[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

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]

Originally Posted by MB.

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.