Death Penalty

[Red Rotties]

If a mistake has been made then at least it is not too late.

I also think that castration should be compulsary for child abuse/rape/sexual assaults of any kind.

when they can safely remove the part of the brain that controls sexual impulses, then this should be done instead of castration.

 

Give the above a try for five years and our prisons will be being sold and turn into luxury flats.

 

The trouble is Kathy is child abuse rape and sexual assault isn't always about sex it is about power over a victim so castration etc isnt always going to work

[Kathyw]

I agree certainly most rapes are about power but if the means for the end were removed perhaps it would lessen the attacks. Saying that no doubt power crazies would find other means to vent their anger on innocent victims.

 

Personally I would mark them on the face with A for abuser, R for rapist etc so that the world knew what they were.

[nancy]

I do not think they should have done away with the death penalty,

and I think it should be used on all these sicko bas---ds who abuse

children and for starving animals and causing them so

much suffering that they die or have to be PTS . I would also use

it to get rid of the Yobos who cause suffering to amimals and OAPs.

Can I get the job of the next Prime Minister ( PLEASE )

[cycas]

Hstorically, the death penalty has been widely used for all serious crimes. Prisons were deeply abusive terrifying places and other penalties such as transportation (in terrible conditions, with the liklihood that if you were transported you would never see any of your family again) were used.

 

None of these things had much effect on crime. There were always more criminals, more crimes. People never think they will be the one that gets caught.

 

Humanity has spent thousands of years trying to eradicate criminality through pain, cruelty and death, and countless innocents have suffered horribly as a result. It's time to try something different.

 

I agree that the mass of the population needs to be protected, but that doesn't mean we have to come down to the level of the criminals.

[Ian]

I agree that the mass of the population needs to be protected, but that doesn't mean we have to come down to the level of the criminals.

 

But that is what / all some of them understand. In my opinion if you live by the sword then you should reasonably expect to die by it

[Kats inc]

But that is what / all some of them understand. In my opinion if you live by the sword then you should reasonably expect to die by it

 

So we might as well remove all prison officers,lock the prisoners in a large facility and leave them to get on with it and let them fight their own battles really in this case.Like for like considered and all that.

 

Ian another thought...children under about 8 yrs of age aren't considered old enough to give evidence against their abusers so basically wise SO's will abuse that age group.Sad but true.Physical evidence is sometimes available but it's much harder to convict without a child's testimony.It's better these days with vulnerable witness evidence giving but the under 8's are still a very difficult age for cases to be prosecuted So whilst you the general public see this as very black and white it really really isn't.We the professionals try to protect children in ways you may not ever know about though so perhaps place a little more trust in us?

[Ian]

I don't understand / see the logic in your reference to prison officers. If the convicted paedophiles, murderers etc had been hung then there would be no need of prison officers guarding them and nobody fighting any battles with them - they are dead and no threat to anyone.

 

 

Likewise with the under 8's. I'm not suggesting that society could protect every child. As was said above they've all done it for the first time once but the Death penalty is only relevant if you have been proven guilty. What I am suggesting is that these people are likely to do it more than once and therefore when convicted ONCE of child abuse that's it I'd hang them, no excuses, no "rehabilitation" - as you yourself have said above there are some people that can't be rehabilitated - and more importantly no further threat to other children or need to build evidence to protect the next child they try it with.

 

With regard to abused wives hitting back and killing him etc that is where the Courts & jury system would have to make a decision between murder, a more justifiable manslaughter etc. Likewise for two young teenagers having consensual sex I do see a major difference between them and sexual offenders - to me that has more to do with parenting than criminal proceedings & as I suggested above the two shouldn't be mentioned in the same category.

 

I do believe that professionals have a role to play. As I said above I believe that advances in science, DNA evidence etc it is far less likely today than it once was that miscarriages of justice could occur.

For sentencing and protection however it's all very well to say just trust the professionals and take no responsibility but what about the cases were people did that and it failed miserably Eg, to name just two with a local connection

 

Ian Huntley - Humberside Police force repeatedly had dealings with him re allegations surrounding underage girls and yet he was never prosecuted. The records were wiped and he went on to pass record checks, get a job in a school and then murder Holly & Jessica - two innocent little girls.

 

Wayne Burtonshaw - a serial arsonist who despite Police, Social Services, Probation, hospitals, Schools etc was allowed to move into a home with a mother & two children. Then repeatedly there were unexplained fires in their home and yet because he blamed someone else it went on & on until he caused a fire that killed stepson Aaron Smith

 

Society needs to decide it's own expectations, elect it's politicians to implement laws accordingly and personally I think the judiciary needs to be more accountable and open to challenge when innappropriately low sentences are given.

 

If the current system were working you'd all be able to point to factual evidence of lower sex abuse, murders, rapes etc since the abolition of the death penalty, very low numbers of reoffenders in such cases and so on - there are various professionals on here so can any of you actually show that evidence?

Edited October 28, 2007 by Ian

[Kathyw]

I think that shrinks should be held accountable if they say someone is fit to re-join society and that person then repeats the crime again, perhaps it would make them think twice before they let people out.

 

Quite frankly I think all prefessionals should be accountable for c***-ups that lead to someone death, be it a child or adult.

 

If we teach that there are consequences to all our actions why should that not be so with professionals?

They should be allowed to hide behind 'overnment etc'.

 

The instances that Ian gave, wile I would not have hung them, sack, with no handshake, the person who freed them and put that person in for life with no chance of parole.

Build another prison and make the inmates of one prison paint, decorate etc.

Make them dig up roads, make them work for their keep.

We are far too soft on people who commit crimes.

 

Empty the bad estates of the decent people and put all the riff-raff together in the bad estate, if they wreck it, they still have to live there.

Make them learn how to live decently before inflicting them on the general public.

 

I would not allow sex offenders to be segregated from the general prison population, let them take their chances with the other prisoners and see how they like being the victim.

[sproggie14]

Edited to add: I am sick and tired of the *Oh, the poor guy, he's had it tough no wonder he turned to crime/rape/murder - let's cut him some slack*. IMHO that is NO excuse, plenty of people has had it tough but they didn't turn out to be criminals/rapists/murderers. And if I hear one more time: *He/she was a victim of a victim* - I might get sick.

 

I don't think it is that simple as someone having it tough and turning to crime as a result. Being the victim of some crimes such as child abuse at a young age does actual damage to a person psychologically making them incapable of knowing right from wrong. It's those people who I think we should concentrate on helping rather than just punishing.

[Ian]

I don't think it is that simple as someone having it tough and turning to crime as a result. Being the victim of some crimes such as child abuse at a young age does actual damage to a person psychologically making them incapable of knowing right from wrong. It's those people who I think we should concentrate on helping rather than just punishing.

 

 

I do understand what you mean but think you are also generalising here and some could be upset or offended by this - ie I'd accept that some children are told it's okay, their secret, are too young to know any different etc BUT there are also people who have been through such horrific experiences and who in laterlife very much know that it's wrong & wouldn't dream of harming a child. In fact not too long ago a Fugee said exactly this & that they would kill anyone who did it to a child of theirs.

 

I think we need to be supporting those poor children who experience such horrors but by the time they reach adult hood I think they should be aware of what is right / wrong and what the consequences of doing that wrong were for their abuser.

[Kats inc]

If the current system were working you'd all be able to point to factual evidence of lower sex abuse, murders, rapes etc since the abolition of the death penalty, very low numbers of reoffenders in such cases and so on - there are various professionals on here so can any of you actually show that evidence?

 

Can you show that the death penalty made any difference?

 

I go by the difference I make to each child I work with not by national statistics or I'd be decidedly depressed.To me that's actually far more important.Today I put one child's name on the child protection register and tomorrow it is highly likely I'll be doing the same for a premature baby who is at risk.That's 2 children made safer which is what counts and is worthy of my efforts.Examining national statistics and justifying stuff isn't really.

[Ian]

The death penalty was abolished before I was born. It is therefore less reasonable to expect me to produce evidence of that fact than it is for those advocating a system with which they work.

 

It would therefore have to be an opinion rather than proof as such but the statistics would appear to support my suggestion yes.

 

The fact is that whilst admittedly homicides rates in England and Wales (ie murder, manslaughter and infanticide) were higher back in 1900 than they were in 1965 the evidence shows that homicide figures consistently fell between 1900 and 1965 but have increased consistently since the death penalty was abolished with the exception of a minor fall between 1995 and 1997.

 

Examples

1900 9.6 per million population

1920 8.3

1940 Not available

1960 6.2

1965 6.8 Death Penalty abolished in this year

1970 8.1

1980 12.5

1990 13.1

1995 14.5

1997 14.1

 

Though there were admittedly small rises from the 1930's - 50's and crime began a rising trend in 1954 Indictable crime of any nature has also shown very much more significant increases within this period (despite rising police numbers) and rose continuously until 1992. Cynics may suggest that recorded crime figures are massaged these days by what is and is not considered recordable.

 

The Prison population (though admittedly rising since the 40's has also vastly increased in this time)

 

Source http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/resea...99/rp99-111.pdf

[EGAR]

Sproggie, this is EXACTLY what I mean. Alot of peeps have been abused as small children and NOT ALL OF them turned criminal. And if the psychopath is uncurable why not pts him and safe money and the have the knowledge that he will never ever roam the streets again due to a clerical error or the mis-assessment by a bleeding heart shrink.

[sproggie14]

I know only too well that not everyone who has a bad experience turns criminal themselves But I also know that such experiences are damaging and who knows what dictates what sort of damage it will do to each person. One might just be depressed, another seriously mentally ill. But the point is they are ill, not evil. IMHO if we seek to euthanise such people we are only a small step away from Hitler, judging what types of people deserve to live.

 

I do have to wonder why if a dog attacks, we immediately look for the reason and say the dog should be spared as it is a victim of circumstances or bad treatment. But we don't offer the same understanding to our own species?

[ingipops]

Having lost a family member to a murderer ( a 'mass' murderer in fact) I used to think the death penalty was what I wanted for the perpetrator of this crime....now I've 'seen' this person in the flesh I don't think I feel the same way at all

It's a very tangled up mess of emotions for me tbh. If the decision on the death penalty for this particular muderer was mine I think I'd prefer him to be held in custody for the rest of his days

 

I do have to wonder why if a dog attacks, we immediately look for the reason and say the dog should be spared as it is a victim of circumstances or bad treatment. But we don't offer the same understanding to our own species?

interesting comment