Should we bring back the Death Penalty?

Discussion in 'Diamond Lil's' started by Oil_Slick, Feb 12, 2008.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Yes

  2. No

    0 vote(s)
  1. I have a very personal view on this matter- effing right we should.................
  2. Too bloody right.
  3. I was watching that on the news last night and thought if only the guy had a pair of boots on and a means of self defence.
    Then it came to me...RALGEX... better than pepper spray.
    Wife has a sprained wrist and she sprayed it near me. I was in tears for ages.
    geoff(ers) :nemo:

    PS Hangings too good for that scum. They should kick the bastards to death
  4. I really feel for this woman, my father was kicked in the head 8 times by the DJ we had hired for his, and my mothers' 30th wedding anniversary party- although myself, the paramedics and Doctors at the A&E dept did everything possible- my father died.

    The f*** wit that did it was then charged with manslaughter, and given a sentence of 4 years, and released on GOOD BEHAVIOUR after 18 months!!!!

    What a complete sham!!
    So yes bring back the death penalty, but let the living relatives push the button.
  5. I seem to be the sole person to vote "no". Oil Slick's just called me a "pinko lefty".

    Much as I abhor the increasing yob behaviour in this country, I really don't think capital punishment will arrest a terminal decline. I mean the USA's not exactly Xanadu is it...
  6. Yes I personally think they should. But I also think that there should be a period of say five years in which the defence must find new evidence/proof to say their client was innocent or there is at least resonable doubt that the conviction was unsafe. Some may call me soft for this but better a period of grace than to murder an innocent man. After all it is possible to say sorry we got it wrong and release someone from prison but not from the grave. However, I also feel that the death penalty will never be brought back no matter how strong public opinion is in favour of it. Look at the last vote they had, some MP's voted no against the wishes of their constituents becasuse They didn't agree with it!
  7. yes but it is a lot harder to get hold of a weapon over here. Can't just walk into the co-op and get one unlike over the pond.
  8. I am so so sorry for you BH, I couldn't even begin to imagine what pain and grief this must have caused your family, but the judges were also partners in this crime:

    If they had acted in earlier incidences he would not have been around to commit any further crimes.
    Also 'when' he does it again you can put the blame on this last sentencing judge for not taking it seriously enough and giving a sentence more suited to a motoring offence.

    It's time it was changed from 'maximum' sentences to 'minimum' sentences.
  9. Saddened to read the story of your Dad BH - condolences.

    With modern day forensics, DNA etc, surely the doubt element in capital cases is virtually removed, meaning that an unsafe guilty verdict would be highly unlikely. In the face of such indisputable evidence, I would certainly back the restoration of the death penalty.
  10. I remain opposed to the death penalty. In fact I would automatically reach a verdict of not guilty as a juror in preference to being responsible for the state murder of another person. Once introduced it would make matyrs of the terroristic types and again result in the wrongful state murder of the innocent. There have been far to many miscarriages of justice over the years to warrant the reintroduction of state killings. Think of how convenient it would have been for the prosecution and police had the mistakes of juries in the Stefan Kiszko or Sally Clark cases not come to light, because the state had already killed them?

    I am familiar with the oft rehersed argument that 'well if you could guarantee that the convicted person was really guilty' but this is a pipe-dream. The selective misuse of evidence, the misrepresentation of statistical probability data, the non-disclosure of secondary evidence to the defence, who are on an unequal footing with the prosecution in that they must disclose their defence to the prosecution after the pre-trial hearing before proceeding to full trial in either the Magistrates or Crown Court. Also remember that the climate of public outrage (especially after Lesley Molseed's murder and sexual assault) all contribute to an unreasonable pressure on the police especially (and upon the Home Secretary) to produce results as quickly as possible. If the police with the connivance of the prosecuters and judiciary (as with Kiszko case!) are happy to scapegoat a misfit with learning difficulties, then how can we talk about the concept of a "safe conviction". After all we still have an innocent misfit (again) in prison for the murder of Jill Dando.
  11. Hey Ed, I am on your side these days, there was a time when I would have said hang em high, but even with todays forensic stuff I am not convinced we can get it right every time, and until we can I for one am not happy to be associated with the judicial killing of an innocent person
  12. To protect the country we have the ultimate weapon, the nuclear bomb. However what the hell do we have in this country to protect law abiding citizens....a smack on the wrist!! Bring back the rope, the birch and the cat. Singapore citizens don't have the problems we have do they? :threaten:

  13. So you would feel happy to find a murder not guilty…

    Says a lot about you as a person.
  14. You're not using my black cat to punish offenders! Bloody zoosadist! ;)

    I must admit, you can tell how good I'd be as a Regulator.... if the person looked frightened and I felt sorry for them, I'd just let them off... :oops:
  15. Hang them very very slowly.The longer the better so they have time to reflect on their crimes.
    Not that I'm a sadist or anything.
  16. I do not subscribe to the Old Testament belief in 'an eye for an eye'.

    If I felt the person was actually guilty of murder and faced execution, then yes. If they faced actual life imprisonment (ie for the rest of their life) that would be an altogether different matter. However the problem here, as with the capital punishment, is that the punishment is the same whether you murder one person or 2000. I believe that the sentence must reflect the nature of the offence, its gravity - there are different gravities of murder after all - aggrivating circumstances, etc., and the number killed. After all once X has killed one person, what deterrent is there to deter them from killing numerous others to prevent their capture? With a mandatory sentence of death: NONE!
  17. This can equally be reversed into "so you would happily hang an innocent man because you were misled by a skillfull prosecution
  18. Whilst I am for the return of capital punishment in proven cases of murder, it's a largely spurious argument as we are now a nation of apologists. There is always a reason why bastards like Peter Sutcliffe and Ian Huntley did what they did and there is a whole self-flagellating industry out there to prevent natural justice from taking place.

    I believe that life should mean life, but also that that life sentence should reflect society's abhorrence of what the murderer has done, so Rose West should not have access to the comforts of life and a more-or-less freedom within the confines of her prison. Second chances should only be on offer to those who have not killed with premeditation.
  19. There are many who feal that life or any other long prison sentence is in fact a more sever punishment than the death penalty because the punishment lasts for so long. I seem to rember not that long ago an Italian lifer petitioned the courts to be executed because to him that was preferable to being in jail. Equally many who are facing life in jail commit or try to commit suicide, and for those executing them would be giving them the easy way out.

Share This Page