Capital Punishment

Capital Punishment

Ive just read the thread about the that brutal rape death and wondered what everyone thought about capital punishment?
Im not sure, i know that in countries that have capital punishment the crime rate isnt lower, but should it be an eye for an eye?

Absolutely not. How can you say it is wrong to kill someone, and then kill them for doing it? It's completely hypocritical.

Also, what about people who are wrongly convicted and killed? The thought of just one wrong conviction should be enough to put anyone off.

For pre-meditated Murder definitley, peadophillia & rape.
All evil, nasty & unforgivable crimes imo.
All of which affect the victims and their families immensely :evil:

I definately think they should receive a punishment greater than just being locked up, but not being killed....thats just an easy escape........

Yeh, i saw a film in school when we were studying capital punishment about this man who was convicted to death for killing a policeman. It was a true story, i think it happened in the 40's?? not sure, but the man had a mental age of 10 or something and the death was an accident. It was pretty sad to think he had actually been hung for it.

not sure on capital punishment - but i'm sure the current system is far too weighted in the criminals favour...

human rights shouldn't apply to crims :devil:

I agree with that like

Ghandi said it all

"An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind"

Definitely! It's never justifiable to take someone elses life!

There are fates worse than death......I think I'd rather die than spend the rest of my life in prison, so it's a no to capital punishment from me.

Also, the idea of miscarriages of justice with capital punishment is shocking.

This is the only reason i don't full support it - i have no problem with an eye for an eye - BUT even the most secure conviction COULD be compromised....

Exactly.

At least if someone's in prison then they can be released after - not ideal, but better than nothing. Can't think of much worse than being wrongly executed - there was that buch of law students in america who proved that something like 15 cases on death row were unsound and got them off

The film is called "Let Him Have It" and it was the true story of Derek Bentley

Derek was partially pardoned posthumously by Home Secretary Michael Howard, who said he should not have been hanged but was still guilty. Bentley's conviction was later overturned by the Court of Appeal, who said that he had not had a fair trial because of the behaviour of the trial judge, Lord Goddard. The film has been credited for keeping the case in the public eye

It revolved around confusion when he and a partner in crime were caught by a cop and Derek had a gun. The other guy said said "let him have it" and it was supposed to have been misinterpreted as "shoot him", rather than "let him have the gun".

Summat like that anyway!!

I'm all for avoiding miscarriages of justice and you are right to say that one wrong conviction should be enough to cast doubt on the whole system, however....in cases where there is NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER, then I think capital punishment is ok. Let's say a person is caught in the act of committing a murder....no questions.....red handed....then I have no qualms about letting them die for it.

The death penalty may well be seen as "the easy way out", so what else do we do? Look at Saudi Arabia.....don't they cut the hands off thieves?? No more stealing for them, and the stigma that must go along with having no hands......!!

We definitely need something better than life sentences that are halved for good behaviour. What is 15 years for killing children? NOT ENOUGH!!!

Rehabilitation.........BOLLOCKS!!! A true murder deserves as harsh a punishment as we can possibly give.

Why should I pay my taxes to keep some murdering scumbag in meals and a nice segregated cell? Ian Huntley....they should let the c*nt fry!!!!

what they should do is keep them on death row for the rest of their life, keep taking them to the gas chamber or whatever but not actually killing them, just making them shit it loads. Then when they awaken from what they thought was there demise you say 'the gas wasn't potent enough to kill you' we will have to schedule another go next week. That way they would be freightend of death for the rest of there life thats got to be some punishment.

Also if they start to catch on to the plan just erase there memory somehow and keep doing it.

Life should mean life, and I wouldn't be averse to seeing a bit of hard labour thrown in for good measure.

good idea... back to 'chain gangs'... get some roads fixed... or beaches cleaned up... get something useful out of them...

Also the term used WITHOUT ANY DOUBT isn't really possible, because if the defendant lawyer shows to the court that there is any reasonal doubt in the prosecution case the person doesn't get convicted it's as simple as that.

So you can't kill people that they not definalty sure they did it because the person wouldn't have been convicted of the crime.

a total unequivocal no.

for those of you that say yes. what is your justification?

what do you say the families of the countless victims who have since been proven innocent?

our systems of justice are far from being perfect, and until they can guarantee with absolute certainty the guilt of a person, there can be no justification for handing out a sentence which can't be recompensed.

to argue the case from the point of view of the victims is futile, when cold hard evidence exists that innocent people are wrongly executed.

I bet anyone who has voted yes would change their minds pretty quickly if they were wrongly accused of anything serious, let alone convicted!