Capital Punishment

[Konrad von Carstein]

Probably going to get strung up for this:p but I am slowly coming to the conclusion that this should be reintroduced here.

 

I would caveat this view that it should only be implemented when there is no doubt that it was premeditated, ie going out "tooled up" should IMO be taken as a sign that you are prepared to use said weapon given the opportunity and therefore killing someone is a possibilty therefore it is premeditated.

 

It is depressing to here on the news about kids being shot or stabbed and killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

For the record I also thnk that going out while carrying a weapon should carry a strict sentence if caught.

 

Just wondering what other peoples thoughts are....

[alwaysthereinspirit]

We're way to lenient.

More years in jail for brandishing a fake gun inside a bank than raping someone.

Hang the bar stewards.

[davemclaren]

You could make some sort of case for it if it acted as a deterrent. However, I don't believe it does.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

I took the SJ option. I think CP should be brought back but only if there is no doubt about the guilt ie. 100%. In this day and age with DNA I think most of them are pretty much conclusive anyway!

 

[Deevers]

Bring it back and back date it as well. that we we could clear up the prison overcrowding problem in no time at all.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

Whats the point

 

Criminals commit crimes on the whole thinking their not going to get caught, if they knew they would they wouldnt be doing it

 

Therefore the thinking would be they would be fine anyway

 

I think we need to come up with more jail room and force people to serve larger sentences

 

You have murders from the 70's and 80's etc still serving time when comparable people more recently are long out

 

Its time the days of 30 year sentences become more common and petty criminals are locked up instead of giving asbo after asbo

[Toggie88]

What would it do?

 

As a previous poster has mentioned - it wouldn't act as a detterent.

[Konrad von Carstein]

Just back from watchin the pesh that is Scotland. I am bit surprised at the view point of those who say it would'nt be a deterrent.

Nedster on a Sat night "Im gonnna take the chib/gun tonight...oh wait if I get caught with it 5 years...hmmm mibbe I won't take it"

After the first few who are jailed/executed surely he message would get through...surely?

[jambos are go!]

You either believe in taking a life or you dont. Capital Punishment is murder by concensus and is an affront to humanity.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

Just back from watchin the pesh that is Scotland. I am bit surprised at the view point of those who say it would'nt be a deterrent.

Nedster on a Sat night "Im gonnna take the chib/gun tonight...oh wait if I get caught with it 5 years...hmmm mibbe I won't take it"

After the first few who are jailed/executed surely he message would get through...surely?

 

and what crimes do you propose the death penalty for?

 

Whilst the thought of people walking around with knifes is pretty bad you couldnt start killing them for it

 

The death penalty would need to be reserved for crimes like murder, rape, terrorism etc and these already carry lengthy sentences and I think someone who is willing to risk them will still risk it for the death penalty

 

Its also worth noting most crimes of this nature are impulsive so again their unlikely to consider the deterrent argument

[Konrad von Carstein]

Or you believe that the worst elements in society should be aware that the price for taking a life may be the loss of your own.

An affront to humanity..,please...what is an affront to humanity is that there are people in society who live thier lives with no regard or thought for the rest of us and regard "normal" people as an inconvenience to thier lifestyle.

[Konrad von Carstein]

and what crimes do you propose the death penalty for?

 

Whilst the thought of people walking around with knifes is pretty bad you couldnt start killing them for it

 

The death penalty would need to be reserved for crimes like murder, rape, terrorism etc and these already carry lengthy sentences and I think someone who is willing to risk them will still risk it for the death penalty

 

Its also worth noting most crimes of this nature are impulsive so again their unlikely to consider the deterrent argument

 

Read my initial post...I suggested that it should only apply where there is NO doubt. With regard to carrying knives, my opinion is that if you take one out with you like other people take keys then it should be subject to a severe sentance if caught.

IMO the fact that there are lowlifes out there who will continue to behave in this manner means that instead of society paying for them to be clothed, fed and cared for they should be removed and our responsibility for them ends at the end of a rope/or needle.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

Read my initial post...I suggested that it should only apply where there is NO doubt. With regard to carrying knives, my opinion is that if you take one out with you like other people take keys then it should be subject to a severe sentance if caught.

IMO the fact that there are lowlifes out there who will continue to behave in this manner means that instead of society paying for them to be clothed, fed and cared for they should be removed and our responsibility for them ends at the end of a rope/or needle.

 

I have not mentioned anything about doubt, its a valid criticism though

 

As for suggesting some little kid who takes a knife out should be hung, I do not actually know what to say to that

 

Next you will be suggestion people who speed should have their legs cut off

[Konrad von Carstein]

I have not mentioned anything about doubt, its a valid criticism though

 

As for suggesting some little kid who takes a knife out should be hung, I do not actually know what to say to that

 

Next you will be suggestion people who speed should have their legs cut off

 

You see, this is exactly the attitude that has allowed the base element of our society to continue thier selfish behaviour unabated.

And for the third time I do not suggest CARRYING a knife should mean the death penalty...however the consequenses of routinely doing so should be severe.

You carry a knife...you are in danger of using it....therefore you are in danger of killing someones son/daughter/father/mother

[BlackJAC?]

Anyone that thinks the government should have the power to execute its own citizens is either taking the **** or needs to stop reading The Sun.

[BlackJAC?]

Read my initial post...I suggested that it should only apply where there is NO doubt. With regard to carrying knives, my opinion is that if you take one out with you like other people take keys then it should be subject to a severe sentance if caught.

IMO the fact that there are lowlifes out there who will continue to behave in this manner means that instead of society paying for them to be clothed, fed and cared for they should be removed and our responsibility for them ends at the end of a rope/or needle.

 

You mean like the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six?

[Konrad von Carstein]

Anyone that thinks the government should have the power to execute its own citizens is either taking the **** or needs to stop reading The Sun.

 

Never read the Sun in my puff...just a guy who see gangsters, junkies and other lowlifes slowly making ordinary peoples lives a misery. Oh and you forgot the IMO at the end of your post. Read the poll results very interesting stats.

[BlackJAC?]

Never read the Sun in my puff...just a guy who see gangsters, junkies and other lowlifes slowly making ordinary peoples lives a misery. Oh and you forgot the IMO at the end of your post. Read the poll results very interesting stats.

 

You really haven't thought this through properly, have you?

[Konrad von Carstein]

You really haven't thought this through properly, have you?

 

Smart comment notwithstanding...your opinion is valid as is mine and I'm man enough to accept this.

 

I have second hand experience of someone being murdered (my sis's stepson) and the misery and impotent rage and frustration this event caused has only served to crystalyse my own thoughts on the matter.

 

I sincerely hope that no one you know and love has to go through an experience like the one this young boys family and friends have just had.

[BlackJAC?]

Basically, mate, whilst I couldn't begin to imagine what it's like to have someone close to me murdered by some lowlife, I really don't think having a judicial system based on vengeance and emotion is in anyone's interest.

 

How the hell would you feel if they had hung the wrong person? Shrug your shoulders and accept **** happens?

 

like i touched upon in a previous post there will always be miscarriages of justice with both the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six just being two examples.

[Ulysses]

...the misery and impotent rage and frustration this event caused....

 

If they killed the guy it wouldn't cure the misery, impotent rage or frustration. You think it would, which is why you'd like it to happen, but it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

[Konrad von Carstein]

BJ? and Ulysses, I can fully appreciate the points that you both put over and please believe me when I say I'm no right wing zoomer or zealot, but at what point as a society do we say enough! Prison is seen as a bonus by some of these people

 

Guilford and Birmingham are both examples of where the system should be watertight with regard to judgements.

 

Oh, and Uly, believe me when i say that for the people concerned capital punishment would have made a huge difference to them. I guess that you have to suffer the pain before you appreciate the emotional torture that you go through.

[BlackJAC?]

BJ? and Ulysses, I can fully appreciate the points that you both put over and please believe me when I say I'm no right wing zoomer or zealot, but at what point as a society do we say enough! Prison is seen as a bonus by some of these people

 

Oh, and Uly, believe me when i say that for the people concerned capital punishment would have made a huge difference to them. I guess that you have to suffer the pain before you appreciate the emotional torture that you go through.

 

I think think you're confusing someone that has committed a major crime with petty criminals. I really don't see why anyone would think having to spend upwards of 5 or 10 years in prison is a bonus.

 

Punishment in general should have nothing to do with emotion. The justice system should primarily deter people from committing crime, rehabilitate those who have broken the law and finally keep those who cannot be rehabilitated away from society

 

Guilford and Birmingham are both examples of where the system should be watertight with regard to judgements.

 

In theory every single case has to be watertight before being put before the court, hence the reason the police have no alternative but to build a case.

 

Sentencing based on moral outrage, emotion etc doesn't deter crime. If you're using the punishment as revenge, you've missed the point and defaulted to a level of barbarity.

[Konrad von Carstein]

I think think you're confusing someone that has committed a major crime with petty criminals. I really don't see why anyone would think having to spend upwards of 5 or 10 years in prison is a bonus.

No confusion some people could care less if they end up in prison,

 

Punishment in general should have nothing to do with emotion. The justice system should primarily deter people from committing crime, rehabilitate those who have broken the law and finally keep those who cannot be rehabilitated away from society.

I agree however, if capital punishment was on the statute books emotion is removed from the process. Yes the justice system should aim to deter and rehabilitate, however our justice system (IMO) fails abysmally.

 

 

In theory every single case has to be watertight before being put before the court, hence the reason the police have no alternative but to build a case.

 

Sentencing based on moral outrage, emotion etc doesn't deter crime. If you're using the punishment as revenge, you've missed the point and defaulted to a level of barbarity.

Again I agree watertight cases are a must ANY doubt should remove the capital element. As I say above if the tariffs are on the statute books revenge, frustration, anger etc are removed from the process (all IMO).[/QUOTE]

 

 

I will bow out of this discussion for now, but please don't think of me as a pitchfork weilding crazy, I assure you nothing could be further from the truth.

[PolitiCon06]

You either believe in taking a life or you don't. Capital Punishment is murder by concensus and is an affront to humanity.

 

One of the few on here who has any sense whatsoever.

[PolitiCon06]

Never read the Sun in my puff...just a guy who see gangsters, junkies and other lowlifes slowly making ordinary peoples lives a misery. Oh and you forgot the IMO at the end of your post. Read the poll results very interesting stats.

 

 

Haha interesting stats? Sorry but that's just comical. What stats are they? That over 50% of people believe in capital punishment of a sample of 18. Truly representative I must say!

 

Any such decisions as this should be made independently by experts, not by people who dislike seeing junkies or other assorted '****' on their street corners and decide that the only way forward is for a state to kill its citizens.

[PolitiCon06]

Smart comment notwithstanding...your opinion is valid as is mine and I'm man enough to accept this.

 

I have second hand experience of someone being murdered (my sis's stepson) and the misery and impotent rage and frustration this event caused has only served to crystalyse my own thoughts on the matter.

 

I sincerely hope that no one you know and love has to go through an experience like the one this young boys family and friends have just had.

 

Sorry to keep quoting you, as I accept the validity of your point of view. But this is my point: people who are emotionally involved in a situation or case should never be the ones to decide the course of justice, no matter the severity of the case. Justice should never be aimed at squaring up personal vendettas, regardless of how much pain and grief is caused by them.

 

Put simply, the law should be about what works and what prevents crime. I fully agree that the leniency of some sentences (particularly in recent years) is a slap in the face not only to the victims' close ones, but to the foundations of our judicial system overall. Tougher sentences need to come in, but capital punishment is not, and never will be, the answer.

[Konrad von Carstein]

Sorry to keep quoting you, as I accept the validity of your point of view. But this is my point: people who are emotionally involved in a situation or case should never be the ones to decide the course of justice, no matter the severity of the case. Justice should never be aimed at squaring up personal vendettas, regardless of how much pain and grief is caused by them.

 

Put simply, the law should be about what works and what prevents crime. I fully agree that the leniency of some sentences (particularly in recent years) is a slap in the face not only to the victims' close ones, but to the foundations of our judicial system overall. Tougher sentences need to come in, but capital punishment is not, and never will be, the answer.

 

I understand what you are saying, the results of this poll are I admit, not of MORI significance.

With regard to your first paragraph, MY viepoint is that the sentence should be fixed therefore removing the human emotion element.

 

As you say the law should be about what works and as far as I can see the legal system today does not work and offers little in the way of deterrant.

 

Thanks for your understanding expressed above but honestly the case I quoted has little or no bearing on my thought process...

[Ulysses]

Oh, and Uly, believe me when i say that for the people concerned capital punishment would have made a huge difference to them. I guess that you have to suffer the pain before you appreciate the emotional torture that you go through.

 

It isn't a question of how much emotional torture people go through. It's a question of whether or not killing the perpetrator would make that suffering any easier. I don't believe that it would for most people, and there is little evidence to suggest that it has any long-term emotional or psychological benefits.

 

Capital punishment doesn't deter murder. It doesn't provide restorative justice, it doesn't bring victims back to life, and even the sense of revenge it might give is short-lived. It also runs the risk of killing innocent people, and to be operated properly in a democratic society it is more expensive than long-term imprisonment.

[Konrad von Carstein]

It isn't a question of how much emotional torture people go through. It's a question of whether or not killing the perpetrator would make that suffering any easier. I don't believe that it would for most people, and there is little evidence to suggest that it has any long-term emotional or psychological benefits.

 

Your statement above is your considered opinion and I respect it fully, but I do disgree most profoundly. Life for a life is a very hackneyed phrase but in my opinion our society is staring into an abyss and something must change

 

Capital punishment doesn't deter murder. It doesn't provide restorative justice, it doesn't bring victims back to life, and even the sense of revenge it might give is short-lived. It also runs the risk of killing innocent people, and to be operated properly in a democratic society it is more expensive than long-term imprisonment.

It may not stop aLL murders but surely it acts as a deterrant? I've done zero research but how can it possibly cost more to get rid of murderers than feed, clothe and house them for 20+ years?

[monkfish1979]

It may not stop aLL murders but surely it acts as a deterrant? I've done zero research but how can it possibly cost more to get rid of murderers than feed, clothe and house them for 20+ years?

 

There lies the problem, IMO. There is nothing that can legally be done to a criminal in this country that would act as a sufficient deterrent to committing a crime. Prison, while presumably not the nicest place to spend your time is not nearly as daunting a prospect as it once was. It's more a "rehabilitation" than a "punishment". Another by-product of people that fail spectacularly to see that humans - being animals - will be put off doing something only if they are absolutely terrified of the consequences. America is fairly solid proof that the death penalty is not the answer. Nor is giving them a nice bed and a playstation, though.

 

I've said it many times before. Escape from New York. This is the way forward. Put them all inside a great big walled off area and let them destroy each other completely.

[Ulysses]

It may not stop aLL murders but surely it acts as a deterrant? I've done zero research but how can it possibly cost more to get rid of murderers than feed, clothe and house them for 20+ years?

 

Some research has been done to suggest a deterrent effect of capital punishment, but the research doesn't provide conclusive results and it has been discredited. Some research has been done to suggest that capital punishment doesn't deter murder, but it doesn't provide conclusive results either. In the United States, the Supreme Court restored the right of states to execute people in 1976. At that time, the homicide rate had been rising for 10 years. It continued to rise for another 5 years, fell away for a few years, rose again until 1992, fell again until 2000, and has been more or less stable ever since. In the UK, murder rates rose steadily from the mid-1960s to about 2003, and have declined gradually since then. Crucially, the murder rate in the US is much higher than in the UK, and has always been so whether or not capital punishment was practised in either country. At a minimum, the argument that capital punishment deters murders is not proven.

 

In order to comply with the basic requirements of the rule of law in a democratic society, the state has to feed, clothe and house the accused for a very long time before killing them - and also has to fund the administration and legal costs of the criminal justice processes involved. One estimate I have read from the USA is that it costs prosecutors between 2.5 and 5 times as much money to secure a death penalty as it does to secure a life sentence.

 

 

Your statement above is your considered opinion and I respect it fully, but I do disgree most profoundly. Life for a life is a very hackneyed phrase but in my opinion our society is staring into an abyss and something must change

 

My statement is my considered opinion, and with respect your response quoted above doesn't really address it. My point was that killing the perpetrator of a murder will provide the victim's loved ones with at best limited and temporary relief from their suffering, and won't bring the victim back to life.

 

What abyss are we staring into?

[Konrad von Carstein]

Just logged back on, was just a wee bit tipsy last night so perhaps started down a risky road with some of my ramblings.

 

I started this thread to try to satisfy my curiousity and the poll, while in no way represents society as a whole makes interseting reading.

 

Far more intelligent people than myself have argued bith sides of this and I'm happy to let this go now, however, in answer to your last question Ulysses, perhaps abyss was a tad drama queenish but the perception I have is that violence and robbery are on the up and there seems to be no solution.

 

To all who posted thanks for not turning it into a nasty minded thread as given the subject matter it could easily have gone that way.

[Ulysses]

but the perception I have is that violence and robbery are on the up and there seems to be no solution.

 

I don't think that's just a perception. The stats back up your view that violent crime is increasing.

 

But I wouldn't recommend we introduce the death penalty for non-fatal violence.

[Tazio]

Maybe the solution is to have a public referendum?

 

On the condition that it can only be held after we have managed 5 years without a single court decision being found wrong and no miscarriages of justice.

[Deevers]

What would it do?

 

As a previous poster has mentioned - it wouldn't act as a detterent.

 

No but it is the one sentence in law that has a 100% rehabilitation rate.

[BigC]

If you had an island with 97 rapists and murderers on it and three innocents, and the means to blow it up without recourse, would you blow it up?

 

No, of course you wouldn;t, because the three innocents would die.

 

That's effectively what you are asking society to do when you ask for the death penalty to be brought back, because no matter how watertight evidence may seem, there will always be miscarriages of justice.

[Deevers]

If you had an island with 97 rapists and murderers on it and three innocents, and the means to blow it up without recourse, would you blow it up?

 

No, of course you wouldn;t, because the three innocents would die.

 

That's effectively what you are asking society to do when you ask for the death penalty to be brought back, because no matter how watertight evidence may seem, there will always be miscarriages of justice.

 

I take it that in this scenario that prior to blowing up the island that we were aware that there were three innocents there? Or are you implying that there are always a percentage of people in situations like this who are innocent?

 

Maybe we should look at the figures for serious crime pre abolition at take a look at them now.

 

Pre abolition there were few murders, few serious assaults and few crimes involving firearms - take a look at the figures now.

 

In a society that has become almost feral - radical solutions need to be found for criminals - the death penalty would be effective - and cost effective. Bring it back and bring it back soon.

[Ulysses]

I take it that in this scenario that prior to blowing up the island that we were aware that there were three innocents there? Or are you implying that there are always a percentage of people in situations like this who are innocent?

 

Yes.

 

 

Maybe we should look at the figures for serious crime pre abolition at take a look at them now.

 

Pre abolition there were few murders, few serious assaults and few crimes involving firearms - take a look at the figures now

 

What are the figures? And why is the murder rate so much higher in (for example) the USA where the death penalty is used?

 

 

In a society that has become almost feral - radical solutions need to be found for criminals - the death penalty would be effective - and cost effective. Bring it back and bring it back soon.

 

How would the death penalty reduce the incidence of non-fatal violent crime?

[Konrad von Carstein]

How would the death penalty reduce the incidence of non-fatal violent crime?

 

I said I'd leave this but in answer to the question above...personally I'm not advocating the death penalty for non fatal violent crime, however, surely if it was on the law books it would make some people think twice about carrying weapons and the like.

 

I mean, going out armed with a knife or a gun or similar is surely tantamount to being prepared to use of the same, therefore it could be argued (I think) that an element of premeditation was present if the worst were to happen.

[BigC]

I take it that in this scenario that prior to blowing up the island that we were aware that there were three innocents there? Or are you implying that there are always a percentage of people in situations like this who are innocent?

 

 

I was assuming that you knew they were innocent.

 

Say 97 prisoners and 3 prison guards in an island prison.

 

Also, can anyone translate this PM that I received. I assume it was in regard to this thread:

 

As long as its not your familly mate.

Any of my kids or wife dad whatever was killed.

Give CAPITAL PUNISHMENT A walk.

Would do it myself.

 

 

GROW UP

 

Dougstar LOYALIST ROBBOS:107years:

 

I have absolutely no idea what it means.

[Maximus]

Would you really trust our justice system to make life or death choices?

 

As for DNA evidence, don't fecking bank on that they can arse that up too, or plant it. That is why I'm very wary about a DNA database. No way should we let them have more powers than they have. 'Hardline' views (maybe not CP specifically) on justice are exactly what the government are going to be pushing in the next few years, just wait and see. It won't be in an effort to protect ordinary folk and crack down on crims either (though it will be marketed that way) it will be to give the police more controls over the population. The police are not there to serve and protect any more they are there to enforce the will of them in charge upon joe public. Just look at all the fines, discrimination laws and the curse of Political Correctness, they are only there to make ordinary folk afraid to look at anyone the wrong way.

[felix]

And why is the murder rate so much higher in (for example) the USA where the death penalty is used?

 

Because there's a huge immigrant population and easy access to guns.

Not a good combination.

[BlackJAC?]

Can always rely on Miller Jambo 60 to come out with a reasoned response.

[Guest Freewheelin' Jambo]

Interesting that so far 67% voted for the return of hanging.

 

But as usual the thread gets hijacked by those against it. Those who by the way are in the minority. Most don't bother posting on the thread but vote for.

 

The silent majority is always shouted down by the noisy minority.

 

But that's democracy.

[Quagmire]

i don't actually know how anyone can want the death penalty unless they have NO idea of how the human brain actually works, why we do the things we do, and don't really care either.

 

also...

 

people don't just wake up one day and kill someone, they must either have something medically wrong with them or have some serious issues that were inflicted upon them outwith their control

 

...is NOT equivelant to someone saying "they can't help being murderers, let them off, bless them". people should be punnished, but they should also be helped, and encouraged, not threatened, to stay clean. but i suspect there isn't actually any point in me saying this to the bloodthirsty mob...

[Ulysses]

But as usual the thread gets hijacked by those against it. Those who by the way are in the minority. Most don't bother posting on the thread but vote for.

 

The silent majority is always shouted down by the noisy minority.

 

But that's democracy.

 

 

Hijacked? What an odd expression.

 

Most of the couple of thousand people who have read JKB since the thread was opened haven't bothered voting or posting on the thread. Come to think of it, most of them haven't even read the thread.

 

There's your silent majority.

[BlackJAC?]

Interesting that so far 67% voted for the return of hanging.

 

But as usual the thread gets hijacked by those against it. Those who by the way are in the minority. Most don't bother posting on the thread but vote for.

 

The silent majority is always shouted down by the noisy minority.

 

But that's democracy.

 

Edit: in fact don't bother.

[shaun.lawson]

Interesting that so far 67% voted for the return of hanging.

 

But as usual the thread gets hijacked by those against it. Those who by the way are in the minority. Most don't bother posting on the thread but vote for.

 

The silent majority is always shouted down by the noisy minority.

 

But that's democracy.

 

About 67% of the British population are in favour of the return of capital punishment too, funnily enough. Fortunately though, the European Court of Human Rights ensures it can't be brought back. Because sometimes democracy is nothing more than the tyranny of the majority - and if we ever brought back hanging, we would instantly cease to be able to call ourselves a civilised country.

[Maximus]

People still believe democracy exists?

 

If democracy was real why would it ever have to be enforced?