Do you believe in the death penalty?

[Ninastar]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but people do change their minds, plus I've not seen it spoken about in quite a while.

Of course this is only if someone is 100% guilty and there is concrete evidence that they have committed the crime in question.

I'm pretty mixed on this... In some ways I don't believe that people who commit totally gruesome crimes should get the easy way out as I believe death itself is peaceful, and that the person should have to live with their crimes for the rest of their lives.

On the other hand, I believe that if the death penalty did exist and someone killed a family member(s), I'd want them dead and I wouldn't feel at peace knowing that they were still alive, getting fed so many times a day, when there are kind people on the streets who don't eat at all.

I think most people think 'well, it depends on the case' and I totally understand that. I wouldn't want someone to get the death penalty for stealing a packet of gum from a newsagents, lol. I'm only talking about cases like mass murder, torture, terrorism etc etc...

I'd like to hear other opinions about this. I think the best way to open your mind is to have discussions with other people.

Poll coming...

[Jack_]

Absolutely not. In a nutshell it is primitive, the easy way out and completely hypocritical.

[Kizzy]

No I don't I feel it would be a massive step backwards, I would prefer they had to live with the guilt of what they had done segregated from society for the rest of their natural life.

[arista]

Absolutely not. In a nutshell it is primitive, the easy way out and completely hypocritical.



Have you had time to Visit America
its no way Primitive.
Its a Free Nation,
Fantastic.

Obey the Law
no problem.

[Northern Monkey]

No,I've never been in favour of it.Do i think some terrorists,murderers or perverts deserve to die slowly and horribly?Yes.However i don't think the state should hold such powers unless in a war situation or in a deadly situation.I do think a terrorist who is involved in an attack in progress should be shot on site though.

[Drew.]

Depends on the circumstances. Situations where people are guilty for one specific moment of killing or whatever they've done then i'd prefer to see them live out their lives with regret and not have the easy way out. I've seen documentaries where people on death row have changed for the better. When it comes to terrorists/leaders and people in general responsible for causing as many deaths as possible then i'd rather see them wiped off the earth completely.. they have no regret to live with and theres more fear knowing they're alive still.

[Jordan.]

Unless a life sentence actually meant they served life in prison I'd support it

[LukeB]

I was meant to vote mixed reviews because some criminals are not actually guilty of murdering or other crimes

[Loukas]

No, i see it as an easy option, let them rot away in prison! A life sentence should mean exactly that though, no parole, ever.

[Shaun]

One hundred percent behind life meaning life in prison but can't in all good conscience ever justify the death penalty. The very fact that it'd take me being personally affected by a murder or hideous crime is reason enough that I shouldn't be the responsible party for their punishment, it's just all very Shylock... law and justice should always be free from emotional bias.

[Firewire]

Absolutely not

[AnnieK]

I am torn on this. On one hand, taking a life for a life seems all very primitive but having said that I despise having my taxes going towards paying for scumbags who have committed heinous crimes to live in relative comfort. I would rather bring in hard labour, life meaning life without chance of parole or luxuries and let them spend the rest of their mortal lives with regret and no chance of freedom.

However, were someone to murder one of mine, I would like 10 minutes in a room with many knives..them being dead or alive won't change what's happened but I would like to extract my own revenge.

[Jamie89]

Voted no. Mainly because it's extremely rare that you can be 100% sure someone is guilty, there are too many cases of people on death row being found to be innocent on new evidence for me to be able to support it. Also, life (meaning life) in jail is a more civilised approach imo, which is what sets us apart from murderers/rapists/peodophiles etc

[Mystic Mock]

If without a shadow of a doubt the person is guilty then I don't have a problem with it as tbf at least it means that there's more space in Prisons for other crimes.

I'm not comfortable with it for the most part though as it's near impossible to prove that someone is 100% guilty.

[Braden]

I just can't get my head round the fact that some people could be put to death for a crime they did not commit.

I know it's easy to say 'only in cases where the evidence is 100% valid', but even so I don't think it's the appropriate action. And like other people have said it is quite hypocritical and the easy option.

[Jamie89]

I am torn on this. On one hand, taking a life for a life seems all very primitive but having said that I despise having my taxes going towards paying for scumbags who have committed heinous crimes to live in relative comfort. I would rather bring in hard labour, life meaning life without chance of parole or luxuries and let them spend the rest of their mortal lives with regret and no chance of freedom.

Completely agree. Especially if it means that society will benefit in some way from their labour.

However, were someone to murder one of mine, I would like 10 minutes in a room with many knives..them being dead or alive won't change what's happened but I would like to extract my own revenge.

I totally understand this Annie, and I'd probably feel the same if I was in that situation, but I don't think legislation should be based on the victims emotion.

[DemolitionRed]

Murder is murder, whether its the state murdering a criminal or a criminal murdering an innocent.
The death sentence doesn't deter Americans. As of July 1, 2015, there were 2,984 people on death row; this obviously changes daily.

Life should mean life.

[AnnieK]

Completely agree. Especially if it means that society will benefit in some way from their labour.



I understand this Annie, and I'd probably feel the same if I was in that situation, but I don't think legislation should be based on the victims emotion.

Yeah I do agree really.....at the end of the day nothing would change other than I would have done to another family what had been done to mine. Still would want to though

[Ammi]

..I don't see any sense or logic at all in the death penalty..with murder..?..one person is dead/or people are dead, so another life is taken in return, where is the punishment../there just isn't any, the dead cannot be punished so there is no 'payment' for their crime...if my child was murdered, I still could never think that the death penalty was right or something that I would want because all that would be doing is taking the life of another mother's/parent's child and causing another family the same pain...that's something that I would never wish for or think was right...

[Johnnyuk123]

Yes get rid asap.

[joeysteele]

I have mixed views, actually in a 'fun' election game on here a few years ago,one of mine and Mocks policies was to bring it back, with very strong criteria and very long criteria needed to be fulfilled and ticked before it could be carried out.
My view does alter and overall I would be against it.

However for me the sickening events of child sexual abuse and then afterwards the murdering of that child,I find so sickening,perhaps I could be persuaded in that instance that the person should forfeit their right to life,in prison or otherwise.
Equally so, such as with that horrendous murder of Lee Rigby, the Soldier, where it was even filmed and it was clear who did the brutal murder there,I could well support the death penalty in that instance too.

On a flat question put to me however as to yes or no to bring it back, I would vote no at this moment in time.

[Black Dagger]

Absolutely not. I'm not blood thirsty enough for it.

[EspeonBB]

I'd say no just because I don't believe in punishing someone for murder or any other heinous crime by... murdering them :shrug:

Plus I think it would be awful if someone got put to death and it turned out they were innocent (yeah ik it would most likely be used in cases where there is overwhelming evidence but there's no way to know for definite)

[Ammi]

I have mixed views, actually in a 'fun' election game on here a few years ago,one of mine and Mocks policies was to bring it back, with very strong criteria and very long criteria needed to be fulfilled and ticked before it could be carried out.
My view does alter and overall I would be against it.

However for me the sickening events of child sexual abuse and then afterwards the murdering of that child,I find so sickening,perhaps I could be persuaded in that instance that the person should forfeit their right to life,in prison or otherwise.
Equally so, such as with that horrendous murder of Lee Rigby, the Soldier, where it was even filmed and it was clear who did the brutal murder there,I could well support the death penalty in that instance too.

On a flat question put to me however as to yes or no to bring it back, I would vote no at this moment in time.

..I think the thing for me in those examples/cases, Joey...if the death penalty was there for some cases and not others..?..no matter how horrendous the crime, it's a bit like putting a value on a life or 'rating' the taking of a life....and the value of any taken life is of equal value to every family who has lost someone...

[joeysteele]

..I think the thing for me in those examples/cases, Joey...if the death penalty was there for some cases and not others..?..no matter how horrendous the crime, it's a bit like putting a value on a life or 'rating' the taking of a life....and the value of any taken life is of equal value to every family who has lost someone...

I agree, despite some of my thoughts, I can be persuaded it is best left in the past rather than bring it back.
So all you say I can and do take on board to add to my own thinking as to this.
I always look at the plus and minus to any issue and on this one, I have far more on the minus side to supporting it,than plus.

[RichardG]

No if I ever committed a bad enough crime then I'd love the death penalty, it's a much easier option than having to spend the rest of your life in prison (assuming life means life of course). It lets them off way too easily, locking them up forever constantly reminded of what they did is a much harsher punishment I think.

[Ninastar]

Loving the mixed opinions. I think people who are against it are just better people than me. I'm the type of person who doesn't have any sympathy for those who commit horrific crimes and I don't really care about their outcome... I know it makes me a bad person, but I'm someone who believes in karma.

[Shaun]

I don't think it's about being better or more mature or whatever, it's an obviously emotional subject and 99% of people who, if they were to be affected by someone in a murderous/rapey/predatory way, would always want the perpetrator dead or wish them harm or whatever... it's just a matter of the state acting as a means of punishment rather than the victim's relatives / mob mentality.

And there's no right / comfortable answer. On the one hand (as RichardG put it), death can be an easy get-out for a criminal, be it for martyrdom (ie. most terrorists) or just general suicidal reasons; but as AnnieK said, lifetime in prison is a massive drain on the taxpayer. And obviously plays into the hands of those who criticise prisons for being too soft (which I'd agree with, games consoles and the sort you hear of need to be done away with).

It's just... killing to punish killing doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Redway]

Nope. Two wrongs ≠ a right.

[Ammi]

Loving the mixed opinions. I think people who are against it are just better people than me. I'm the type of person who doesn't have any sympathy for those who commit horrific crimes and I don't really care about their outcome... I know it makes me a bad person, but I'm someone who believes in karma.

..it doesn't make you a bad person at all Caitlin, not one bit... I just believe that taking the life of someone who has taken a life, shortens the gap between who we are and who that person is, that's not karma or justice because it takes us closer to them..?...but with the karma thing and what Joey said about the torture and murder of a child...Daniel Pelka's mother 'took her own life' in prison and his stepfather has just been found dead in prison, so karma maybe..?...and they went to prison/we can't make karma, karma makes itself...and it decides when to make itself...

[King Gizzard]

Never, ever, under any circumstance

[King Gizzard]

I cba getting into detail about these things cause it's been on here so many times but 1. Yeah, two wrongs don't make a right 2. A lot of criminals will see it as a way out. Let them live with their guilt, and if they have none they must be insane to some degree. Rather have kennel conditions, horrible food and water. You'll save a lot of money by just giving them the bare basics. **** their human rights

[Anaesthesia]

I am also undecided. I do believe a life sentence should be a life sentence. Yet at the same time, there is the issue that we taxpayers are paying a lot of money to keep someone alive who is a very bad person...not only the expense, but there will never be any chance of rehabilitation, and you also need to consider, if you think that these people do in fact have a conscience...that by keeping them alive, we are causing them to be tortured for the rest of their lives.

There are some I think should be euthanised, Levi Bellfield is the first that springs to mind.

[Shaun]

I'm not sure I see the link between prison being torture?

[Anaesthesia]

..it doesn't make you a bad person at all Caitlin, not one bit... I just believe that taking the life of someone who has taken a life, shortens the gap between who we are and who that person is, that's not karma or justice because it takes us closer to them..?...but with the karma thing and what Joey said about the torture and murder of a child...Daniel Pelka's mother 'took her own life' in prison and his stepfather has just been found dead in prison, so karma maybe..?...and they went to prison/we can't make karma, karma makes itself...and it decides when to make itself...

Do you know Ammi, and I think this is really weird. I read the BBC news every day (not even in HD) , and for the last two days, a resurrected thread has been trending - that of Daniel Pelka's mother taking her own life, a story from July 2015. I almost missed the story of the stepfather also being dead, because I immediately thought it was about the mother again.

I find this really bizarre, that this thread is brought back trending just before the latest news.

[Anaesthesia]

I'm not sure I see the link between prison being torture?


I didn't say it was, I was implying the weight of their conscience, should they have one, would be.

[Kizzy]

Loving the mixed opinions. I think people who are against it are just better people than me. I'm the type of person who doesn't have any sympathy for those who commit horrific crimes and I don't really care about their outcome... I know it makes me a bad person, but I'm someone who believes in karma.

I don't have any sympathy either, for me karma would be the constant daily reflection.
Death is too easy.

[Mystic Mock]

I cba getting into detail about these things cause it's been on here so many times but 1. Yeah, two wrongs don't make a right 2. A lot of criminals will see it as a way out. Let them live with their guilt, and if they have none they must be insane to some degree. Rather have kennel conditions, horrible food and water. You'll save a lot of money by just giving them the bare basics. **** their human rights

I hate that saying as sometimes people do need to get an eye for an eye, like for example if someone spits in your face are you not allowed to retaliate? I know it's not the same as what we're talking about here but sometimes two wrongs do make a right imo.

[JoshBB]

The death penalty is a medieval way to deal with criminals, and it has no place in modern british society. I think that summarises my view on this subject.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes, pistol shot to the back of the head and body incinerated as quick as we can

saves money, gives revenge and justice to victims families

[Crimson Dynamo]

I don't have any sympathy either, for me karma would be the constant daily reflection.
Death is too easy.

psychopaths do not have that mental facility and many child killers and rapists commit crimes just to fantasise about them for years after

You may suffer if you were banged up but for the average rapists and killer they dont care

[Kazanne]

psychopaths do not have that mental facility and many child killers and rapists commit crimes just to fantasise about them for years after

You may suffer if you were banged up but for the average rapists and killer they dont care

Agree with this,made a good point there LT.

[smudgie]

Yes, I am all for it, providing there is absolutely no doubt about their guilt, secondly it must be a humane way to send them off.
Maybe get a vet to do it.
Taxpayers money could be spent much better on other things.

[Kizzy]

psychopaths do not have that mental facility and many child killers and rapists commit crimes just to fantasise about them for years after

You may suffer if you were banged up but for the average rapists and killer they dont care

I don't know what percentage of killers are psychopaths, I wouldn't say it warranted a change in the law.
In fact if it was due to a brain injury or affliction I'd have more sympathy.

[lostalex]

Yes i would support it if we had a perfect justice system. but there are no perfect justice systems in the world, so i am against it for now. I don't think it's wrong to kill a killer though, morally i think it's fine.

[Amy Jade]

Mixed.

On one hand I think it's a step backwards and there is always that fear that a person supposedly 100% guilty could be innocent and as somebody else suggested there have been times when a person has changed and could benifit society now.

In other cases I think it's just justice, like if Jihad John was found alive I'd want him dead, even if he was imprisoned he would never feel remorse for his crimes and you can imagine his life from John would not be that bad and he could continue or castrating hate from inside.

Another case I can see the death penalty coming into action is for pedophiles. Just kill them to stop even the smallest chance they can hurt another kid.

[kirklancaster]

I would build slendid new ampitheatres where convicted murders, terrorists, child-killers and cop-killers could be dressed and equipped in the style of gladiators and made to fight to the death.

Huge revenue could be raised from the cost of admission tickets to the public, which should be in line with say 'Front Row' seats to the theatre or major sporting venues, and also from the sale of food, drink, refreshments ice creams and souvenirs and novelties.

Before each show, the victims families can address the killer with something along the lines of:

"My name is Maximum Decimated Citizen, loving father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life and the next."

It would save the Crown a fortune, make it a fortune and provide much needed entertaintment considering the peurile shet that's on the telly.

No????

Ok then - Anyone for tennis?

[Ammi]

..I wouldn't even joke about it Kirk..:laugh:..that might be our reality TV of the future...

[Johnnyuk123]

I would build slendid new ampitheatres where convicted murders, terrorists, child-killers and cop-killers could be dressed and equipped in the style of gladiators and made to fight to the death.

Huge revenue could be raised from the cost of admission tickets to the public, which should be in line with say 'Front Row' seats to the theatre or major sporting venues, and also from the sale of food, drink, refreshments ice creams and souvenirs and novelties.

Before each show, the victmis families can address the killer with something along the lines of:

"My name is Maximum Decimated Citizen, loving father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life and the next."

It would save the Crown a fortune, make it a fortune and provide much needed entertaintment considering the peurile shet that's on the telly.

No????

Ok then - Anyone for tennis?

Yes make them play tennis but with hand grenades instead of tennis balls.

[Ammi]

..I watch too many movies, yes...

[kirklancaster]

..I wouldn't even joke about it Kirk..:laugh:..that might be our reality TV of the future...

:laugh: This is why you are MY Kween. :kiss:

[Johnnyuk123]

If you really wanna make some money to give back to the families who have lost loved ones to these murderers then why not make a horror movie using them. A Saw type of horror. The dvd sales would be through the roof.

[kirklancaster]

If you really wanna make some money to give back to the families who have lost loved ones to these murderers then why not make a horror movie using them. A Saw type of horror. The dvd sales would be through the roof.

:laugh: Snuff movies uh Johnny? Ammi would defo buy or rent a copy - She watches loads of movies. :laugh:

[lime]

No No..I do not believe in executions....It irks me beyond belief that in 2016 their still some folk that thirst over wanting to witness the death of anonther....I come from a country where street justice is considered the way forward.,....no trial ..public executions is shocking but I think those who cry out for this must witness it some times

[DemolitionRed]

No No..I do not believe in executions....It irks me beyond belief that in 2016 their still some folk that thirst over wanting to witness the death of anonther....I come from a country where street justice is considered the way forward.,....no trial ..public executions is shocking but I think those who cry out for this must witness it some times

I agree with this.
and to make it entertainment like some are suggesting here, would make us no better than the Saudis or Iranians who make executions a family day out.

We also have to remember that killers create many victims and that includes their own family members.

[Z]

I don't know, I just think the margin for error is not worth it - obviously if somebody is locked up for a crime they didn't commit they can never get the time back, but at least they're still alive and can work towards proving their innocence hopefully... I feel it's something we brush under the carpet in our past if people were given capital punishment and it then turns out they were innocent all along...

[Niamh.]

I don't know, I just think the margin for error is not worth it - obviously if somebody is locked up for a crime they didn't commit they can never get the time back, but at least they're still alive and can work towards proving their innocence hopefully... I feel it's something we brush under the carpet in our past if people were given capital punishment and it then turns out they were innocent all along...

Yeah, I agree with this

[Z]

Yeah, I agree with this

I'm trying to put myself in the position of somebody who lost someone they love in some kind of horrible crime... a murder... and they're led to believe that Person X committed this horrible crime and they grow to hate this person and want them to suffer as much as their loved one did... and the state sentences them to death, they die, and you start to maybe move on a little bit/completely only to then find out that that person was innocent and it was actually Person Y who killed your loved one... and now you have the guilt of wanting Person X to die when they did nothing wrong and now do you wish the same on Person Y or do you think twice about wanting them to die because what if they didn't do it and it was actually a third person, Person Z? It's just such a grey area and I wonder if maybe you'd have those feelings of regret even if Person X was the real culprit, feeling guilty for wishing death on someone... does that make you any better than Person X? I don't know, I can certainly see the arguments for capital punishment and think a lot of them are valid, but it's just not worth it for the small chance they've got it wrong.

[lostalex]

We all agree the justice system is ****ed up....

but what if it was a 100% certainty that the person was guilty of the worst crimes, like rape, torture, murder.

[Niamh.]

We all agree the justice system is ****ed up....

but what if it was a 100% certainty that the person was guilty of the worst crimes, like rape, torture, murder.

What's 100% though? It wouldn't work because you'd have to draw up some sort of guidlines of what is and what is not 100% and if something is not 100% shouldn't that be reasonable doubt and they shouldn't be in jail in the first place?

[Z]

We all agree the justice system is ****ed up....

but what if it was a 100% certainty that the person was guilty of the worst crimes, like rape, torture, murder.

But a lot of the time it's not a 100% certainty, it's only the most serious of crimes that get a proper analysis and even then you're relying on teams of lawyers trying to convince an impartial group of people to believe their argument - human error is always going to be a factor and I just don't feel confident that any trial can 100% prove someone's innocence or guilt - it's all based on arguing a point of view that a jury of people of different backgrounds, beliefs and abilities can most easily digest and come to a consensus on - if you have somebody accused of rape, that really is just somebody's word against somebody else's so the lawyers are trying to set up the scene around those words and make you not believe the accused/not believe the accuser... Certainly in murder trials there's forensic evidence but that's not fool proof either and how many stories have we heard of people being put away for crimes they didn't commit even now?

[lostalex]

But a lot of the time it's not a 100% certainty, it's only the most serious of crimes that get a proper analysis and even then you're relying on teams of lawyers trying to convince an impartial group of people to believe their argument - human error is always going to be a factor and I just don't feel confident that any trial can 100% prove someone's innocence or guilt - it's all based on arguing a point of view that a jury of people of different backgrounds, beliefs and abilities can most easily digest and come to a consensus on - if you have somebody accused of rape, that really is just somebody's word against somebody else's so the lawyers are trying to set up the scene around those words and make you not believe the accused/not believe the accuser... Certainly in murder trials there's forensic evidence but that's not fool proof either and how many stories have we heard of people being put away for crimes they didn't commit even now?

i'm talking about a hypothetical though, the poll says if you knew 100% they were guilty of the worst crimes...

you aren't reading the poll correctly.

[Z]

i'm talking about a hypothetical though, the poll says if you knew 100% they were guilty of the worst crimes...

you aren't reading the poll correctly.

I haven't read the poll lol, my bad. I can't imagine a scenario where somebody's guilt is 100% proven, I don't think I can get past that to answer the poll question to be completely honest. Evidence can be faked. Testimonies can be confused, they can be downright lies, they can be full of mistakes. Trials rest entirely upon strong arguments and the people that are chosen to be in the jury, that's all. Juries can be influenced or blackmailed. The whole system is susceptible to human error and while I do believe in it and think that it's overall a force for the greater good, I don't know if I totally trust it.

[lostalex]

I haven't read the poll lol, my bad. I can't imagine a scenario where somebody's guilt is 100% proven, I don't think I can get past that to answer the poll question to be completely honest. Evidence can be faked. Testimonies can be confused, they can be downright lies, they can be full of mistakes. Trials rest entirely upon strong arguments and the people that are chosen to be in the jury, that's all. Juries can be influenced or blackmailed. The whole system is susceptible to human error and while I do believe in it and think that it's overall a force for the greater good, I don't know if I totally trust it.

pretend we could resurrect the dead, they could testify in court as ghosts and point to exactly who murdered them.

or maybe a more realistic scenario, we could analyze brain matter, and see people's memories after they die. they have a way to analyze people's brains in an autopsy and we could see their exact memories and everything in their brains.

[Z]

pretend we could resurrect the dead, they could testify in court as ghosts and point to exactly who murdered them.

or maybe a more realistic scenario, we could analyze brain matter, and see people's memories after they die. they have a way to analyze people's brains in an autopsy and we could see their exact memories and everything in their brains.

But interpreting people's memories again would be down to humans, who are prone to error - the first time I was assaulted in my life I was walking along a well lit main road at night time and was approached by a group of guys, one of them punched me in the face twice and I fell onto the road, there was a car there sitting at the traffic lights when it happened. I was also completely sober. Do I remember the colour of the car? No. The number plate? No. The guy who punched me's face? No. The number of guys in the group? No. You lose a lot of the details when something happens to you really quickly like that, I don't even know if I'd trust the ability to have someone's memories unless it was a perpetrator carrying out a long period of abuse, and even then...

It's not that I think life is so valuable that it's a crime in itself to take it away, more that I don't really believe that human beings can devise a foolproof system of proving guilt and being able to categorically euthanise people who are 100% guilty - if that system existed, we'd have it by now or at least be working towards it, but there aren't even any signs that we might get to that point one day... as has already been said, I do resent that I'm being taxed partly to support people who are uselessly sat behind bars and I do think that maybe using them for labour might be a better idea so that they are at least contributing actively to the economy but then I don't think state sanctioned slave labour is the way forward either... what's happened to me, I used to be so strong in my convictions :laugh:!

[lostalex]

But interpreting people's memories again would be down to humans, who are prone to error - the first time I was assaulted in my life I was walking along a well lit main road at night time and was approached by a group of guys, one of them punched me in the face twice and I fell onto the road, there was a car there sitting at the traffic lights when it happened. I was also completely sober. Do I remember the colour of the car? No. The number plate? No. The guy who punched me's face? No. The number of guys in the group? No. You lose a lot of the details when something happens to you really quickly like that, I don't even know if I'd trust the ability to have someone's memories unless it was a perpetrator carrying out a long period of abuse, and even then...

It's not that I think life is so valuable that it's a crime in itself to take it away, more that I don't really believe that human beings can devise a foolproof system of proving guilt and being able to categorically euthanise people who are 100% guilty - if that system existed, we'd have it by now or at least be working towards it, but there aren't even any signs that we might get to that point one day... as has already been said, I do resent that I'm being taxed partly to support people who are uselessly sat behind bars and I do think that maybe using them for labour might be a better idea so that they are at least contributing actively to the economy but then I don't think state sanctioned slave labour is the way forward either... what's happened to me, I used to be so strong in my convictions :laugh:!


But your way of thinking is why so many murderers are able to go on killing more and more and more people.

[Z]

But your way of thinking is why so many murderers are able to go on killing more and more and more people.

Does capital punishment stop murders from happening? No. No system is foolproof. I understand that I'm erring on the side of caution to the point of wrapping everything in cotton wool but I'm speaking hypothetically and I'm ultimately glad I'm not in a position to decide whether or not we need capital punishment in our society, it's a tough call and definitely not one I could make.

[Ninastar]

When I say '100% guilty' I mean when there has been countless witnesses who have seen the crimes, the person has admitted they are guilty, fingerprints on weapons, camera/video evidence etc etc

There would have to be concrete evidence... otherwise I wouldn't make this thread/poll lol. There's no way I'd make a thread about this and mean that someone might not be guilty. Sorry, I should have made it clearer lol.

[Ammi]

When I say '100% guilty' I mean when there has been countless witnesses who have seen the crimes, the person has admitted they are guilty, fingerprints on weapons, camera/video evidence etc etc

There would have to be concrete evidence... otherwise I wouldn't make this thread/poll lol. There's no way I'd make a thread about this and mean that someone might not be guilty. Sorry, I should have made it clearer lol.

..you need to watch The Making of a Murderer, Caitlin..:laugh:..

[Ninastar]

Yeah, I do... But I've also seen reports of his now ex-wife saying that he's not innocent. I definitely want to watch this though.

Were his fingerprints found on weapons and stuff? Did he admit to being 'guilty'?

[Niamh.]

Yeah, I do... But I've also seen reports of his now ex-wife saying that he's not innocent. I definitely want to watch this though.

Were his fingerprints found on weapons and stuff? Did he admit to being 'guilty'?

No and no. Evidence is quite dodgy but you'd have to watch it

[Ammi]

Yeah, I do... But I've also seen reports of his now ex-wife saying that he's not innocent. I definitely want to watch this though.

Were his fingerprints found on weapons and stuff? Did he admit to being 'guilty'?

..:laugh:..it's far too complicated for any of those answers but it will make you think about '100%' in terms of the death penalty and how sure any of us can be to think that it would be a thing to have...

[Ninastar]

No and no. Evidence is quite dodgy but you'd have to watch it

Yeah, I will do. I just meant in my OP that before being subject to death penalty, there would have to be 100% evidence (with all the examples i posted) before any decisions were made. If there was uncertainty/the person still said they weren't guilty, I wouldn't wish for them to be sent to death row.

When I made the thread, I pictured a case I think I saw on youtube, where I saw this man happily admit had had made countless murders and even admitted to commit more if he ever got out. It was bizarre and a little scary to watch. Thats the type of person I'm talking about when I made this thread. Sorry for any confusion guys, I just thought that when I said '100% guilty' people would think along the same lines.

[TomC]

No because I think life imprisonment is a worse punishment than to die anyway.

[DemolitionRed]

No because I think life imprisonment is a worse punishment than to die anyway.

I agree but then life should mean life in prison and not partly in prison and partly on parole. The killers of Lee Rigby can be out on parole in 45 years and that means one of them will likely get parole when he's 63... that is just wrong

[Ninastar]

I agree but then life should mean life in prison and not partly in prison and partly on parole. The killers of Lee Rigby can be out on parole in 45 years and that means one of them will likely get parole when he's 63... that is just wrong

I also totally agree with this. I find the jail sentences in this country pretty lenient. I believe life should mean life.

[joeysteele]

An example of 100% certain case was the murder of Lee Rigby, the guy was talking about why he had done it with Lee's blood on his knife.
A woman had even gone to try to reason with him as to why.

No doubt there at all in that one as to the murder of Lee and who had carried it out too.

That kind of certainty would have to be the criteria for any death penalty and they would probably be very few and far between.
There however was a 100% certainty as to a murder and murderer.

[kirklancaster]

An example of 100% certain case was the murder of Lee Rigby, the guy was talking about why he had done it with Lee's blood on his knife.
A woman had even gone to try to reason with him as to why.

No doubt there at all in that one as to the murder of Lee and who had carried it out too.

That kind of certainty would have to be the criteria for any death penalty and they would probably be very few and far between.
There however was a 100% certainty as to a murder and murderer.

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

There are numerous other examples too.

[Kizzy]

How is it any punishment for those who feel it is honourable to die for their cause?

[DemolitionRed]

How is it any punishment for those who feel it is honourable to die for their cause?

Good point. The two guys who murdered Lee Rigsby wanted to be shot dead by the police. Being shot in the legs then sent to jail wasn't ever part of the plan.

[Ammi]

..I guess that another 'against' example would be right now and the family from Leeds, Geraldine Newman and her two children, Shannon and Shane being brutally murdered with a hammer...and now in Wales, possibly her ex husband committing suicide..?..so he's taken the 'coward's way' and not going to have to face what he's done, what would a trial and then the death penalty have achieved there, all it would mean is that he would have had to go through a trial and then be given exactly what he wanted in the first place/death...why should someone be given that/let them live many years and every day, face what they have done...

[Vicky.]

I have mixed views...theres always a possibility that its the wrong person even with a confession. Also its the easy way out in a way, I know I would rather be put to death than have life in a supermaxx prison or whatever. But I can see why families of victims see it as justice...

I would not be opposed to, however, removing the genitalia of known offending paedophiles. If that makes me barbaric then so be it. Either that or life (meaning life) in prison. With the 'normal' cons, who hate people who fiddle with kids.

So yeah, undecided on capital punishment and such

[user104658]

Loosely, my stance is this:

In a perfect system, with no margin of error, I have no problem with the death penalty when it comes to mass murderers / child killers etc. where completely innocent people were killed having done nothing.

I don't think it's ever appropriate in "normal" murder cases where the killer has an obvious motive... e.g. killing someone who had (from their perspective) "ruined their life" in some way. A one off killing with ANY explanation, really. People snap. Yes, they should be locked up for a very long time in those cases, but I'd reserve the death penalty only for people who are extremely dangerous and beyond any hope of redemption.

Bob can snap and kill Tim, who lied to company bosses causing Bob to lose his job / wife / children / home, for example, and not realistically be any risk to the general public on release from prison. John who kidnaps, tortures and kills strangers... not so much. They are and will be a risk to other human lives until their own is over.


HOWEVER... the system is so, SO far from perfect and has such huge, random margins for error and corruption that I could never actually support the death sentence. People have been killed, are on death row, and will be killed in future for crimes they did not commit. That is an absolute fact, and that is not acceptable.

[MB.]

I've changed my mind, any **** who abuses animals can suffer the same fate as whichever crime they did

[Alf]

No, I'd rather the likes of Peter Sutcliffe and Ian Huntley get a roof over their head rent free for the rest of their lives, no worries about paying bills, no worries about having to feed and clothe themselves, no worries about having to get up and go to work.

And all this paid for by the taxpayer.


While their victims get their life taken away for no reason.


But at least it makes us look humane that's the main thing, I'd hate someone to call me inhumane, that would really hurt my feelings.

[DemolitionRed]

I've changed my mind, any **** who abuses animals can suffer the same fate as whichever crime they did

I have the same emotional reaction when it comes to deliberately abusing an animal. Like children, I see animals as trustful innocents.