Death penalty????
- Thread starter masona
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 28 Oct 2005
- Messages
- 31,282
- Reaction score
- 1,998
- Country
I agree with NotB. If killing is such a heinous crime - then what is the government doing perpetrating it? How can it be such a bad act when the government of the day is willing to commit the same attrocity in the name of justice? Killing is wrong and those that commit such an act (wilfully) should be removed from society.
joe
joe
Blimey i fall asleep for a couple of hours and the government has brought back the death penalty! now that's what i call efficiency!joe-90 said:
Fact not schoolboy fiction:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4455850.stm
Sponsored Links
Just my own take on it, but in these less religious days, the Death Penalty still falls in to the trap of believing that Death is the worst thing that can happen to someone.
Let's assume that some crimes are so bad that we have no interest, or likelihood, of trying to rehabilitate the offender. There is a need, and a public interest in punishing this offender and, IMHO, death is no punishment. Once you're dead, you're dead - You're not in Hell. You're dead. Gone. Not Feeling Anything.
Compare that with the rest of your life (genuinely) in prison, reflecting on what you've done every day. Much worse, so what we really need is for the public to have faith in the existence of a long-term punitive solution for the worst offenders, not the death penalty.
Let's assume that some crimes are so bad that we have no interest, or likelihood, of trying to rehabilitate the offender. There is a need, and a public interest in punishing this offender and, IMHO, death is no punishment. Once you're dead, you're dead - You're not in Hell. You're dead. Gone. Not Feeling Anything.
Compare that with the rest of your life (genuinely) in prison, reflecting on what you've done every day. Much worse, so what we really need is for the public to have faith in the existence of a long-term punitive solution for the worst offenders, not the death penalty.
You are thinking of Bertie Bassett, Only link i could find to a cartoon strip of Fred: http://www.uclick.com/client/slp/tmfba/Freddie said:
The worst thing that can happen to someone is a living death of a stainless steel cell ( washable ) with the basic food and water to preserve life--no visitors --no let out--no luxury--no nothing untill they drop---wanting execution is the only way of shortening their excistance.
Just strip away everything from them for life, cost to the taxpayer --minimum few pounds per week.
Any miscarriage of justice can then be put right
Just strip away everything from them for life, cost to the taxpayer --minimum few pounds per week.
Any miscarriage of justice can then be put right
B
Big_Spark
notb665 said:
Notb, this statement makes little sense, I know lots of people WILLING to kill, they may be reluctant, but they are willing, are you saying that all of the UK's Military are not thinking straight?
I shot a man in Canada many years ago, OK he didn't die, but he walks with sticks now. Was I willing to kill..yes, did I feel it necessary, not at that time as my actions prevented him using his weapon, namely a .32 Colt Auto. (I was carrying a hand Gun due to Black Bear Attacks)
The Death Penalty does not prevent murder, READ MY POST. IT IS A PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER.
Notb, I think you should draw a line of distinction between a willingness to kill and a total disregard for life with a desire to kill.
I know that we can twist the sentence to suit any arguement we wish, but I hope you see the point I am making.
It was decided many years ago that keeping Polar bears in Zoo's should be stopped as they go mad through boredom, and some have made this argument for other higher species too. If we afford such rights to animals, and we take their lives when they pose a danger to the public, why should we treat people worse in one way and better in another?
Serial Killers can never be released into the public, they can never be rehabilitataed, so keeing them in prison for 30, 40, 50 years or more till they die is acceptable..personally I find it barbaric. If a person is found guilty of an offence for which freedom will never be a possibility, then execution should be the alternative.
However it should be humane..as humane as it ever can be anyway. I disagree with the US system where people can spend 10-20 or in one case 18 years on death row before execution..that is totally barbaric and unacceptable. Once a person has been convicted in a way that satifies all safeguards they should be given 6 months in which to appeal. If they fail in their appeal or choose not to appeal, then something should be put in their food on an unspecified date so they go to sleep and don't wake up. None of this spectacle the Yanks make of it, that is inhumane. None of this dragging their family in to watch, or the victims families, that is simply Glorifying it.
Still going strong on the internet by all accounts!Freddie said:
here's more info i've found on this lovable character if you are interested.
http://www.tonystrading.co.uk/galleries/~comicstrips/fredbasset.htm
B
Big_Spark
Freddie said:
What about the phsychological damage...that can never be compensated for. Imagine that you had a sloppy defence or a shoddy investigation by the Police..or both..and you were convicted of a crime you didn't commit. You then spend 15 years in this cell before someone goes "Oh sugar, we made a mistake, let Mr Bassett out of his kennel".
Under current Guidelines you would be entitled to Government Compensation equal to twice you total annula earnings based on your salary at the time of conviction for the period of incarceration..usually a few hundred grand!! You think 15 years in solitary would be compensated for by this money? Would you even be in a fit state to be released in the world? Probably not.
What you propose is horrendous, inhumane and I would oppose vehemently.
Depends how you see it, Yorkshire ripper Peter Sutcliffe, murdered 13 women and 5 attemped murder and will cost the taxpayer approximately £4,000,000 to keep him for life in jail. Wouldn't we be better off to do away with these people, free up more room in prison and save money? And this is just one person!Freddie said:
Sponsored Links
