Capital Punishment

[Mottie]

Don’t care. Tell me, what would your punishment for a child murderer be?

This is where ellal quietly disappears into the ether…..

Yep, gone to ground. Only reply I’ll get to that will be some sort of personal attack calling me a thug troll or some such swervy shyte. I can read him like a book.

 

[motorbiking]

I would feel completely cheated if you had to do that to my barrister who I was paying to defend me.
Charge it !!!!!

Some of the very best play the fool to sucker the other side. It’s an extremely successful tactic

 

[motorbiking]

I've known experienced barristers to do it. I just give them a pep talk and take them back to first principles.

Don’t forget to tell them about your 2:1 in law.

 

[Highway Man]

Don’t forget to tell them about your 2:1 in law.

 

[Highway Man]

Don’t forget to tell them about your 2:1 in law.

Mine was a first with honours, perhaps MNW is talking about taking a barista back to basics in coffee making.

 

[johnny2007]

I am all for capital and corporal punishment, I think the punishment should fit the crime, obviously for any concerns over guilt is to be avoided and prison but this must be hard labour and not a soft option. Violent offences such as agravated burglary and theft of cars etc, should be met with lashes of substansial proportions to inflict not just pain but to mark the offender. I spent a bit of time in Thailand where they have very severe penantys for drugs and crime in general.

If we took the same approach there won't be any politicians left to run the country...

 

[JohnD]

Safe gaurds would need to be put in place where capital punishment could only be used for the found 100% guilty before they even reach a trial. Anything less than 100% must be a hard labour sentence.

I'm interested in Highwayman's suggestion that when an accused is not found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, he should be sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour.

And that when a person is considered to be guilty, no trial is necessary before deciding to kill him.

 

[Highway Man]

I'm interested in Highwayman's suggestion that when an accused is not found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, he should be sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour.

And that when a person is considered to be guilty, no trial is necessary before deciding to kill him.

Exactly that, if there are crimes that have been commited that doesn't require a trial to prove guilt, then just sentence them to death.

 

[transam]

I'm interested in Highwayman's suggestion that when an accused is not found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, he should be sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour.

And that when a person is considered to be guilty, no trial is necessary before deciding to kill him.

Technically what is the point of a trial if two blokes are filmed beheading a soldier on the streets of London ???

Or some bloke stabbing Joe cox in broad day light

 

[morqthana]

This is where ellal quietly disappears into the ether…..

Yep, gone to ground. Only reply I’ll get to that will be some sort of personal attack calling me a thug troll or some such swervy shyte.

Well, since you're in the business of criticising people for disappearing into the ether, and going to ground, and since, I'm sure, you would deny that you're a hypocrite, you will soon be replying to this without personally attacking me, won't you.

IRA apologist.

Using intelligence and reason, and ONLY intelligence and reason, please show how that accusation is justified.

 

[Vinty]

is the death intended to be a punishment too

Death is the ultimate punishment.
If a Judge asked any murderer upon conviction, do you prefer natural life in prison or hanged until you are dead.
What do you think the convicted murderer would chose.
The only problem I have with the death penalty is that the wrong person could be hanged.
There are some people in society who are so evil that death is the only way the victims families can find closure.
Keeping someone convicted of murder alive while their victims families are grieving for their lost one, is unnatural.

 

[Vinty]

I'm interested in Highwayman's suggestion that when an accused is not found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, he should be sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour.

And that when a person is considered to be guilty, no trial is necessary before deciding to kill him.

That's a bit like the Scottish verdict of 'Not Proven' rather than not Guilty or Guilty.

 

[Vinty]

Talking of the IRA, you do know what the IRA did to keep local thugs and villains in order, don’t you? It worked

True to a point.
They used to give the villains a warning first, if they ignored it, they would be given an appointment time to turn up at to be shot, to be fair the IRA always called for an ambulance to collect them after they had been dealt with.
However if the thug was connected to a an IRA member , then, maybe the restorative justice guidelines would be interpretated differently.

 

[King Billy]

Offence + aggravating factor = aggravated offence.

car theft is not an aggravated offence ... it can be.

but it isn't. Car theft is not an aggravated offence.
The penalty is a fine, Community service, or up to 6 months in prison.

But for car theft to become an aggravated offence there must be some aggravating factor, as you have shown..

A person commits aggravated vehicle taking if they:

1. Take a mechanically propelled vehicle without the owner’s consent (an offence under Section 12(1) of the Theft Act 1968), and
2. While the vehicle is unlawfully taken, one of the following occurs:
   • The vehicle is driven dangerously
   • The vehicle is involved in an accident causing injury to any person
   • The vehicle is damaged
   • Other property is damaged

The penalty can be, and is usually longer prison sentences depending on the seriousness of the aggravating factor.

You can both waffle on as much as you like, but you're only making fools of yourselves.

 

[King Billy]

Maybe he was separating out in his mind the theft bit from the later aggravating factors. Rookie mistake. But we've all done it.

HWM said:-

... and theft of cars etc, should be met with lashes of substansial proportions to inflict not just pain but to mark the offender.

Maybe he wants to tattoo something on their forehead, or make them wear some kind of symbol, or their crime number etched on their wrist.

Car theft is not an aggravated offence, unless there is some aggravating factor associated with it.
I didn't make any mistake. I was fully aware of what I was saying, and of what HWM was suggesting.