The Death Penalty (Merged)

[Defiance]

Hiya's,
I've voted yes BUT, Many a person especially in england were hanged wrongly as-in they were innocent

If it's an outright planned murder 100% no errors capable i say kneck em

Manslaughter eg: someone snaps due to being mugged/robbed/abused etc or has to act in self defense well give em a medal and no record (but again has to be 100% free from errors and not a premeditated get-back-at-someone)

Rapes/Child abuse etc again if 100% certain kneck em (slowly)

As in a well known case of a farmer killing someone by shooting in their back as they fled again a medal, As the scum were there to rob and by all accounts he himself could of been yet another unsolved murder victim i say kneck em

What with dna etc now i think it's high time to bring the dp back but as i say only when it's 100% proven

Pierpoint himself had a very educated feeling that a female victim of his hanging was innocent but did his job none the less, Later she was found to of been probably innocent

As for the kids well youths of today that cause so much damage and worry in neighbourhoods knowing that until their 18 they can do anything and not get much done to them, Birch the ****s in local village/town/city so to not only let them feel pain but the humiliation of everyone knowing them

And for all you libs thinking pain/tough punishment don't solve stuff i read or was told this can't really remember but it makes sense to me, (maybe not word for word but gist is) Punch a liberal and when they get back up punch em again and again when back up punch them again, Sooner or later they lash back or resist (guess it means everyone can only take so much before they have to change their thinking)

Ohh and when it's your daughter been raped or your son shot maybe you would change your views

My dad hit me once in my life with a very thick army issue leather belt, Think it was 3 maybe 4 lashes across backside, My crime was to have shouted "bloody bitch" to me mom when i was around 12yrs old

Never did me any harm, And i know many a school friend who had good hidings off their parents and all turned out very decent people, But abuse obviously should not be tollerated


Only way the UK will get the DP is if politicians get to grips with what the majority of their voters want (this is as likely as me landing on mars) (as said EU law etc so we are destined for more general decay os society and more libs saying ohh they didn't realise what they were doing)

Kill someone in uk your out in 9yrs Rob a bank or do a paper-crime you fubared dude bigtime

Ohh and as for sex offenders that wait until their victims are 13 before raping/mollesting them because it's a lesser punishment when victim is 13 and over i say hang em slowly while a rotty chews on their scrotes

Please Have Fun

Ciao

Def

[mrbeast]

The argument that the death penalty should be used if 'they are 100% sure' doesn't hold up to scrutiny. This is because guilty or not guilty do not work on a continum, its either 100% this way or 100% that way. Theres no 'well we think he might have done it but not sure, so we'll bang him up just in case. If there is doubt its a not guilty verduct.

I think you will find that the authorities felt that all those people who turned out to have been innocent in the end were 100% guilty at the time.

Also it would not do faith in the leagal system much good if the punishment was comuted to a lesser one because they are not sure if he did it.

[fredbass]

Look: the legal system with a jury of ones peers has found the defendant guilty of Murder. One can argue all day that the jury could have made a mistake. You can't ignore a conviction because there's a small chance that the verdict is wrong. The guilty party should receive an appropriate penalty which is death for death. And until the execution is carried out, the convicted has numerous opportunities of appeal in the USA, which some say are far too many opportunities. So given the vast amount of appeals, once all opportunities have been forgone then the execution should be carried out.

A life sentence is not appropriate for murder.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by fredbass

Look: the legal system with a jury of ones peers has found the defendant guilty of Murder. One can argue all day that the jury could have made a mistake. You can't ignore a conviction because there's a small chance that the verdict is wrong. The guilty party should receive an appropriate penalty which is death for death. And until the execution is carried out, the convicted has numerous opportunities of appeal in the USA, which some say are far too many opportunities. So given the vast amount of appeals, once all opportunities have been forgone then the execution should be carried out.

A life sentence is not appropriate for murder.

But the chance still remains.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by fredbass

A life sentence is not appropriate for murder.

I think it is. A death sentence is an easy way out. If I was given a choice between a miserable boring existence in a limited space with no stimulation for the rest of my life and a quick death I believe I would choose death.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by fredbass

The guilty party should receive an appropriate penalty which is death for death.

Rape the rapist, anyone?
Have you ever gotten in a fight, and regretted it afterwards?

And until the execution is carried out, the convicted has numerous opportunities of appeal in the USA, which some say are far too many opportunities.

If the state decides it's allowed to kill you, you should get as many appeals as you like.

agreeing with mrbeast here http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...5&postcount=62

[fredbass]

Originally Posted by bradclark1

I think it is. A death sentence is an easy way out. If I was given a choice between a miserable boring existence in a limited space with no stimulation for the rest of my life and a quick death I believe I would choose death.

I still believe death is appropriate for death, but I too would prefer death rather than a life sentence, given a choice.

[fredbass]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Rape the rapist, anyone?
Have you ever gotten in a fight, and regretted it afterwards?

If the state decides it's allowed to kill you, you should get as many appeals as you like.

We're talking about death or no death aren't we? Don't confuse the issue.
I believe the death penalty is only appropriate for murder. If one is convicted of rape or child molestation, then a difference sentence should be applied.

And so you believe in an endless amount of appeals. If that was the case, then noone would be executed unless they stopped appealing, would they.

[August]

Originally Posted by fredbass

I believe the death penalty is only appropriate for murder.

One could say that 60-80 years stuck inside a drab 8x10' cell is a kind of living death...

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by August

One could say that 60-80 years stuck inside a drab 8x10' cell is a kind of living death...

Could be very expensive for taxpayers though. Taxes going to house these types is not money well spent. And for most of these types, do you believe any can be rehabilitated? Dollars to donuts that figure would be rather low statistically.

[fredbass]

And on a slightly tangent curve: Could killing a sole or spirit of someone leaving them in complete depression thus not able to live an enjoyable life be considered a form of murder? Should we consider executing someone for commiting such act?

Just something to think about.

[Tchocky]

Losing my fish would indeed be depressing. Hang 'em.

[fredbass]

Originally Posted by Sea Demon

Could be very expensive for taxpayers though. Taxes going to house these types is not money well spent. And for most of these types, do you believe any can be rehabilitated? Dollars to donuts that figure would be rather low statistically.

Irrelevant to me. They don't deserve to be rehabilitated. And yes, tax payers should not have to pay to keep them alive.

Interesting Tidbit I read on CNN today.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/02/28/....ap/index.html

[mrbeast]

The reason for the rising cost of the prison population is because there are simply too many people sitting in prisons. Surely society would benefit from more constructive forms of punnishment being implemented for lesser crimes. In the UK prisons are bulging with persistant though minor offenders that learn nothing from their incarceration except better ways of commiting crime. IIRC in the US there is the '3 strikes' system which has produced anomalous situations of repeat shoplifters being handed 25 year sentances for example. I would suggest its these people who cost vast sums of funds for prisons not convicted murders on life sentances.

The argument that it is cheaper to sentance someone to death than it is to hand them a life sentance is false.

Sentancing someone to death is not cheap it costs around 2 or 3 million dollars to carry out an execution and pay for all the court costs of appeals added to the cost of housing an inmate while this goes on. Its actually cheaper to keep a prisoner in prison for an average life sentance than it is to put them on death row.