Capital Punishment

Dunno what execution method should be used ?? I suppose it should be humane ??

Lethal injection probably the most humane cleanest method ???
 

As of 21 February 2026, at least 75,227 people (73,188+ Palestinians[4] and 2,039+ Israelis) have been reported killed in the Gaza war according to the Gaza Health Ministry (GHM) and Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, including 248 journalists and media workers, 120 academics, and over 224 humanitarian aid workers, a number that includes 179 employees of UNRWA. Scholars have estimated 80% of Palestinians killed were civilians. A study by OHCHR, which verified fatalities from three independent sources, found that 70% of the Palestinians killed in residential buildings or similar housing were women and children.

In January 2025, a peer-reviewed analysis of deaths in the Gaza war between October 2023 and 30 June 2024 was published in The Lancet. The paper estimated 64,260 deaths from traumatic injury during this period, and likely exceeding 70,000 by October 2024, with 59.1% of them being women, children and the elderly. It concluded that the GHM undercounted trauma-related deaths by 41% in its report, and also noted that its findings "underestimate the full impact of the military operation in Gaza, as they do not account for non-trauma-related deaths resulting from health service disruption, food insecurity, and inadequate water and sanitation." A comparable figure for May 2025 would be 93,000 (77,000 to 109,000), representing 4–5% of Gaza's pre-war population. Another independent peer-reviewed analysis of casualties was published in The Lancet by Michael Spagat and other researchers. They estimated 75,200 violent deaths and 8,540 excess non-violent deaths between 7 October 2023 and 5 January 2025. The estimate of violent deaths is 34.7% higher than the GHM's casualty count at the time. Of the violent deaths, the researchers estimate that 56.2% were women, children, and elderly individuals.

The number of injured is greater than 100,000; United Nations agencies have reported an unprecedented surge in amputations during the conflict and that Gaza is home to the highest number of child amputees per capita in the world.


It doesn't matter how much you try to deny the truth, you can't change it.
 
So would I given the chance if my innocent unarmed young countrymen attending a festival were raped, slaughtered and taken hostage.

How many unarmed young people on the "other side", innocently going about their lives would you kill?

Do you have an exchange rate which values the lives of those innocent unarmed young people compared to the ones killed at the festival? Are they worth one tenth? One twentieth? One fiftieth?

Or would you, if given the chance, kill every single one of them, and wipe the entire population off the face of the Earth?
 
you have an exchange rate which values the lives of those innocent unarmed young people compared to the ones killed at the festival? Are they worth one tenth? One twentieth? One fiftieth?
Well, if someone got caught stealing something worth a fiver, you wouldn’t expect them to be fined a fiver, would you? They wouldn’t learn any lessons from that and would keep returning for more.

Like it or not, it’s been going on for years but even apologists such as yourself, can’t deny the one single event that has brought about the current situation. They only have themselves to blame.

I have my thoughts on the subject, you have yours. Neither of us is going to change our views so I’ll not be wasting any more of my time responding to you on this matter.
 
The death penalty can be a form of eugenics, by taking bad people out of the gene pool. It is said that Britain executed one in ten of its population in ancient times (IT Minion disputes this) and that this led us to becoming history's most intelligent and advanced race of people. Look at how degenerate we are now, without the death penalty.

String 'em up I say.
 
I have avoided any reference to human rights and have been looking purely on the basis of foundational British law. But this is very complex stuff. So, I have done another AI just to flag up possible further areas of discussion. I would be interested if you could ask the same question of Anthropic:

The question I asked was:

'would a system where a tribunal decides that a particular accused won't receive a trial if they are certain of his guilt be a denial of justice under magna carta'
I think what is being proposed in this thread is similar to the lammy dodger’s proposal. That being the trial by jury is replaced by a trial by judge, where the overwhelming evidence is presented and the judge is asked to review against any doubt whatsoever. Almost like a first appearance at magistrates court, before being referred up. If the judge concludes the evidence is so strong, there is “no point in a trial by jury” he passes his order and the convicted goes in to the giant squashing machine or whatever the method is.

In this case the only steps being skipped are trial by jury, right of appeal etc. it’s important that there is no appeal otherwise there will be public outcry if an innocent person is squashed.


On the subject of Claud.Ai. It’s free to use if you want to give it a go. It’s amazing at tax and financial advice.
 
Last edited:
Dunno what execution method should be used ?? I suppose it should be humane ??

Lethal injection probably the most humane cleanest method ???
I don't think it's a medical problem, as it's easy to put somebody out painlessly for an op, so similar to kill them. The problem, in eg USA, is that they don't want it to be too barbaric, but don't want it to be entirely stress-free either, because where's the deterrence or retribution in that? In Belarus or China I don't suppose they're bothered.
 
On the subject of Claud.Ai. It’s free to use if you want to give it a go.

I have been put off previously because I though it might go rogue. But I've now bitten the bullet. The answer it gave was essentially the same as the one Google AI gave, just more in depth.
 
Well, if someone got caught stealing something worth a fiver, you wouldn’t expect them to be fined a fiver, would you? They wouldn’t learn any lessons from that and would keep returning for more.

Crime has to be made to be simply not worth-while. At the moment, many of the penalties make it worth-while. If they steal £100 per week, and it goes on for months, then get fined £100, they are well into profit. If they steal £1m and get locked up for 10 years, out in 10, they are still into a decent profit, unless it is recovered, and in many cases it is not. Shoplifting has doubled in some areas in five years - obviously, that risk is another worthwhile one.
 
I think what is being proposed in this thread is similar to the lammy dodger’s proposal. That being the trial by jury is replaced by a trial by judge, where the overwhelming evidence is presented and the judge is asked to review against any doubt whatsoever. Almost like a first appearance at magistrates court, before being referred up. If the judge concludes the evidence is so strong, there is “no point in a trial by jury” he passes his order and the convicted goes in to the giant squashing machine or whatever the method is.

In this case the only steps being skipped are trial by jury, right of appeal etc. it’s important that there is no appeal otherwise there will be public outcry if an innocent person is squashed.

I think three high up judges would be needed rather than one. Would the accused have proper representation and a right to contest the evidence.
 
Back
Top