The death penalty...your views please

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

I don't normally bother with it but sorry, that's gotta be post of the week.

theres nowt worse than a pissed off dead person.

Former Member

execution doesn't seem to stop people killing people in the places that have execution.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

execution doesn't seem to stop people killing people in the places that have execution.

Exactly. Japan has low murder rates, but American states with the death penalty don't. So clearly it's nothing to to with the death penalty itself.

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

I don't normally bother with it but sorry, that's gotta be post of the week.

haha well i am a bit pissed

Former Member

This is something I'm unsure about. Part of me thinks yes, because then it won't cost the taxpayer and it does seem (for some people anyway) the only way of keeping them out of trouble. Of course, it would also make us as bad as the criminals. It's basically saying 'it's alright for the state to go and kill people, but the average man can't.'

Former Member

I'm With Stupid wrote:

Exactly. Japan has low murder rates, but American states with the death penalty don't. So clearly it's nothing to to with the death penalty itself.

Japan also has the death penalty

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

srious killers do not get out in five years ...hows ian brady doing?
but ...pinch a shit load of money ...and you get thirty years.

Well yeah, there's a clear message in there about the way we hold money in a more important rank than people's lives and well-being. Sad state of affairs.

I agree that the financial argument is a lame one, and an obvious smokescreen for what I think is debatably more barbaric motivation. It boils down to the childhood lesson that if someone does you wrong that's not a free ticket to wreak revenge, we have to maintain perspective and our basic human values which are [or should be] live and let live. I'm aware that people would say "oh, but the murderer didn't let so and so live". The old Gandhi quote - an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind is never more germane than when talking about the death penalty imo.

I am unequivocally anti-DP, there's not a crime in the world that would allow me to feel vindicated in taking someone else's life. That's the long and short of it, for me.

Former Member

Balddog wrote:

Japan also has the death penalty

Yeah I know, that's what I meant.

Former Member

\

Former Member

sophia wrote:

it's about whether I think anyone else ever has the right to take someone else's life as punishment or retribution, and I don't.

So you'd be against imprisoning somebody for the rest of their life for some heinous crime? Permanently withdrawing somebody's freedom is imo equivalent to directly taking somebody's life.

Former Member

\

Former Member

sophia wrote:

No, but I am against doing it for reasons of vengeance though. I think sometimes people who are dangerous to others have to be incarcerated to prevent them harming other people. Also, I think retribution and recompense do have some part to play in the healing process, and in achieving justice. Vengeance, however, does not.

Spot on. The death penalty serves no other purpose than revenge. And it makes the perpetrators no better than the condemned.

Former Member

Aladdin wrote:

And it makes the perpetrators no better than the condemned.

So anybody who advocates executing Ian Huntley is of the same ilk as Huntley?

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

So anybody who advocates executing Ian Huntley is of the same ilk as Huntley?

Well let's say you put someone with a gun in the same room as Ian Huntley, and they know he's committed the crime, and they shoot him, then yes, it would be the same as all other premeditated murders. Just because the person with a gun is replaced by something 'official' doesn't mean that it's any more moral.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

So anybody who advocates executing Ian Huntley is of the same ilk as Huntley?

On a certain level, yes for sure.

Both show no respect for the sanctity of human life.

Former Member

The death penalty represents the ultiamte intrusion of state power on the liberty of the individual. It has no place in modern society.

Indrid Cold

To make something clear about my own opinion: I do think that someone who decides on the death penalty for a murderer is no better than the murderer, and that no one has the right to take other people's lives. I only mentioned the other reason before because it's the one that has to do with fact and not opinion.

Former Member

Does society not have the right to take its own lives(life? )

If we all unanimously voted to give the state the right to execute us if we committed certain crimes, would it still be unjustifiabe..

Just curious

Former Member

stargalaxy wrote:

Five years was a completely random number that doesn't refer to any specific case. As for the theft of money, our authorities firmly believe that money is more important than human life. What else would explain the decisions to go to war in foreign countries, sometimes lying to get into those wars? What else would explain the refusal to do anything about the huge deficits building in the NHS, that could potentially cost lives?

Careful! You're sounding like a socialist.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

Careful! You're sounding like a socialist.

Coming from one of the most right-wing members on the boards, that might sound bizarre. But it's the observation I make. Our authorities are more interested in wasting money on illegal wars than anything else. Give it a few weeks at most - we'll hear of thousands more troops being deployed in Afghanistan. Millions more in pounds wasted on a war that we can't win.

Former Member

Disillusioned wrote:

So you'd be against imprisoning somebody for the rest of their life for some heinous crime? Permanently withdrawing somebody's freedom is imo equivalent to directly taking somebody's life.

You think? Really? So you can bring people back from the dead can you? Wow! Impressive!

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

You think? Really? So you can bring people back from the dead can you? Wow! Impressive!

you also cant turn back time and give people back the years theyve lost...

at least with death you dont know youve lost anything....

Former Member

Balddog wrote:

you also cant turn back time and give people back the years theyve lost...

at least with death you dont know youve lost anything....

but family and friends would ...

Former Member

Balddog wrote:

you also cant turn back time and give people back the years theyve lost...

No, you can't. However you can pay people compensation money.

Balddog wrote:

at least with death you dont know youve lost anything....

I think I know what option the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 etc would prefer.

Former Member

Accepting the death penalty in certain cases in my opinion is acceptable, but only in certain, rare cases. Those who are extremely dangerous to members of society and no matter how many attempts are made, can never be reformed and always pose a serious danger to others.

I dont think accepting the death penality makes you as bad as a criminal, like a murder or child rapist, its just understanding that sometimes locking some one up for ever is pointless when forced Euthanasia can be applied.

Former Member

subject13 wrote:

its just understanding that sometimes locking some one up for ever is pointless when forced Euthanasia can be applied.

You could easily turn that around and say killing someone is pointless when you can protect the public by keeping them locked up forever.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

but family and friends would ...

but then theres the argument that family and friends can move on from a death...but if someone they love is locked away for their whole lives without chance of release, it also holds family and friends prisoner..they can never move on with their lives...

Unless of course they try to forget the guy in prison...in which case its even worse for him.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

No, you can't. However you can pay people compensation money.



I think I know what option the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4 etc would prefer.

Compensation money....great

I dont know what id prefer...it would depend what happened...If i had to live in prison knowing that I was missing my daughter growing up...or that I would see my loved ones die or even worse, forget me totally, I dont know whether id want to keep living..

Former Member

Balddog wrote:

you also cant turn back time and give people back the years theyve lost...

at least with death you dont know youve lost anything....

So, what would happen if you were to execute someone and it turned out that they were the wrong person? Nothing can be done there, but if you throw them in prison, they can be released and possibly be given compensation for what they've had to suffer.

Former Member

Balddog wrote:

Compensation money....great

I dont know what id prefer...it would depend what happened...If i had to live in prison knowing that I was missing my daughter growing up...or that I would see my loved ones die or even worse, forget me totally, I dont know whether id want to keep living..

I think if it ever came down to it, you'd feel differently. If you were wrongly convicted, you'd have the chance to appeal to continue to protest your innocence and maybe get a pardon at some point. No chance of that if you're dead.