Majority of Brits Want The Death Penalty Back

[letmein]

How about you?:cat:

Our dedication to the death penalty

Half a century on from its abolition, why is capital punishment still so popular?

Almost 50 years ago a Labour MP, Sidney Silverman, proposed a bill that would cease all state executions in Britain. The last death sentences were carried out on Peter Anthony Allen and Gwynne Owen Evans on 13 August 1964. But before Silverman's historic bill – and ever since – a majority of the British public has consistently supported capital punishment. A YouGov survey in 2010 showed that 51% would back the reintroduction of the death penalty, with only 37% committed to its abolition.

The abolition of the death penalty was part of a wider series of liberal reforms passed in parliament with cross-party support from the late 1960s onwards. The legalisation of abortion and decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967 helped shape modern Britain. Harold Wilson's government would set the standard for equality with the Equal Pay Act (1970), the Sex Discrimination Act (1975) and the Race Relations Act (1976). But whereas most people support these initiatives, the argument about whether the state should be able to execute its citizens still divides us. Less than a year after Silverman's bill was passed, Ian Brady and Myra Hindley were arrested for the Moors murders and public opinion favoured their execution.

So why, after half a century without state executions, are most people not convinced? One reason could be the public's expectation that the law should act on their behalf. The Telegraph's Simon Heffer told me for the Crime and Punishment – The Story of Capital Punishment documentary that, for the most serious homicides, in the "interest of maintaining confidence in the rule of law the only appropriate punishment is the death penalty".

He cites the cases of murderers convicted of the most heinous crimes, where torture, rape and ultimately murder were premeditated against children or the very old. The public would appear to back this view. When Ian Huntley was arrested for the murders of Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells, a YouGov poll showed that 63% of respondents believed Huntley should be executed by the state. The tabloid press also stirs up public frustration with stories of reoffending sex attackers and murderers enjoying a comfortable prison term. And while the tabloids don't support the reintroduction of the death penalty in their editorial pages, they do allow their high-profile columnists to call for the return of the noose.

Professor Robert Blecker from the New York Law School believes that citizens have the right to expect that the state will deliver retribution on their behalf – and indeed that the state has an obligation to do so. Blecker cites Kant to argue that even a civilised state has "a moral imperative and a duty" to act and that if you break society's rules by committing murder then as "a responsible agent, you've chosen to do what you did, then you deserve to die for it".

Opponents to capital punishment, like Geoffrey Robertson QC, argue that it is "much worse for an individual to spend the rest of their life in prison than to be executed immediately". But most of the public don't share his faith in the prison system. It was the Victorians who first introduced the idea of imprisonment as an alternative to execution. This was part of a liberal reforming agenda, which sought a more proportional sense of punishment. As a consequence, conviction rates rose as juries became more likely to convict. The penal system has been used since to maintain the public's faith in the law. After abolition those convicted of murder received a mandatory life sentence and in 1983 the whole life tariff was introduced, meaning some prisoners would never be released. But while convicted murderers spend considerably longer in prison today than they did before the death penalty was abolished, it's questionable whether in cases like the Soham murders the public are convinced that prison is a satisfactory alternative.

But what about miscarriages of justice, like the case of Derek Bentley, who was posthumously pardoned four decades after being hung? Michael Mansfield QC believes that the ultimate sanction "can't be applied in a flawed system of justice". Mansfield represented both the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four, all of whom would almost certainly have been executed had Britain retained capital punishment. The former home secretary Michael Howard admits these cases changed his mind on the death penalty. "I accepted that you could never completely eliminate the chance of a mistake and since then I have been averse to the idea of the state deliberately taking someone's life."

During the 1980s and early 1990s a free vote was held every year in parliament on the reintroduction of capital punishment. One MP who always voted in favour of a return of the death penalty was Ann Widdecombe, a former prisons minister, who argues that "during the height of the IRA outrages, there was a strong moral case for saying a moral deterrent is available" and that only the death penalty could provide this.

This defence has been put forward since the era of the Bloody Code in the 18th century, when over 200 offences – including stealing a rabbit or keeping the company of gypsies – carried the death sentence. Until 1868 executions were carried out in public in front of drunken and baying crowds and it was expected that the public would attend to witness justice being carried out. Professor Vic Gatrell of Cambridge University, author of The Hanging Tree: Execution and the English People, explains that this public spectacle was designed as a visual show of the state's power and to "testify to the anger of the king". But this was before the Victorians established a penal system and a police force. And after decades of research the contention that the death penalty is a deterrent in countries that still enforce it, like the US and China, has not been proved either way.

Capital punishment was only fully removed from British statutes under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998: until this time it had been technically possible to be executed by the state for treason or piracy. As long as Britain remains committed to its human rights legislation, it will never reintroduce capital punishment, and all the major political parties oppose it. Abolition was led by MPs who considered it a moral issue and would not be swayed by public opinion. But with the public still largely unconvinced, one wonders whether they would maintain their opposition now.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2011/apr/05/death-penalty-abolition

[joeysteele]

Personally I am not in favour of the death penalty,however for multiple murders and child murderers I doubt I would lose any sleep for those if we had the death penalty.

For me the 100% certainty factor in a lot of cases is what worries me and there have been many proven miscarriages of justice to make me not want the death penalty back.
I could be persuaded to go along with it for the above crimes I mentioned above.

I am in the minority I know, as most people I know would vote to bring the death penalty back and poll after poll suggests the majority is with them.
However, I cannot see in my lifetime any Govt prepared to take the miscarriages of justice risks and therefore bringing the death penalty back in the UK.

[arista]

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/4/5/1302004804592/Ian-Huntley-capital-punis-007.jpg


Sign Of The Times.

[Stu]

It's the retarded, bloodlust hope of armchair warriors everywhere. Most of whom are too stupid to realize that the legal procudure involved would actually cost the state far more than housing a prisoner for life.

[MTVN]

Thankfully such a draconian measure will probably never be implemented, regardless of the support of the majority

[Mystic Mock]

Majority should always get what they want,also the more criminals you send to prison the more space it takes up in prison,meaning innocent people are having to pay more tax to keep them scumbags alive.

Bring back the death penalty.

[Benjamin]

The majority of people also voted in Conservatives as our Government, voted Rachel Rice winner of BB9, voted Joe McElderry winner of Xfactor in 2009, etc.

The majority is not always right and does not always have the better opinion. In hindsight a lot regret their decision/vote.

[Smithy]

http://www.thegamerslab.com/community/images/smilies/didntwhat.gif

[Benjamin]

Majority should always get what they want,also the more criminals you send to prison the more space it takes up in prison,meaning innocent people are having to pay more tax to keep them scumbags alive.

Bring back the death penalty.

And what about those people who are innocent but found guilty? It happens.

[Lee.]

:joker:

[Lee.]

Oh.. erm.. that Joker ^ was meant for Smithy's gif not innocent people being sentenced to death!

[Mystic Mock]

And what about those people who are innocent but found guilty? It happens.

Thats the risk i would take,and clearly others agree with me.

[Benjamin]

Thats the risk i would take,and clearly others agree with me.

So say for example it was your mother, you'd still stand by that decision?

[Mystic Mock]

So say for example it was your mother, you'd still stand by that decision?

Bringing in personal matters is a bit unfair,but if I wasnt personally involved I would gladly see some of those murderers in prison die.

[Benjamin]

Bringing in personal matters is a bit unfair,but if I wasnt personally involved I would gladly see some of these murderers die.

Not really unfair. It'll be personal to someone be it you or a stranger. Knowing that a loved one was innocent but there was nothing you could do to prove their innocence and them being sentanced to death. How is that fair?

[Niamh.]

Oh.. erm.. that Joker ^ was meant for Smithy's gif not innocent people being sentenced to death!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/miyochan/GIFS/tumblr_ldosjjSkII1qzcpfl.gif

[MTVN]

Majority should always get what they want,also the more criminals you send to prison the more space it takes up in prison,meaning innocent people are having to pay more tax to keep them scumbags alive.

Bring back the death penalty.

No they shouldnt, not if they're calling for draconian or oppresive measures, noone should have to be subjected to the tyranny of the majority in such instances

[Tom4784]

The majority of people are dimwits that'd sign all their rights away if it was worded nice to them. The death penalty creates more problems then it solves.

[Mystic Mock]

Not really unfair. It'll be personal to someone be it you or a stranger. Knowing that a loved one was innocent but there was nothing you could do to prove their innocence and them being sentanced to death. How is that fair?

For starters it would be like a 1% chance of it happening,and considering you like going personal how would you feel if your mother was murdered the police had enough evidence to prove who did it,but because the death penalty (and life sentence cough) are illegal in the uk,wouldnt you want to see them dead and brought to justice?

[Benjamin]

For starters it would be like a 1% chance of it happening,and considering you like going personal how would you feel if your mother was murdered the police had enough evidence to prove who did it,but because the death penalty (and life sentence cough) are illegal where you live,wouldnt you want to see them dead and brought to justice?

Like I said. It would be personal to somebody, I was just using yourself as an example as I'm having the debate with you. I sense you are defensive and a little annoyed, but I'm getting my point across.

Secondly, if my mother was murdered, yes I would be devastated and I may say at first I would want vengance, but I'd still not condone taking their life. I'm not one for seeing people murdered.

And what about if my mother was murdered accidentally by someone. What they should be killed for that?


That 1% chance of them being innocent is still not fair.

[Mystic Mock]

No they shouldnt, not if they're calling for draconian or oppresive measures, noone should have to be subjected to the tyranny of the majority in such instances

When its to do with politics the majority of the uk should get what they want,otherwise you would be having a George.W.Bush happening all over again.:hugesmile:

[Stu]

Majority should always get what they want,also the more criminals you send to prison the more space it takes up in prison,meaning innocent people are having to pay more tax to keep them scumbags alive.

Bring back the death penalty.
I'll repeat myself : The death penalty costs more to carry out than housing a prisoner in a cell.

[Mystic Mock]

Like I said. It would be personal to somebody, I was just using yourself as an example as I'm having the debate with you. I sense you are defensive and a little annoyed, but I'm getting my point across.

Secondly, if my mother was murdered, yes I would be devastated and I may say at first I would want vengance, but I'd still not condone taking their life. I'm not one for seeing people murdered.

And what about if my mother was murdered accidentally by someone. What they should be killed for that?


That 1% chance of them being innocent is still not fair.

Im also debating with you,im just saying personal matters are always different.

And if your mother did get murdered by accident then of course they shouldnt be punished.

[MTVN]

When its to do with politics the majority of the uk should get what they want,otherwise you would be having George.W.Bush all over again.:hugesmile:

So if the majority wanted to introduce forced labour it would make it right? Or if they said they would kick out all other races and have an all-white Britain? An opinion being shared among the majority does not automatically give them the right to deprive citizens of civil liberties and human rights.

[Benjamin]

Im also debating with you,im just saying personal matters are always different.

And if your mother did get murdered by accident then of course they shouldnt be punished.

You still haven't answered my other question.

How is it fair on that 1% who happen to be innocent?

[Shaun]

majority of under 2000 people, that is. A straw poll is always intended to give a reflection of a cross-section of society but that's all it ever is. It's never the majority of Britons.

[CharlieO]

Death is nothingness, prison is a form of torture. why not let them feel pain but have a reversible option if possible.

Though i dont agree when people get let out early for being 'good'.

[Mystic Mock]

So if the majority wanted to introduce forced labour it would make it right? Or if they said they would kick out all other races and have an all-white Britain? An opinion being shared among the majority does not automatically give them the right to deprive citizens of civil liberties and human rights.

Of course it doesnt make it right,but if the majority wanted them stuff to happen then they should get what they want.

[Benjamin]

Of course it doesnt make it right,but if the majority wanted them stuff to happen then they should get what they want.

What an absolutely ridiculous perpsective. :bored:

[Mystic Mock]

You still haven't answered my other question.

How is it fair on that 1% who happen to be innocent?

Its not,but there will be 99% chance of a criminal being prosecuted.

[MTVN]

Of course it doesnt make it right,but if the majority wanted them stuff to happen then they should get what they want.

So you'd be happy to deprive people of their lives, of their rights and liberties just to satisfy a tryannical majority?

Back in 1933 the majority got what they wanted in Germany (well it wasnt quite a majority, but they were comfortably the largest party) Hitler was made Chancellor. Look how that turned out.

[Stu]

Prosecuting a death penalty case is extremely expensive for a state and drains money that could be used for education and social programs. Capital punishment costs more than sentencing a prisoner to life without parole. The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty cost North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution over the costs of sentencing murderers to life imprisonment. The majority of these costs occur at the trial level.[4] In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70 percent more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases, including the costs of incarceration.

"The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innnocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated.

If the death penalty was replaced with a sentence of Life Without the Possibility of Parole, which costs millions less and also ensures that the public is protected while eliminating the risk of an irreversible mistake [...] More than 3500 men and woman have received this sentence in California since 1978 and NOT ONE has been released, except those few individuals who were able to prove their innocence."


• more pre-trial time will be needed to prepare: cases typically take a year to come to trial
• more pre-trial motions will be filed and answered
• more experts will be hired
• twice as many attorneys will be appointed for the defense, and a comparable team for the prosecution
• jurors will have to be individually quizzed on their views about the death penalty, and they are more likely to be sequestered
• two trials instead of one will be conducted: one for guilt and one for punishment
• the trial will be longer: a cost study at Duke University estimated that death penalty trials take 3 to 5 times longer than typical murder trials


Washington State “At the trial level, death penalty cases are estimated to generate roughly $470,000 in additional costs to the prosecution and defense over the cost of trying the same case as an aggravated murder without the death penalty and costs of $47,000 to $70,000 for court personnel.” (Final Report of the Death Penalty Subcommittee of the Committee on Public Defense, Washington State Bar Association, December 2006,
http://www.wsba.org/lawyers/groups/commi…


Tennessee: “Death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.” (The Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury Office of Research's Report, "Tennessee's Death Penalty: Costs and Consequences."
http://www.comptroller.state.tn.us/orea/…

Kansas: “The study counted death penalty case costs through to execution and found that the median death penalty case costs $1.26 million. Non-death penalty cases were counted through to the end of incarceration and were found to have a median cost of $740,000. For death penalty cases, the pre-trial and trial level expenses were the most expensive part, 49% of the total cost. The investigation costs for death-sentence cases were about 3 times greater than for non-death cases. The trial costs for death cases were about 16 times greater than for non-death cases ($508,000 for death case; $32,000 for non-death case).” (. Kansas: Performance Audit Report: Costs Incurred for Death Penalty Cases: A K-GOAL Audit of the Department of Corrections)

North Carolina: The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than the a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/northcar…
links to ("The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina" Duke University, May 1993)

http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

http://www.aclu.org/capital-punishment/death-penalty-101




That's just a start. There is no good reason for the death penalty to be reintroduced. It bothers me that people who it will never affect seem to hell bent on bringing it back. It's not healthy for society that people are willing to yearn for such drastic, draconian, eye for eye, vengeful things. I don't want my kids growing up in a world where a media circus complete with up to the minute Sky News coverage makes a national event out of watching a rapist or serial get his whilst we cheer on pointing, laughing, spreading text jokes and patting outselves on the back for what a good job with the world we are doing.

It's immature and uninformed at best, downright paranoid and psychotic at worst. I like my morals simple and straightfoward with no hideously bloodthirst driven contradictions. Killing is wrong. End of story.

[Mystic Mock]

So you'd be happy to deprive people of their lives, of their rights and liberties just to satisfy a tryannical majority?

Back in 1933 the majority got what they wanted in Germany (well it wasnt quite a majority, but they were comfortably the largest party) Hitler was made Chancellor. Look how that turned out.

Your basically advocating a dictatorship then if you never let the majority have what they want.

Also hitler pretended to be a really nice person thats why the germans voted for him.

And no I wouldnt be happy about depriving people of there rights or lives or liberties,and there will never be a majority in this country that will agree with the stuff you mentioned,thank god.

[Vicky.]

Death is nothingness, prison is a form of torture. why not let them feel pain but have a reversible option if possible.

Though i dont agree when people get let out early for being 'good'.

LOL really?

Sure they are under all forms of stress sat there with their free 3 meals a day and playing on their playstations ;)

[Tom4784]

Your basically advocating a dictatorship then if you never let the majority have what they want.

Also hitler pretended to be a really nice person thats why the germans voted for him.

And no I wouldnt be happy about depriving people of there rights or lives or liberties,and there will never be a majority in this country that will agree with the stuff you mentioned,thank god.

:laugh3:

Your replies in this topic have been GOLDEN.

[Stu]

Your basically advocating a dictatorship then if you never let the majority have what they want.

Also hitler pretended to be a really nice person thats why the germans voted for him.

And no I wouldnt be happy about depriving people of there rights or lives or liberties,and there will never be a majority in this country that will agree with the stuff you mentioned,thank god.
Just stop trying, please. It's like watching a dog slowly suffer under the wheel of a parked car.

[Mystic Mock]

LOL really?

Sure they are under all forms of stress sat there with their free 3 meals a day and playing on their playstations ;)

Dont forget the tortous Xbox and Xbox 360.:joker:

[Mystic Mock]

Just stop trying, please. It's like watching a dog slowly suffer under the wheel of a parked car.

Just stop trying what? debating.

[MTVN]

Your basically advocating a dictatorship then if you never let the majority have what they want.

Also hitler pretended to be a really nice person thats why the germans voted for him.

And no I wouldnt be happy about depriving people of there rights or lives or liberties,and there will never be a majority in this country that will agree with the stuff you mentioned,thank god.

Of course I'm not advocating a dictatorship, I'd advocating placing limits on governments so that individuals arent forced to live under tyrannical and oppresive laws just because the majority want it. There's no excuse for oppression, full stop.

He hardly pretended to be a really nice person, his intentions were explicit enough, even in the very early years of the Nazis; look at some of the quotes from Mein Kampf, some of his speeches and their 25 point plan. Not all voters were raging racists and anti-semites true, but that's hardly the point.

The majority supposedly support the death penalty, taking the life of another human being, it might not be on the same level as forced racial expatriation but it's still draconian and shouldnt be allowed to exist. And in a lot of countries they still have national service which is a form of forced labour, so there are real threats to the liberty and rights of individuals, and there always will be.

[Stu]

Just stop trying what? debating.
Is that what you call it?

51 percent in a poll of 2,000 is no barometer whatsoever for making such drastic moral decisions that are baseless, uninformed, bullshit and are both costly and unhealthy for society. This is not a debate. It's a farce.

[CharlieO]

LOL really?

Sure they are under all forms of stress sat there with their free 3 meals a day and playing on their playstations ;)

-just looked up playstations in prison-

my opinion has changed. that is disgraceful they should be punished for what they do.

i do think that is ridiculous they need to shop s**t like that.

[Mystic Mock]

Is that what you call it?

51 percent in a poll of 2,000 is no barometer whatsoever for making such drastic moral decisions that are baseless, uninformed, bullshit and are both costly and unhealthy for society. This is not a debate. It's a farce.

Most surveys and polls normally have bigger leads than that proving that we as a nation want the death penalty back.

Also go and be patronising to someone else please?

[Glenn.]

I completely agree with bringing the Death Penalty back. If your willing to take a life, then you should pay with your own.

[Stu]

Most surveys and polls normally have bigger leads than that proving that we as a nation want the death penalty back.

Also go and be patronising to someone else please?
Is that what you call conveying an effective argument?

Stick to discussing the poll that has been posted unless you are actually going to put your money where your mouth is and dispense some of this knowledge you have of other more effective polls.

[CharlieO]

The majority of people probably want free food, that doesn't mean tesco is going to let it happen. nor would it be a smart move.

[Mystic Mock]

The majority of people probably want free food, that doesn't mean tesco is going to let it happen. nor would it be a smart move.

Your comparing Tesco to Murderers,rapists,pedophiles?

[CharlieO]

Your comparing Tesco to Murderers,rapists,pedophiles?

im just basically saying the public doesn't always know best therefore majority shouldn't always win.

[james130]

Don't think they should bring it back. However, if someone murdered a member of my family or raped a friend I could definately be swayed.
I just don't think prisons should be: giving prisoners qualifications: letting them watch tv; eat nice food; have visitors etc...
If prison is to put people off comitting crimes then i t should be grotty and horrible.

[M X]

NO!

[Shaun]

I think people exaggerate prisons - there seems to be the image of them as little Travelodges with Playstations and swimming pools or something. I went to see my oldest brother a couple of times as a child and whilst he didn't tell me then, he told my mother, that he pretty much cried himself to sleep every night. It's put the fear of God into me, so I don't know what's with the "omg dem paedophiles got 3 meals todaiii" attitude.

[Mystic Mock]

I think people exaggerate prisons - there seems to be the image of them as little Travelodges with Playstations and swimming pools or something. I went to see my oldest brother a couple of times as a child and whilst he didn't tell me then, he told my mother, that he pretty much cried himself to sleep every night. It's put the fear of God into me, so I don't know what's with the "omg dem paedophiles got 3 meals todaiii" attitude.

What crime did your brother do? the milder the worser you get with the uk governments.

[Vicky.]

I think people exaggerate prisons - there seems to be the image of them as little Travelodges with Playstations and swimming pools or something. I went to see my oldest brother a couple of times as a child and whilst he didn't tell me then, he told my mother, that he pretty much cried himself to sleep every night. It's put the fear of God into me, so I don't know what's with the "omg dem paedophiles got 3 meals todaiii" attitude.

Meh I dont know. My dad actually works in durham prison (which is apparently meant to be a 'bad' one) and he reckons the prisoners get a very easy ride.

[MTVN]

I think people exaggerate prisons - there seems to be the image of them as little Travelodges with Playstations and swimming pools or something. I went to see my oldest brother a couple of times as a child and whilst he didn't tell me then, he told my mother, that he pretty much cried himself to sleep every night. It's put the fear of God into me, so I don't know what's with the "omg dem paedophiles got 3 meals todaiii" attitude.

I agree, I dont think any amount of luxuries can make up for losing your freedom and being cooped up in that environment

[Vicky.]

I actually know someone who prefers being locked up to being out. When he gets released he does stupid things like burgling houses he knows are empty just to get locked back up again. So I cant really get the argument how 'bad' it is inside :/

Obviously the experience will differ from person to person though I guess

[Stu]

I actually know someone who prefers being locked up to being out. When he gets released he does stupid things like burgling houses he knows are empty just to get locked back up again. So I cant really get the argument how 'bad' it is inside :/

Obviously the experience will differ from person to person though I guess
I think it's a pretty easy argument, myself.

The vast majority of people are not like the person you know and do not enjoy being in prison.

[Vicky.]

I think it's a pretty easy argument, myself.

The vast majority of people are not like the person you know and do not enjoy being in prison.

Maybe. I only actually know that one person who has ever actually been in prison :p

My point was more though, that even though it will be a very small minority with his mindset...if it was really that bad inside, that minority wouldnt WANT to be there either would they.

[_Seth]

Never want it back. Not even in extreme cases.

[joeysteele]

I cannot as I said before on this thread,see any Govt. in my lifetime bringing it back, MPs on a free vote will always vote it down.

I accept in the UK that I am in the minority of not wanting the death penalty back,then again I am used to being in the minority on lots of issues.
In a referendum to bring back the death penalty,I would vote no, unless I had a separate option for its use for multiple murders by someone and also child killers.

Too many mistakes have been made in the past and really one possible innocent life killed by the death penalty being brought back is one too many.

I am surprised that poll had only 51% wanting it back though, generally prior to that the figure has always been nearer to 65%.

Also as to the comments as to being in Prison and as to why have certain privileges,well we only sentence people to prison now,we don't include hard labour or any labour really.
The only punishment prison gives is loss of liberty,until that is changed then privileges will be in force.

I also don't know of more than 3 people who would want to go to prison or even try it either for any length of time.

[Niall]

I think this is utterly ridiculous. Who are we to judge whether someone should live or not? After all if the death penalty was brought back for things such as murder then surely that would make us no better than the murderer in the first place?

Personally, I think its just people being ignorant about the implications and severity of the death penalty. Besides, being sentenced to a life in a prison cell with no chance of getting out is far, far worse imo than death. All the pain and suffering you'd have in prison before you die in there is surely much more of a punishment than killing someone right off the bat for their crimes.

Thats my take on it anyway.

[Boothy]

I don't think capital punishment is the way forward but I definitely think some criminals get an easy ride for the crime they've commited.

I think people exaggerate prisons - there seems to be the image of them as little Travelodges with Playstations and swimming pools or something. I went to see my oldest brother a couple of times as a child and whilst he didn't tell me then, he told my mother, that he pretty much cried himself to sleep every night. It's put the fear of God into me, so I don't know what's with the "omg dem paedophiles got 3 meals todaiii" attitude.

Maybe so, but they're still too cushty for some people. Obviously the circumstances under which the crime was committed need to be taken into account, but I think that the mass murderers or child molesterers in the world, someone like Ian Huntly for example, who would be eligible for the death penalty, should be made to stay in a dark, dingy hole with no bed, toilet or contact to anyone for the rest of their existance.

[Mystic Mock]

I think this is utterly ridiculous. Who are we to judge whether someone should live or not? After if the death penalty was brought back for things such as murder then surely that would make us no better than the murderer in the first place?

Personally, I think its just people being ignorant about the implications and severity of the death penalty. Besides, being sentenced to a life in a prison cell with no chance of getting out is far, far worse imo than death. All the pain and suffering you'd have in prison before you die in there is surely much more of a punishment than killing someone right off the bat for their crimes.

Thats my take on it anyway.

1.Who was the murderer,rapists and pedophiles to judge on whoes lives they was going to destroy.

2.Not that stupid argument of we are no better than the killer or whatever criminal it is if we kill them crap,we dont hurt innocent people where as they do.

3.Life doesnt mean life in the uk,murderers are lucky if they get sentenced to 10 years,and if by some miracle that they do get sentenced higher than usual,they then have nintendo wiis,playstations and xbox and xbox 360,plus they have more security guards protecting them than the average criminal,so yeah they suffer worse than death.

[Livia]

I'm not so sure the majority of people in the UK are in favour of the death penalty. I think it depends on which poll you look at.

If the death penalty was actually a deterrent I'd probably agree with it. But it isn't. I do believe that hopeless cases should be in prison for life, though. A life sentence should mean life - not ten years and out in seven.

[joeysteele]

1.Who was the murderer,rapists and pedophiles to judge on whoes lives they was going to destroy.

2.Not that stupid argument of we are no better than the killer or whatever criminal it is if we kill them crap,we dont hurt innocent people where as they do.

3.Life doesnt mean life in the uk,murderers are lucky if they get sentenced to 10 years,and if by some miracle that they do get sentenced higher than usual,they then have nintendo wiis,playstations and xbox and xbox 360,plus they have more security guards protecting them than the average criminal,so yeah they suffer worse than death.

I am not in favour of the death penalty overall but you point out some areas where I would support it, as to Paedophiles who kill children and I would also support it for someone committing multiple murders.

Sections 2 and 3 of your post are very strong points indeed and you are right, we don't hurt people in the first place so we cannot be the same as the Murderer if they were executed, they have already committed the murder.

You are also correct as to life not being life, I agree a life sentence should be that for murder and mean the rest of your life.

[MeMyselfAndI]

Bring it back and have the guy who threw the dog off the roof the first victim of it

[Suze]

Personally I am not in favour of the death penalty,however for multiple murders and child murderers I doubt I would lose any sleep for those if we had the death penalty.

For me the 100% certainty factor in a lot of cases is what worries me and there have been many proven miscarriages of justice to make me not want the death penalty back.
I could be persuaded to go along with it for the above crimes I mentioned above.

I am in the minority I know, as most people I know would vote to bring the death penalty back and poll after poll suggests the majority is with them.
However, I cannot see in my lifetime any Govt prepared to take the miscarriages of justice risks and therefore bringing the death penalty back in the UK.

I agree with your post, and am against the death penalty being brought back.

[Jords]

For severe crimes with 100% proof, yes.

[joeysteele]

I agree with your post, and am against the death penalty being brought back.

Thank you very much Suze.

[Niall]

1.Who was the murderer,rapists and pedophiles to judge on whoes lives they was going to destroy.

2.Not that stupid argument of we are no better than the killer or whatever criminal it is if we kill them crap,we dont hurt innocent people where as they do.

3.Life doesnt mean life in the uk,murderers are lucky if they get sentenced to 10 years,and if by some miracle that they do get sentenced higher than usual,they then have nintendo wiis,playstations and xbox and xbox 360,plus they have more security guards protecting them than the average criminal,so yeah they suffer worse than death.

You're right in a sense, they had no place to judge whether or not another person should remain living but do you really think the suitable punishment for their crime is death? I think thats like giving them a get out of jail free card.

Jail is worse then death anyways. You can't leave whenever you like, if you're jailed for life you will never have your freedom back again, you won't be able to see family members freely like you may have once upon a time. To be honest, I think the psychological ramifications of life in prison far outweigh the death penalty.

Also if I was running the prisons then I would make sure that murders etc wouldn't be allowed out if they are given life.

I believe the death penalty is amoral, wrong and backwards. :/

[Jords]

You're right in a sense, they had no place to judge whether or not another person should remain living but do you really think the suitable punishment for their crime is death? I think thats like giving them a get out of jail free card.

Jail is worse then death anyways. You can't leave whenever you like, if you're jailed for life you will never have your freedom back again, you won't be able to see family members freely like you may have once upon a time. To be honest, I think the psychological ramifications of life in prison far outweigh the death penalty.

Also if I was running the prisons then I would make sure that murders etc wouldn't be allowed out if they are given life.

I believe the death penalty is amoral, wrong and backwards. :/

The thing is with the death penalty being an option for punishment, it should help reduce such awful crime out of fear..

[Niall]

The thing is with the death penalty being an option for punishment, it should help reduce such awful crime out of fear..

I doubt it really does work though. The U.S still have the death penalty in some states and the amount of homicides in that country are through the roof and ik guns are widely available there but still. O_o

[Stu]

The thing is with the death penalty being an option for punishment, it should help reduce such awful crime out of fear..
As would de facto, zero tolerance 'life meaning life' in strict prisons.

And at far less of a cost to the taxpayer.

It's ironic that most people who want the death penalty back seem to be historically right wing Christians. Apparently 'thou shalt not kill' had a footnote.

[joeysteele]

I don't think the death penalty would deter anyone determined to murder someone. As many say on here, the USA has largely in many States the death penalty and their murder rates are sky high.

[Pyramid*]

I don't think the death penalty would deter anyone determined to murder someone. As many say on here, the USA has largely in many States the death penalty and their murder rates are sky high.


Plus the penal system over there appears to be far stricter than our prison system - as you say, it's not the deterrant that it should be.

[bananarama]

It's the retarded, bloodlust hope of armchair warriors everywhere. Most of whom are too stupid to realize that the legal procudure involved would actually cost the state far more than housing a prisoner for life.

Never heard such bull manure in all my born days.,....

[Stu]

I'm not surprised that it took you more than a day to pop out.

[bananarama]

Bring it back and have the guy who threw the dog off the roof the first victim of it

Well said. They should also bring it back for burglars. Car thieves. Drug dealers to name just a few of the types of trash in the country that deserve the rope.....Wouldn't be a bad idea to hang the wooly minded soppy liberal type that crazily defend not getting rid of criminal rubbish......

Time the liberal types thought about the victims instead of their phoney goody goody two shoes idea of misguided moraility

[MTVN]

Well said. They should also bring it back for burglars. Car thieves. Drug dealers to name just a few of the types of trash in the country that deserve the rope.....Wouldn't be a bad idea to hang the wooly minded soppy liberal type that crazily defend not getting rid of criminal rubbish......

Time the liberal types thought about the victims instead of their phoney goody goody two shoes idea of misguided moraility

WTF is wrong with you

[Stu]

SELF PARODY ROFL

[/caps]

[Tom4784]

A lot of people confuse vengeance for justice. Justice should be impartial, fair and unfeeling. For the law to work we as civilised people need to be better then the criminals on trial. Torturing peadophiles and 'throwing people down dark holes for the rest of their lives' isn't being the better person, it's using the pretense of justice to justify crimes commited as punishment.

The Death Penalty is just state sanctioned murder and there's no reason for it as like Stu said it's more expensive then locking up a prisoner for life.

[Tom4784]

Well said. They should also bring it back for burglars. Car thieves. Drug dealers to name just a few of the types of trash in the country that deserve the rope.....Wouldn't be a bad idea to hang the wooly minded soppy liberal type that crazily defend not getting rid of criminal rubbish......

Time the liberal types thought about the victims instead of their phoney goody goody two shoes idea of misguided moraility

Why don't you just cut out the middle man trial and kill everyone accused of a crime? It's the next logical step no?

[Stu]

I'm tempted to change my custom status to 'soppy liberal type'.

[Shasown]

I'm tempted to change my custom status to 'soppy liberal type'.

I want to be 'wooly minded liberal type' on mine.


Well said. They should also bring it back for burglars. Car thieves. Drug dealers to name just a few of the types of trash in the country that deserve the rope.....Wouldn't be a bad idea to hang the wooly minded soppy liberal type that crazily defend not getting rid of criminal rubbish......

Time the liberal types thought about the victims instead of their phoney goody goody two shoes idea of misguided moraility

Good idea then after that we could start stoning people for adultery, cutting off hands for theft etc.


I just wonder all those people who say prisoners have it easy, have any of them ever done any time in jail? I dont mean a long weekend in the cells of the local police station for being drunk on a Friday night but proper time in prison?

I mean some of the current playstation generation may be able to endure staying in a small room for 20 odd hours a day, 365 days a year with only a TV and stand alone games console etc but it just doesnt appeal to me. I like being able to decide when I leave the house and where I go.

I have some friends who are prison officers and they all hold the opinion if you removed the little perks that prisoners have, suicide rates and trouble within the prisons they work in would shoot up.