The Death Penalty (Merged)

[STEED]

A number of polls took place here in the last few days and the over all figure of 67% want to see the death penalty back. But I feel it's lower than that, as this is reaction to the news at the weekend. I just wonder how many of these posters know that we the UK can not bring back hanging as we are apart of the EU.

As for the figure I would put at about 53%.

[Tchocky]

A link for those numbers?

Agreed that they're a bit higher than expected. I'd say what with the number of man-kills-young-girl cases in Britain this month that those numbers are artificially high.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

A link for those numbers?

No link as it was on the Radio yesterday but I do believe The Sun ran one of those polls. It was a mixture of radio/newspaper polls. the 67% is the over all sum of all those polls added up.

[Letum]

It was about 90% when the law was changed.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Letum

It was about 90% when the law was changed.

Was that at the time when hanging was out lawed?

[Steel_Tomb]

I'm sick to death (excuse the pun) of the EU telling us what to do. The EU was formed to be a market for the EU countries, not for them to go about telling us how to run our country. They can piss off for all the bloody use they are!

Go UKIP!:rotfl:

Oh, yes, I'm in favor of bringing back the Death penalty, might make people think twice about offending. Atm the they go to comfy prisons with better facilities than most people how access to. If they might get a visit to the gallows then they might actually reconsider! A lot of the scum that are in prison don't deserve to live anyway, wast of tax payers money to keep that filth alive!

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Steel_Tomb

I'm sick to death (excuse the pun) of the EU telling us what to do. The EU was formed to be a market for the EU countries, not for them to go about telling us how to run our country. They can piss off for all the bloody use they are!

Go UKIP!:rotfl:

Oh, yes, I'm in favor of bringing back the Death penalty, might make people think twice about offending. Atm the they go to comfy prisons with better facilities than most people how access to. If they might get a visit to the gallows then they might actually reconsider! A lot of the scum that are in prison don't deserve to live anyway, wast of tax payers money to keep that filth alive!

Nice to hear you also hate the EU.

[FIREWALL]

This must be a poll for all of you that live on the ROCK.

So I'll just lurk and see.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by FIREWALL

This must be a poll for all of you that live on the ROCK.

So I'll just lurk and see.

Not necessary, input from others here who have the death penalty in there country's is welcomed.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by STEED

Was that at the time when hanging was out lawed?

Yup.
There was a poll last year that showed for the first time it fell well under 50%, however
it's something that yo-yos a lot around the genral trend.

[August]

Originally Posted by Letum

It was about 90% when the law was changed.

Just curious. How does a representative government ban something that 90% of the population supports?

[bookworm_020]

But why would you want to bring it back??? We haven't someone for almost 50 years, and despite the occasional media outburst, there isn't much support to bring it back.

[mrbeast]

Some food for thought for this thread:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4457402.stm

"A 1995 poll of US police chiefs showed that at least three out of every five did not believe that the death penalty reduced significantly the number of homicides".

"You find that most research in the States is being used to buttress a polemical argument, either for or against executions".

"You can't say that the death penalty has no deterrent effect. But there is no evidence that it is more influential than Life Without Parole sentences and first-class detection techniques."

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/page40.asp

[Letum]

Originally Posted by August

Just curious. How does a representative government ban something that 90% of the population supports?

Well, because it is a democracy, not a pure olagarchy.

Lets say there are two politicians.
The first politician believes X should be banned and will stay true to this belief, even
if no one else agrees with him.
The second politician also believes X should be banned, but he keeps voting against
banning X because no one agrees with him and he wants to stay popular and win
votes.

Even if I did not want X banned, I would still vote for the first politician because his way of doing things represents me better than the second politician.

If I voted for the second politician, I might get my way on issue X, but his
machivilian nature in appealing to the mob-majority in order to keep power and
popularity, rather than doing what he thinks is right would not represent me at all!

[August]

Originally Posted by Letum

Well, because it is a democracy, not a pure olagarchy.

Lets say there are two politicians.
The first politician believes X should be banned and will stay true to this belief, even
if no one else agrees with him.
The second politician also believes X should be banned, but he keeps voting against
banning X because no one agrees with him and he wants to stay popular and win
votes.

Even if I did not want X banned, I would still vote for the first politician because his way of doing things represents me better than the second politician.

If I voted for the second politician, I might get my way on issue X, but his
machivilian nature in appealing to the mob-majority in order to keep power and
popularity, rather than doing what he thinks is right would not represent me at all!

Sounds like Orwellian double speak to me. Pols are supposed to represent their constitutents. When 9 out of 10 want something, unless it violates the constitution they should get it.

How does your theory stack up when the thing that the politician believes in is something racist or otherwise completely unpalatable?