FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Death penalty

Death penalty

Jump to: Newest in thread

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

Yay or nay?

Why?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's a tough one...

I look at evil criminals who have done unspeakable things that get released after 15 years here and think YES! End them so they can never hurt another soul.

But then I look at the amount of times they've got it wrong and given innocent people a death sentence and think no...

There should DEFINITELY be harsher punishments for some crimes though!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *tephTV67TV/TS over a year ago

Cheshire

Nay

Ruth Ellis or Derek Bentley.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yay

But only to people who go to the gym but don't put their equipment away after using it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ex HolesMan over a year ago

Up North

Yay

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nay

Ruth Ellis or Derek Bentley. "

This.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Nay.

Humans fuck up. We can release people wrongly imprisoned. We can't un-execute them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *imon_hydeMan over a year ago

Stockport

No, we're better than that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No, better form of correctional institutions, education and compassion

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *oerow16Man over a year ago

Essex/ London

Yeah

To terrorist and pedos

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otsossieMan over a year ago

Chesterfield

No. We’re better than this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

From bottled water to the death penalty is quite a leap. But both seem controversial and sure to raise passionate yays and nays.

Pros and cons to everything and there's no straightforward answer to the death penalty.

Are very violent criminals, psychopaths and serial killers 'evil' (in the Judeo-Christian sense) and so deserve to die or have some form of brain 'damage' which would mean they can't help what they do? Are their conditions treatable or are they beyond redemption?

To my mind it's more complicated than just saying 'they've done a heinous thing hang them'. Would you be prepared to be the hangman?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No. The whole purpose of a civilised society is to act in a civilised manner.. i.e. better than those who act in an uncivilised manner.

Retribution rarely leaves anyone truly happy, and those emotionally involved, invariably cant see things objectively to decide on sentences?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otsossieMan over a year ago

Chesterfield

"Yeah

To terrorist and pedos "

But not murderers? Mass murderers? Child murderers without sexual motivation? Traitors? Spies?

What defines a terrorist? How do you prove it? Where does the line lie?

What about British agents carrying out “terrorist” activities in other countries at our behest?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wisted999Man over a year ago

North Bucks

Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icecouple561Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex

It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"From bottled water to the death penalty is quite a leap. But both seem controversial and sure to raise passionate yays and nays.

Pros and cons to everything and there's no straightforward answer to the death penalty.

To my mind it's more complicated than just saying 'they've done a heinous thing hang them'. Would you be prepared to be the hangman?"

If the terrible and heinous crimes they were commited against the person answering your questions loved ones, then yes, I believe many would be fine being the hangman.

Although that's not really answering the original post lol

Some crimes are deserving of the death penalty imo.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *oerow16Man over a year ago

Essex/ London

Terrorist and pedos are the ones the really make me sick and don't see why we should have to pay for them to live a comfortable live in prison

Yes to the others you mentioned

This country is too soft

Go out and kill some and stay at the best hotel with all your meals cooked watch TV and play Xbox

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable"

Agreed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *riar BelisseWoman over a year ago

Delightful Bliss

No. But life imprisonment should mean life and they should be working 8 hour shifts every day.

Non capacity or mental health patients should have access to crafts and animals etc rather than just medicating them

Severe danger obv would be in a hospital set up not just a standard prison.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nay

We're not monsters

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yay

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *az211Man over a year ago

Bse

"Yay

But only to people who go to the gym but don't put their equipment away after using it"

Can also add the ones that don’t clean the equipment after use!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Yeah

To terrorist and pedos

But not murderers? Mass murderers? Child murderers without sexual motivation? Traitors? Spies?

What defines a terrorist? How do you prove it? Where does the line lie?

What about British agents carrying out “terrorist” activities in other countries at our behest?"

And what about mitigating circumstances. Should killing another human (outside of war) always be 'murder' punishable by death? What about manslaughter or women who kill their abusive husbands?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ndy64hMan over a year ago

Plymouth

I worked for 30 years as an officer in the prison service. I'm met some truly evil people, people I would have gladly killed.

To see them walking around, with their hanger ons, and admirers.

Having to put in reports for parole boards, knowing that they have complied with everything expected of them, behaved well in prison, shown remorse, yet deep down inside you feel it's one big con to get released.

On the other hand I've met some murderers who have stated from the moment they've arrived in the prison they are innocent, won't fo any courses to get themselves paroled, and eventually being released because they were innocent.

The risk of taking one innocent person's life, far outweighs all those guilty ones we would execute.

As a nation we've moved on, I know certain sectors of our society haven't, but we left executions behind and in the past. Let's never bring it back.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otsossieMan over a year ago

Chesterfield

"Terrorist and pedos are the ones the really make me sick and don't see why we should have to pay for them to live a comfortable live in prison

Yes to the others you mentioned

This country is too soft

Go out and kill some and stay at the best hotel with all your meals cooked watch TV and play Xbox "

If you’re jealous of those in jail then I suggest you try some “victimless” crime, and go join them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yes.

If it is proven beyond all doubt then the death penalty should be imposed.

And by imposed I mean acting or behaving in a way that results in the death of police,fire and ambulance staff.

Like the ones who dragged that police officer to his death I'd have no problems handing down the death sentence to them.

No drawn out appeals. Just take them away and finish them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"Terrorist and pedos are the ones the really make me sick and don't see why we should have to pay for them to live a comfortable live in prison

Yes to the others you mentioned

This country is too soft

Go out and kill some and stay at the best hotel with all your meals cooked watch TV and play Xbox

If you’re jealous of those in jail then I suggest you try some “victimless” crime, and go join them. "

He said it made him sick, not jealous.

Those people are in jail for a reason, not because they were jealous of the inmates....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No but make a life sentence actually life. The problem with death sentences is that you can't take it back if it turns out later down the line that a wrong conviction was made. It also stops people being made martyrs to a cause if they're just left to sit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ackformore100Man over a year ago

Tin town

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation. "

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple over a year ago

Cumbria

not a fan of keeping people in prison for there whole life but putting one to death by mistake mitigate this in my opinion..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple over a year ago

Cumbria

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc "

If it wasn't for press coverage TV shows sensational their crimes these people would have been forgotten about and rotted away in prison a long time ago..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Heres a spin on the idea.

Those convicted may choose to end their life if they elect to do so? Playing devils advocate here.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Equally an innocent person could be made to suffer for decades or life. It's just as rotten.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

"Yay

But only to people who go to the gym but don't put their equipment away after using it"

Or don’t wipe their butt sweat away

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's only because society is big and complex and the 'state 'is responsible.

But in a small remote community, the death penalty would be simpler.

And if it meant me having to look after a prisoner for the duration of my life, I'd also be sentenced.

So it's easy if it's not your responsibility.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *wisted999Man over a year ago

North Bucks

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc "

I don’t follow?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No. Our legal system is not good enough to be absolutely correct. Too many cases overturned as a result of shoddy investigation, rubbish decisions by CPS (PPS in NI)

Plus, killing someone is just a form of revenge.

The only time I could be swayed into making an exception would be for convicted paedophiles.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aul1973HullMan over a year ago

East Hull

It would save a lot of money, 85,000 people in prison at a cost of £3,240,573,946 a year (average of £38,255 per inmate per year)

It costs £63,000 a year to keep a prisoner at HMP Frankland, prisoners the likes of the Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe and Soham murderer Ian Huntley behind bars.

But is is morally right to execute 'Lifers' who have killed another person or carried out multiple acts of extreme violence? Does the cost of keeping somebody locked up for 25+ years justify execution? Deciding who should be kept locked up in humane conditions and who should be executed humanely is near impossible.

The Americans can't even decide, the average time for death row inmates awaiting execution is 20 years.

(Source: Government websites & mainstream media)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc

If it wasn't for press coverage TV shows sensational their crimes these people would have been forgotten about and rotted away in prison a long time ago..

I have a feeling their victims won't have forgotten

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Yes

Some who takes away the life and liberties of innocent people do not deserve to keep theirs.

If your crime is so heinous and irreconcilable then taking life should result in the same.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No, what role would retribution serve?

I am all for an overhaul of the judicial system though. Often, sentencing is not enough of a deterrent. Although that is not often relevant for the most serious of crimes as the consequences are not thought about by the person committing the crime.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nope. I’m against. No firm reasons except I don’t believe it’s up to anyone else to decide who lives or dies.

Before anyone starts with the ‘murderers do that etc’- yes I know. But I just don’t believe two wrongs make a right.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ecadent_DevonMan over a year ago

Okehampton

Nope.... more something like Battle Royale (2000 version)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *asmeenTV/TS over a year ago

STOKE ON TRENT

But tougher sentences for crimes

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *kyblue1878Couple over a year ago

Southport

Yes, but the caveat for capital punishment would need to have certain criteria met, like irrefutable DNA evidence, CCTV etc whereby no mistakes are made. Any lack of such should then carry an absolute life tariff. Obviously we're talking specific offence criteria too to warrant such terms.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ensualMan over a year ago

Sutton

Some years ago I read a book on the history of the trial.

It pointed out that many of the States in the USA that still have the death penalty stopped funding reviews of cases on death row because they were finding a high incidence of mistrials. The mistrials predominantly affected the poor that had to rely on the public defence service.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple over a year ago

Cumbria

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc

If it wasn't for press coverage TV shows sensational their crimes these people would have been forgotten about and rotted away in prison a long time ago..

I have a feeling their victims won't have forgotten"

there dead ..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"NO , WHAT ROLE WOULD RETRIBUTION SERVE?

Punishment.

And a guarantee they won't commit the offence again.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

no to the death penalty, but life should meen life etc, the amount who get out early from all sorts of sentances, is shocking, but and here is the thing, make them earn money to pay for thier stay, how about picking up litter of motorways aswell, making productive things that can be sold, it would give them some self respect hopefully making them less likely to offend again, making productive things that can be sold, the cost needs to go down and we need to look at the prisoners to pay for it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc

If it wasn't for press coverage TV shows sensational their crimes these people would have been forgotten about and rotted away in prison a long time ago..

I have a feeling their victims won't have forgotten

there dead ..

No, not all are dead by any means

And when trying to look smart, in future, understand their, they're and there

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"NO , WHAT ROLE WOULD RETRIBUTION SERVE?

Punishment.

And a guarantee they won't commit the offence again.

I guess the British Justice system is about rehabilitation as much as anything though? Not suggesting that comforts victims loved ones, but its a consideration.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *os19Man over a year ago

Edmonton

I think if they are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt and now a days with forensic evidence and DNA we are closer than we were in the past then a proper life sentence with no privileges.To me that means a cell at room temperature in all weathers , one hot meal a day the rest of the time bread and water and no television , radio , internet , telephone.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *den-Valley-coupleCouple over a year ago

Cumbria

"Yes when they can bring in a system of complete and utter guaranteed guilt. (Which I cant see ever)

So until then. Longer sentences and better rehabilitation.

Myra Hindley

Ian brady

Richardsons

Krays

Etc

If it wasn't for press coverage TV shows sensational their crimes these people would have been forgotten about and rotted away in prison a long time ago..

I have a feeling their victims won't have forgotten

there dead ..

No, not all are dead by any means

And when trying to look smart, in future, understand their, they're and there

As a collective we will all know far more about the individual who's committed the crime than the victims if they were programs that celebrated victims and survivors and true heroes of heinous crimes rather than celebrate perpetrator and sensationalising that act.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *oncupiscence73Woman over a year ago

South

No - we are better than that, our judicial system is flawed and benefits those with money. Life should mean life and prison should be hard work. Community service should be just that too.

We cannot murder someone for murdering someone that’s just hypocritical.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ty31Man over a year ago

NW London

Nay.

It goes against my Christian beliefs.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenscentitCouple over a year ago

barnstaple

No...feels totally wrong

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

The question should first be...

Do we want a society with a Justice system that is geared towards rehabilitation and actively works to reduce recidivism or, do we want retribution/punishment?

Modern society seems a little confused in which we want. Justice or, a deserving punishment?

I have spent years dealing with vile human beings who have done the worst things you can imagine! Most don't care and actively work toward repeating the offence.

Very few try to change. Even fewer succeed!

If you want justice, more needs to be done in terms of education, active training for employment and significant improvement on challenging offending behaviour.

If however, you want simple and harsh punishment. You need to not be squeamish about the punishments given out!

I strongly believe that capital punishment has its place but, the court system needs overhauling.

Any capital cases should go through a secondary, even a tertiary court, only once guilt has been established. Not a jury trial, but a panel of specialist judges. Then the safety of the verdict can be assessed and weighed against the impact to, and views of the victims, families and wider public.

I do not trust general Joe blogs to properly deliberate and judge most cases, let alone one deciding if someone should live or die!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nay.

It goes against my Christian beliefs."

Old testament?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable

Agreed"

Exactly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable"

Are you referring to the murderers themselves? Seems applicable to them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable

Are you referring to the murderers themselves? Seems applicable to them"

Yes I was concerned how that could be interpreted

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nay. Humans fail. In all walks of life

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No.

However I do believe that if you're handed a life sentence then that's it, you're in prison for life. Like in America when you can be handed x-amount of life sentences that ensures you're never getting out.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *2000ManMan over a year ago

Worthing

It's a painless, easy way out. I'd rather they have to spend their lives in squalid conditions with minimal food to keep them alive. Not going to happen though, instead it's a life of better meals and warmth than some pensioners get.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's a painless, easy way out. I'd rather they have to spend their lives in squalid conditions with minimal food to keep them alive. Not going to happen though, instead it's a life of better meals and warmth than some pensioners get."

Exactly. Human rights my arse. It’s disgusting

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *os19Man over a year ago

Edmonton

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable"

Dignitas.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No way in hell. If murder is a crime, how can we say it's ok for the state to murder people?

And what about wrongful convictions?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hezuMan over a year ago

London

They dont use death sentence not for immoral reasons but for profit reasons, they make prisoners do labour pretty much free if they killed off all their workers they would be out of business. Prison is a scam

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No....

Its rather difficult to reverse when we get it wrong

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

Never! There is allways that chance it's wrong person! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

"No way in hell. If murder is a crime, how can we say it's ok for the state to murder people?

And what about wrongful convictions? "

Tes exactly x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nay, killing people who aren't trying to kill you is wrong....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ionelhutzMan over a year ago

liverpool

That says more about the way we treat out pensioners than anything else.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aul1973HullMan over a year ago

East Hull

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable

Dignitas."

Dignitas is a whole other can of worms! Possibly worthy of a thread of its own?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"They dont use death sentence not for immoral reasons but for profit reasons, they make prisoners do labour pretty much free if they killed off all their workers they would be out of business. Prison is a scam"

The prison industrial complex and the purposes of punishment is a *whole* other can of worms

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ty31Man over a year ago

NW London

"Nay.

It goes against my Christian beliefs.

Old testament?"

New Testament.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Yay or nay?

Why?"

Absolutely not. A civilised society simply does not function on such a premise. The state should never sanction the death of another human against their consent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ablo minibar123Woman over a year ago

If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay"

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *assion and MoreCouple over a year ago

Here and There, Monaghan

No, barbaric and has no place in a civilised society. Longer sentences for serious crimes should be applied.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

The death penalty is wrong, end of.

Why?

It doesn't act as a deterrent. Look how many states in the US have the death penalty, but still have high murder rates. People still import drugs in to Thailand...

Sends an incoherent message. You killed someone, that's wrong, so now were going to kill you. Flawed logic if ever the case.

They get the wrong person. Even in Britain, where the justice system is far from perfect yet ranks amongst the very best in the world, convicts the wrong people. People can be convicted on false or tainted evidence.

It doesn't save money... The legal process is far more expensive. In the states for example, the legal costs for a death row inmate far exceed the costs of a while life tariff.

It is fundamentally immoral. We have no more right to kill someone than they have you.

When the Birmingham six were convicted, the trial judge said on sentencing that if the death penalty were an option, he would hand it down. Interestingly, on their eventual acquittal the same judge (Lord Denning as he became) said he wouldn't have regret using the death penalty and later finding out their innocence. Alternatively, Douglas Hurd, a former Home Secretary and parliamentary member who had voted in favour of the restoration of capital punishment, stated that the case was the end of the debate and it should never be available as an option again.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arlomaleMan over a year ago

darlington

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? "
ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay"

Why?

And define "no doubt" (no Gwen Stefani jokes please)? Absolute proof, 100% accurate, can that ever be truly achieved? It can't be.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose "

Many have, and there's lots of instances where they don't want the death penalty.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 07/09/20 16:54:37]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose "

And as the convicted killer's neck snaps as they drop, the body of the murder victim miraculously rises from the dead, and is restored to the arms of their family?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

That’s an exceptionally complicated question.

Death is the most final thing, and cannot be taken back... however there are some actions that are irredeemable.

I’m a strong believer in redemption and rehabilitation for most things, but there are some crimes committed by people who will never, ever want to repent.

It’s too grey an area to allow for black and white thinking.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose "

Ironically a lot of these families don’t advocate for the death sentence. I can’t remember where I saw it (it was a while back) but the families of victims tend to advocate more for longer sentencing. In America (where the death penalty is still applied) many victims families write pleas for the death sentence NOT to be carried out.

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Depends on what it’s for

I have to say yes only for two crimes though but can’t say them on hear as world filter

But I think everyone will know what they are

And it shouldn’t be a pain free death ither

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"That’s an exceptionally complicated question.

Death is the most final thing, and cannot be taken back... however there are some actions that are irredeemable.

I’m a strong believer in redemption and rehabilitation for most things, but there are some crimes committed by people who will never, ever want to repent.

It’s too grey an area to allow for black and white thinking. "

I think the catch 22 situation with those who fail to repent is that, in their minds, death is neither a deterrent or punishment at that point, so to kill them wouldn’t serve any purpose bar making another persons family suffer needlessly. Its a very complicated question though

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arlomaleMan over a year ago

darlington

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

And as the convicted killer's neck snaps as they drop, the body of the murder victim miraculously rises from the dead, and is restored to the arms of their family?"
some mite get comfort knowing that the person responsible for the crime against a loved one is now no longer breathing and will definitely never be able to kill again

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

And as the convicted killer's neck snaps as they drop, the body of the murder victim miraculously rises from the dead, and is restored to the arms of their family? some mite get comfort knowing that the person responsible for the crime against a loved one is now no longer breathing and will definitely never be able to kill again "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ablo minibar123Woman over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Why?

And define "no doubt" (no Gwen Stefani jokes please)? Absolute proof, 100% accurate, can that ever be truly achieved? It can't be."

No doubt as in the person admits to the crime or there is enough witnesses to the incident for example. I just don't see why some criminals get to live when they have ruined people's lives completely, I think in the case of child murderers or attackers it is absolutely heartbreaking to see them walk away

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"some mite get comfort knowing that the person responsible for the crime against a loved one is now no longer breathing and will definitely never be able to kill again "

Interesting that you should say that, as there are many cases relatives and friends who have championed the demise of the convicted person have felt absolutely no relief, or comfort, knowing the "killer" is gone.

"Killer" in quotes, as you can never be sure, and if somebody has been put to death there is even less chance that an incorrect conviction will be overturned.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Why?

And define "no doubt" (no Gwen Stefani jokes please)? Absolute proof, 100% accurate, can that ever be truly achieved? It can't be.

The whole point of an early guilty plea is to reduce sentencing & in turn save money, time & emotional distress. If you only give out the death penalty to those who please guilty, nobody would ever please guilty, this releasing them from the potential death sentence - just a slight hole in your theory there

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arlomaleMan over a year ago

darlington

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

So what youre saying is, as one innocent family must suffer from the insurmountable pain of losing a loved one, the only way to balance the books is to cause another innocent family the exact same pain? What exactly does that achieve? "
no what my point is look back at people who have be released and are supposed to be rehabilitated but then go on to kill again it’s simple do it once get found guilty ripe round the neck and no family will have to suffer again

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By * and M lookingCouple over a year ago

Worcester

I say yay purely based on some of the criminal spelling on this fred.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"No doubt as in the person admits to the crime or there is enough witnesses to the incident for example. I just don't see why some criminals get to live when they have ruined people's lives completely, I think in the case of child murderers or attackers it is absolutely heartbreaking to see them walk away"

Okay, a confession is not sufficient. You need evidence to support the confession. Police will tell you that people walk into police stations and confess to all sorts.

Witnesses can lie, evidence can be tampered with. It's no where near as clear cut as you might imagine.

No body is talking about walking away... we're talking about if it is ever okay to use the death penalty once a person is convicted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ablo minibar123Woman over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Why?

And define "no doubt" (no Gwen Stefani jokes please)? Absolute proof, 100% accurate, can that ever be truly achieved? It can't be.

It wasn't a theory love

. Just giving my opinion in a forum thread which like everyone else I'm entitled to do. So if yr looking for a fight try elsewhere

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nay.

It goes against my Christian beliefs.

Old testament?

New Testament. "

Which takes president? Both are the "word" of god. Does that mean you pick and chose?

Or perhaps you are actually one of those few people who use their religious text as a framework or guide, rather than definitive rules. If so

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"That’s an exceptionally complicated question.

Death is the most final thing, and cannot be taken back...

It’s too grey an area to allow for black and white thinking. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *irewolffMan over a year ago

Dublin

No.

Make them suffer by staying locked up for a very long time. Harsher sentances.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By * and R cple4Couple over a year ago

swansea

Definitely Nay! It’s bad enough when people get locked up then it’s proven years down the line they were innocent, they can’t get back them years they spent in prison no matter how much compensation they get given .

People are human mistakes get made would hate to think how many innocent people have been put to death in America..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ty31Man over a year ago

NW London

"Nay.

It goes against my Christian beliefs.

Old testament?

New Testament.

Which takes president? Both are the "word" of god. Does that mean you pick and chose?

Or perhaps you are actually one of those few people who use their religious text as a framework or guide, rather than definitive rules. If so

New Testament is the basis for Christian faith.

Christianity as a religion grew out of Judaism which takes it's core values and beliefs from Old Testament.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *otfabcouple2017Couple over a year ago

Nottingham

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males"

Where's your evidence for the "50+ white males"?

And why is that ironic?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Deffo especially for terrorists

Child killers

And wife killers

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Quite surprised at all the nays to be honest. Wonder if it was your child who was sexually abused and killed in the most horrendous way or your loved one tortured and chopped up into little pieces whether you’d feel the same. I don’t think anyone can truly answer that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Why?

And define "no doubt" (no Gwen Stefani jokes please)? Absolute proof, 100% accurate, can that ever be truly achieved? It can't be.

It wasn't a theory love

. Just giving my opinion in a forum thread which like everyone else I'm entitled to do. So if yr looking for a fight try elsewhere

I’m not looking for a fight, im just debating the merits or therein lack of in regards to the death penalty & so happened to see some glaring ommissions in your riposte

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Quite surprised at all the nays to be honest. Wonder if it was your child who was sexually abused and killed in the most horrendous way or your loved one tortured and chopped up into little pieces whether you’d feel the same. I don’t think anyone can truly answer that. "

I can quite comfortably say I would. Probably because i’d be so overcome with greif that revenge, which is essentially what the death penalty is, would be the last thing on my mind. I also wouldnt see a need to transfer the suffering I was enduring onto other innocent people, thus doubling the amount of suffering.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *isfits behaving badlyCouple over a year ago

Coventry

Just because someone else has lost their humanity doesn't mean we have to too. And of course if there has been a miscarriage of justice at least it can be reversed (to a certain extent) unlike the finality of death. Also the death penalty seems to do little in terms of deterrence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he Ring WraithMan over a year ago

Bradford

Nay, Nay and thrice Nay !

Too many innocent people imprisoned and proved innocent afterwards, if they had been killed what then ?

I would rather a dozen guilty go free than one innocent be killed.

(in my humble opinion only of course).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

But apart from that, can we not study and learn from the worst types of criminals too? Nothing will undo their crime, not even killing them, but maybe some future murders/terrorist attacks etc could be prevented if we don't go down the eye for an eye route?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'm saddened by how many people still favour the death penalty. I thought we'd moved past that as a society.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ackformore100Man over a year ago

Tin town

"Never! There is allways that chance it's wrong person! X"

No... Not always. Sometimes but not always.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males

Where's your evidence for the "50+ white males"?

And why is that ironic?

It’s ironic because statistically speaking 50+ white males are the most likely demographic to show conservative/right wing tendancies - one of which happens to be the reintroduction of the death penalty.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I find this really difficult. I lean towards no, but I've experienced some shit that makes me think yes, kill that piece of shit and I really wouldn't give a fuck. And if anyone ever hurt my daughter or partner, I would be happy for them to be killed too.

But, I think that's just the side of me speaking that has experienced immense pain and suffering. I know it's not the right thing, but when there is solid proof and the person has committed a terrible crime, I really don't care if they die. It's not black and white, and really tough to answer.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No I still don’t believe anyone can. I believe that with any situation in life you cannot predict how you would act/feel until you’re in that situation. You think you can but it’s not possible.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Technology with DNA testing, CCTV etc has moved on immeasurably since the last execution in the UK in 1964. I think in extreme cases and where the evidence is irrefutable, the death penalty could be considered.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males

Where's your evidence for the "50+ white males"?

And why is that ironic?

That not irony.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Technology with DNA testing, CCTV etc has moved on immeasurably since the last execution in the UK in 1964. I think in extreme cases and where the evidence is irrefutable, the death penalty could be considered."

I agree

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

No I still don’t believe anyone can. I believe that with any situation in life you cannot predict how you would act/feel until you’re in that situation. You think you can but it’s not possible. "

So, by that reasoning, is it not fair to say that if one should not be steadfastly against the death penalty for a lack of understanding in regards to how they would feel if they were directly effected, that those who advocate the death penalty should also cease their advocation for such a process by means of they cannot, without doubt, provide reasoning to the same degree by which they would not change their mind nor feel guilt if such an action was to occur?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals. "

And put the peadophiles into rehab and molly coddle them for a couple years till they’re all better?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males

Where's your evidence for the "50+ white males"?

And why is that ironic?

That not irony. "

Said with a certain degree of sarcasm, as finding advocates of the death penalty in a country that is a white, conservative cess pit of hate that is modern Britain isn’t exactly something bucking a trend.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Even DNA evidence doesn't make it irrefutable. DNA evidence has been planted by corrupt cops at times. At others, DNA evidence that could free a prisoner on death row hasn't been allowed. DNA evidence has also been misinterpreted.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No.

I urge everyone to watch a Steve Coogan film called Shepherds and Butchers.

Harrowing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If there is no doubt that the person is guilty and the crime is serious enough I vote yay

Can I ask why you think that such a punishment is acceptable? ask the parents of a murdered and sexually abused son/daughter what they think is serious enough for the hangman’s noose

The irony also isn’t lost that the largest demographic in favour of the death penalty are 50+ white males

Where's your evidence for the "50+ white males"?

And why is that ironic?

That not irony.

Oh I knew it was sarcasm.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals.

And put the peadophiles into rehab and molly coddle them for a couple years till they’re all better? "

Yeah, now you’re starting to get it! Especially since something like paedophilia has been catagorised mental disorder. Offering these people rehabiliation & treatment under supervision is actually a more realistic solution, as imprisonment tends not to have any lasting effect on reducing an offenders paedophilic (is that a word?) tendancies, making them more likely to reoffend.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I agree, but I did not mean that dna alone would be counted as irrefutable evidence. There would have to be much. much more.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Yay or nay?

Why?"

For convicted terrorists yes

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *m3232Man over a year ago

maidenhead

Yes I agree we should have it for certain crimes. But how you could police it so you know without question they were guilty is the hard bit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals.

And put the peadophiles into rehab and molly coddle them for a couple years till they’re all better?

No no no. I’m really not getting it. I’ll bow out now. I’ve said my piece. I know already that you and I will never agree in a million years. I’ll let you crack on.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Yay or nay?

Why?

For convicted terrorists yes

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter (in some cases)

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Yay or nay?

Why?

For convicted terrorists yes

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter (in some cases)"

Oh God.

I’m really going now!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No, because, well the abscence of certainty.

Some people are beyond redemption though so its a tough call.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals.

And put the peadophiles into rehab and molly coddle them for a couple years till they’re all better?

No no no. I’m really not getting it. I’ll bow out now. I’ve said my piece. I know already that you and I will never agree in a million years. I’ll let you crack on. "

Fair enough if you don’t get it, but if you want feel free to google all about it. It’s actually very interesting & because of breakthroughs in study & treatment is becoming more & more documented.

Thanks for the debate anyway. Nice to flex the brain muscles for a bit.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 07/09/20 18:06:30]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshyXOMan over a year ago

Newcastle

"Yay or nay?

Why?

For convicted terrorists yes

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter (in some cases)

Oh God.

I’m really going now!

All im saying is, if we’re hanging terrorists, certain members of the armed forces will be top of the list. That would sharp change peoples priorities.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'm taking bets on whether this thread can get to 175 or will it blow it's gaskets before then

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nabelle21Woman over a year ago

B38

If someone murdered a loved one of mine...I reckon I could be the executioner.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

yes, providing the evidence is absolutely correct, otherwise if there is the slightest of doubt, then no

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Yay or nay?

Why?

For convicted terrorists yes

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter (in some cases)

Oh God.

I’m really going now!

All im saying is, if we’re hanging terrorists, certain members of the armed forces will be top of the list. That would sharp change peoples priorities."

What a ridiculous statement. Flexing the brain muscles as you state is of course very pertinent, but occasionally people have to do things that everyday folk find distasteful and refrain from even facing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ackformore100Man over a year ago

Tin town

I was having just this discussion with my kids earlier.

Take a bow though forumites. As reading through the thread it's great to see none of the nastiness that sometimes pops up. We can debate pretty emotive subjects like adults....

And for me... I'd be leaning towards yes for certain crimes... But I have great trouble reconciling with my conscience. I think if life truly meant life for some crimes it would make it less of an issue. But letting out a convicted murderer who murders again within days of release shows that something is not right.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

"Never! There is allways that chance it's wrong person! X

No... Not always. Sometimes but not always. "

U know what I mean! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Morally, I don't want to be a society which sanctions killing for any reason.

Absolutely. Understanding how these people have ended up commiting these crimes allows us to profile their behaviour & enable early intervention in regards to other would be criminals.

And put the peadophiles into rehab and molly coddle them for a couple years till they’re all better?

No no no. I’m really not getting it. I’ll bow out now. I’ve said my piece. I know already that you and I will never agree in a million years. I’ll let you crack on.

Thanks for the debate anyway. Nice to flex the brain muscles for a bit."

I don’t need to google. I’ve done 20 years in child protection. I’ve seen them come in and out of your so called treatment and re-offend again and again. My view will never change. It’s your way of thinking I don’t get.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Another thing I'd have a practical concern over, is it being a slippery slope. Morality and legality change all the time, just look at what we used to execute people for. It's all very saying it can only come in for iron clad, no dispute cases of particular crimes but the parameters would be far easier to widen if it was allowed at all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nay

Ruth Ellis or Derek Bentley. "

Or yay for

Robert Black

Ian Huntley

Myra Hindley and Ian Brady

Dale Creagan

etc etc

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"If someone murdered a loved one of mine...I reckon I could be the executioner. "

That’s just an emotional desire for revenge

Not something to base a society wide policy on.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no."

World War 2?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Yay or nay?

Why?

For convicted terrorists yes

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter (in some cases)"

Unless they take an innocent life if they’re convicted of the crime then they face the penalty of death simple

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *orace99Man over a year ago

York

"Nay.

Humans fuck up. We can release people wrongly imprisoned. We can't un-execute them

This ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *erces LetiferMan over a year ago

Somewhere off the edge of the map... 'ere there be monsters

Nay. But nor should they just be left to sit in a cell watching TV and living off taxpayers money. Give them hard labour; make them work for their facilities and utilities and if they want decent food beyond basic sustenance - again they can work extra for it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?"

Not quite the same thing.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *orace99Man over a year ago

York

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable"

Like selling arms to a country knowing that they will cause civilian casualties.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 07/09/20 18:34:45]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?

Not quite the same thing. "

The choices were rather more limited there, given the circumstances.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

"It seems to me that humans are able to sanction murder if its for reasons they deem acceptable

Like selling arms to a country knowing that they will cause civilian casualties."

Exactly! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?

Not quite the same thing. "

You said that the answer to should we kill people should always be no. Killing is killing, no matter what justification you do or do not give it, surely?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Nope yet if someone piss inside my mcFlurry I'd probably kill that person with my lovely bare hands

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

No but chop of the fingers and dicks off paedos so they can’t reoffend...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"No but chop of the fingers and dicks off paedos so they can’t reoffend..."

They still would by using a phallic object

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?

Not quite the same thing.

The choices were rather more limited there, given the circumstances.

Or to put it another way - should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no, unless somebody can come up with any kind of justification, then yes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Nope yet if someone piss inside my mcFlurry I'd probably kill that person with my lovely bare hands "
someone's got to fill the spot where the chocolate and caramel was meant to be !

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?

Not quite the same thing.

You said that the answer to should we kill people should always be no. Killing is killing, no matter what justification you do or do not give it, surely?"

You're really using WW2 to defend the death penalty? I mean ... it's a novel approach.

Killing is always wrong. Obviously. But the circumstances were different as we might have struggled to imprison the entire third reich.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *asmeenTV/TS over a year ago

STOKE ON TRENT

"Phrased a different way, the question is: should we kill people?

The answer to that should always be no.

World War 2?

Not quite the same thing.

You said that the answer to should we kill people should always be no. Killing is killing, no matter what justification you do or do not give it, surely?

You're really using WW2 to defend the death penalty? I mean ... it's a novel approach.

Killing is always wrong. Obviously. But the circumstances were different as we might have struggled to imprison the entire third reich."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

DNA evidence, CCTV, witness statements can all be fabricated, tampered, planted, etc... In absolute terms, no conviction can ever be 100% safe.

But even if it was 100%, do you still think it's ok to kill?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *pursChick aka ShortieWoman over a year ago

On a mooch

No as we make too many mistakes in our justice system.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ackformore100Man over a year ago

Tin town

Is it for revenge?

Is it to prevent them from killing again?

Is it to prevent them inciting others to kill?

Is it for punishment?

Is it to protect others?

If you take the "thou shalt not kill" saying.. "we should never kill" ... Why then do we bother to equip our police marksmen with guns at all? Or our armed forces?

When an intruder is about to slice the throat of your son / daughter / loved one... What would you like the police to do?

Some people have to do ugly things to protect us from people who would do us harm if they were allowed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

DNA evidence, CCTV, witness statements can all be fabricated, tampered, planted, etc... In absolute terms, no conviction can ever be 100% safe.

But even if it was 100%, do you still think it's ok to kill?"

In certain circumstances, yes. In times of war and in self-defence. It's the definition of when it is right or wrong that I would question. If you abhor killing full stop, then you would not defend yourself when attacked or you would refuse to fight in a war. Definitions of killing vary, why should they not vary in this way as regards execution? As has been said above, massive grey areas.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Things go round in circles.The death penalty will return as a judicial sentence.Might not be in our lifetimes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *adbod74Man over a year ago

Dudley

Yep all day long, for murders, pedophiles

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *aul1973HullMan over a year ago

East Hull

What's your view OP?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nSeeNMan over a year ago

Z'ha'dum

It's hard sometime's not to think yes there should be a death penalty when your hear or read about heinous crimes. But on reflecting on it id say no because all its doing is continuing the culture of violence. Also if a mistake gets made there's no reversing it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)