prison. Its a safe environment where they can get some normality in their otherwise chaotic life and its one place where they truly feel they belong. The big bad world can be very scary to these people.

 

I don't agree with the death penalty for any crime. Owl pretty much sums up why I don't agree.

[GSDFan]

No, I don't agree with the death penalty.

 

1. If it worked as a deterrent then other countries which have it, such as the USA, wouldn't have such huge numbers of murders.

 

2. It isn't right to choose to kill a human being ( unless they want to die because they are terminally ill ). You cannot say it is wrong for someone to murder but OK for the state to kill someone.

 

3. Too many innocent people have been found guilty and then later found to be innocent.

 

 

An interesting fact I found out the other week.

If a jury believe that the sentence is too harsh for the crime committed,then they tend find the defendent not guilty.

 

 

If I had to serve on a jury where the defendant would face the death penalty then whatever the evidence presented I would say 'Not guilty'. I am not prepared to be even partly responsible for the death of a human being.

[reds]

Because there are those out there who 'like' being in prison. Its a safe environment where they can get some normality in their otherwise chaotic life and its one place where they truly feel they belong. The big bad world can be very scary to these people.

 

 

Absolutely! Worked in YOI's for years and that's one of the very saddest things. But what good is it to them in the long run? That's where the system needs an overhaul, the programmes available should be something that will actually help them not just something that can be delivered without costing too much. There should be the infrastructure outside prison to support them when they come out so that they don't see prison as the safe place. Many lads could only get clean whilst inside - how damning is that of the state of things!! Prison should be a last resort and it most definitely should not be a fix for drug, mental health, or housing issues.

[Jemimap]

Agreed, that's the infliction of suffering theory of punishment which is perfectly valid.

But that's also when you get the 'revolving door' syndrome as people just go in and out of prison. Where's the learning involved in that? Where's the benefit to society?

 

Oh definitly, there does need to be efforts at rehabilitating offenders but i think often the fact that they are being punished gets lost along the way. A balance of the 2 is what's needed

[phoebejo]

I think my feelings on the death penalty have changed over the years. I have no problem with convicted murderers and paedophiles being hung, however because there can be no coming back for those wrongly convicted then executed I just cannot support it in this country.

 

Barry George (who killed Jill Dando) and Michael Stone (who killed Lyn & Megan Russell) are both appealing against their convictions. If we had the death penalty they'd both be dead by now. What if one of them wins their appeals? There are plenty of other cases I could mention, but those two sprung to mind. And Sion Jenkins, who was convicted of murdering his foster daughter? He's now a free man but things could have been so different. All of those men have sworn blind they are innocent.

 

Jails need to be much tougher in my opinion. There is a thread here somewhere about Ian Huntley being on Facebook via a friend. That man should be in solitary confinement, being fed nothing but gruel and without the luxury of friends.