If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
The Death Penalty
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Does anyone think we should bring back the death penalty? If so then why and if not, why not?
I personally think that the death penalty should be brought back for 3 reasons:
1) The mere threat of the death penalty can be used to discipline criminals as it is likely to put potential murderers off.
2) It'll save much needed space in prisons for lesser criminals
3) It'll take violent murderers and rapists off the streets for good.
As long as there is an efficient system of appeal available to the criminal at all stages of the prosecuting process, then I am in favour of the Death Penalty.
And..... oh go on then, should drugs be legalised?
I personally think that the death penalty should be brought back for 3 reasons:
1) The mere threat of the death penalty can be used to discipline criminals as it is likely to put potential murderers off.
2) It'll save much needed space in prisons for lesser criminals
3) It'll take violent murderers and rapists off the streets for good.
As long as there is an efficient system of appeal available to the criminal at all stages of the prosecuting process, then I am in favour of the Death Penalty.
And..... oh go on then, should drugs be legalised?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
but on the other hand your just bringing yourselves down to their level.
but i know if anyone of my close mates or family were brutally murdered/raped etc i would certainly want to see them pay, even though they get off easy, a lot of these 'lethal injections' are painless and dont compare to how much pain and suffering the criminal has caused
No way do I agree that the death penalty should be brought back, it stinks of the dark ages.
I don't think it will put murderers off as a lot of murders are committed on a whim and others are committed by deranged people who will do it no matter the potential consequences.
Also what about if a person was sentenced to death and later found to be innocence, no point having a re-trial for a dead man.
I believe in being tough on career criminals, rapists, murderers etc., but if we wanted to save spaces for lesser criminals, maybe we should try and reform the lesser ones so they wouldn't re-offend and be in prison at all.
Oh dear. Read my arguments properly.
If the potential consequence is death, then this will ensure that the same person does not recommit the crime at the next possible opportunity, i.e. he/she are off the streets forever.
Which is why I said that there must be a good system for appeal in place.
he/she could be off the street forever if they were locked up forever doesn't mean they have to be put to death.
I know that life sentences don't mean 'life' these days but I think a system of 'life means life' would be better than the current system and the death penalty.
Using Ian Brady as an example, hes been on hunger strike for two years and everyday hes chained to a machine to keep him alive. He knows he will never get out and all he wants is his own death but we won't allow it. Surely that is the worst punishment, the death penalty is far to quick and easy for the likes of him.
I couldn't disagree with the death penalty more than I do, for various reasons. With regard to the arguments giant has put in favour of the death penalty:
Very unlikely. Lessons from the US show that the death penalty is not a deterrent and does not prevent murders. Crime figures between States that have and haven't got capital punishment return similar rates.
Frankly, I find it rather shocking that you might argue for the death of a human being because of reasons of space.
In any case, you should consider that an executed prisoner costs the government far more money than one who is locked for life.
As it has been said before, so does a life sentence.
The bottom line is this: the human right is sacred and no government or power has the right to take it away. Estate-sponsored murder is no different from the murder committed by the condemned.
Yes life should mean life but some of the worst criminals get out after a certain number of years and they go on about their lives while others are still in despair over what this person may have done.
Ian huntley for example, what does anyone think he should get?
If life it should be life, not up for release after 20 years or something, but i can't decide on what he gets, it's up to the courts.
Let them be in prison and be afraid to turn their back, now thats more punishment and suffering than any lethal shot of anything.
Leave that one till the trials over. Innocent until proven guilty.
No it won't. Look at America, its had a great affect there hasn't it? Criminals don't usually think about consequences.
How about we put less people in prison, especially for drugs offences. Prison doesn't work and often exacerbates the situation.
If they don't have the right to take life, why does the state?
And this totally ignores possible miscarriages of justice.
Do they not come off drugs when in prison ? or at least a fairly large amount of people. I dont know the figures and have not looked into it but I seen a documentary once and there were about 9/10 people who had been inside for different crimes which were comitted purely because they had a drug problem, anyway they were thankful for being inside because they got off the drugs. I also read somewhere that they had drug rehab type things within the prison service and they also helped people come off drugs.
1. You mean like the death penalty stopped the Washington sniper?
2. Untrue. Instead of having them in normal prisons, you
have them in Death Row prisons for upwards of twenty years. Which have the added bonus of costing more to operate.
3. So would a life sentence. I dont recall Myra Hindley being on the street recently.
If they are "nutcases" you are saying that they are mentally ill. I dont know about you, but Im not in the business of killing seriously ill people just because we dont like them.
Justice is not a revenge mechanism. Besides, how is killing someone going to bring another person back to life?
The worst criminals do not get out, witness Hindley and West in particular.
Putting the cart before the horse there a bit arent we?
The whole system is overcrowded, and the 700 or so people currently in jail for not paying the BBC Tax are crowding it far more than the minute number of people who have comitted serious enough offences to "merit" death.
Thats exactly the crux of the debate. Mumia Thingummy in the US has recently had his conviction overturned, if memory serves me right, and there are umpteen cases in the UK where, had the death penalty still been in force, would have seen gross miscarriages of justice. Take the Birmingham Six and Guildford Four for instance, theyd be dead now, despite their innocence.
One of the last deaths in the UK was a shaky conviction for murder, where the famous words "let him have it" were enough to see a man die. Even though what the shooter took them to mean was not the intended meaning.
Ive said it before, no matter what anyone has done, they do not deserve to be killed for it. And on a far more cynical reason, there is a REASON why Ian Brady has been on hunger strike, and Fred West committed suicide. Its because they dont want to be stuck in a room for the rest of their lives. What better punishment than one that they dont want?
More reliable than using bunny rabbits in labs, use a child-rapist and get results.
Please be joking. Please.
Some come off drugs, some don't. Depends on the services available inside. Some people go in without a habit and come out with one. There is some evidence that since the introduction of mandatory drug testing, prisoners have switched from using cannabis inside to using heroin. Some prison officers turn a blind eye to drug use within prisons as it pacifies the prisoners. Yes, some people do detox whilst inside, but a lot don't.
My point is though, that drug use should not be viewed as a criminal matter, but a social and medical matter. People in prison for posession of drugs should not be there imo.
One of my old friends was a drug addict, he went to prison for attempted armed robbery, when he got out he told me how it was the best place to be to get your head sorted and off the drugs. He then told me how he struck a deal with the prison doctor to get a whole range of drugs including tranquilizers. Prison doesn't solve any drug problems.
I actually saw him last week for the first time in ages, I think hes been in prison a couple of times since. By the look of him hes still on something, he didn't know who I was.
Fair enough really, though I dont think that they should get away without any punishment. Maybe they should have to spend some time at a secure detox unit instead, just to force them to get better I guess.
Dealers should rot in there though.
Punishment for possession of drugs? Why?
And why should dealers rot? Most of the problems caused by drugs are due to prohibition.
Are you on the same planet as the rest of us?:) (ive got a inkling as to why you wouldnt want to see dealers rot as well);)
Personally, Id like to see murderers giving a life sentance first WHICH MEANS LIFE. People like Brady, West etc dont deserve to get the easy way out and totally deserve to spend ever single day of thier life in solitary confinement, no tv, no books, nothing. They must pay for what they have done and in the worst way possible which i believe is this.
These arnt people who haved nicked ur TV etc, they people who have taken pleasure from taking innocent people and children off the streets and then torturing them and murdering them for thier own kicks, it really does begger belief that some people believe people like this should one day gain the right to live a free life again. Truly shocking.
I dont like the look at america argument agaisnt the death penalty either, I think the murders in america have more to do with poor gun control and cultural differences IMO. Look at Saudi Arabia, they have a zero tolerance approach to all crime and they have one of the best crime rates on earth.
Yes thanks. Please enlighten me as to how jailing people for simple possession is helping anyone. You can tell me how the "war on drugs" is helping matters as well, while you're at it.
because its an offence ? if you do something your not allowed to and get caught you get done for it, regardless of what it is you do wrong.
Yes I know they are illegal. That wasn't the question. Do you need me to repeat it?
Not a hard question is it?
So everyone who breaks the law should receive a custodial sentence?
Do you drink alcohol?
Again anyone who commits an offence should be charged. If someone is caught for posession then its their tough luck, they know the consequences and if they dont like it then dont do drugs........end of.
Let me ask you a question:
Why should they get away with it when they know its an offence ? Does that mean that because I know shoplifting is an offence I can still go and shoplift and get away with it ?
Depends what they did, how many times they have done it etc. For 1st time offenders (depending on the crime id say give them a warning), only one warning and the next time come down hard.
that is not an offence, really this is getting silly.