FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > shud we reintroduce the death penalty?

shud we reintroduce the death penalty?

Jump to: Newest in thread

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

if so why? if not also why not? discuss x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

done to death

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *U1966Man over a year ago

Devon

YES for child murderers drug dealers cop killers mass murderers and terrorists long drop on short rope

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Tricky one this. I would say yes. Saying that, it depends on the crime. Murder and sex offenders definitely!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *riskynriskyCouple over a year ago

Essex.

Yes... For people who drive those big big yaris's and micras' and need two spaces because they can't park straight in a car park or have to park in the middle of two spaces on the road.... Long painful deaths...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

Only for people who post using text speak!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

define murderers,one direction murdered a blondie classic last night but think the death penalty would be a bit harsh

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

A life for a life.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethany10Couple over a year ago

falkirk

No. That is all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *G LanaTV/TS over a year ago

Gosport

No. Too many famous miscarriage of justice cases where death penilties would have been given. Probably most famously in the UK are the Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *teveanddebsCouple over a year ago

Norwich

[Removed by poster at 21/02/13 07:48:10]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *teveanddebsCouple over a year ago

Norwich

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven."

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. Too many famous miscarriage of justice cases where death penilties would have been given. Probably most famously in the UK are the Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *emmefataleWoman over a year ago

dirtybigbadsgirlville

Oooh the answers on this one will interest me, after the last few days, lots of bloodthirsty forumites about.

My answer would be no.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!"

What a sick thing to say. You know that they were acquitted and therefore innocent?

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 *ust_for_laughsCouple over a year ago

Hinckley

"No. That is all."

What he/she/they said...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society."

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

No. Countries that still have it still have their share of violent crime; it's not a deterrent. Just serves the baying mob.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hetalkingstoveMan over a year ago

London

Absolutely not. It is proven that it will kill innocent people, and it is NOT proven that it works as a deterrent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Are you suggesting society has broken down and everyone is up to no good. Or are we going to be factual and see that crime in whatever form is committed by a tiny percentage. As has always been the case. Of course, not according to the Daily Mail...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hetalkingstoveMan over a year ago

London

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Why does the US have rape and murder at at least the same rate as the UK if the death penalty is a deterrent?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ittlebitWoman over a year ago

Plymouth

Yes. The prison service doesn't put people off and although the death penalty probably wouldn't either, at least the tax payer wouldn't be giving them a life better than most pensioners! Execute is what I agree with... Cull that type of behaviour

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethany10Couple over a year ago

falkirk

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

That is not logical. Even when the death penalty existed murders continued.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Yes, but the sentence can only be carried out by an immediate member of the victim's family, and that person can then be put on a murder charge if subsequent evidence finds the executed person innocent.

How does that sound? Controversial and trollish enough? Discuss?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

The point here is that there were over 23,000 cases of pedophile attacks last year alone .

The sentences are no deterrent and terrorism , drug offences and other such behaviour also continues unabated .

In clearly obvious cases of organised crime of this nature we should make an example of the scum , and put the deterrent in place and save money too .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *G LanaTV/TS over a year ago

Gosport

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!"

What for person with rock solid independent alibis and for people principally convicted on forensic evidence in a lab where even control blank samples would have tested positive had they been used.

Any legal system is fallible we have shown time and time again that you cant rely on ours to get it right. Look at the current furore over the Hillsborough disaster and the suppression of evidence at the original inquests.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Can you tell me a country where the death sentence has been proven to be an effective deterent ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

What happens in our 'civilised ' society is that we all go to every possible effort to cite reasons not to bring back the death penalty .

Examples of miscarriages of justice are cited and we all get that feeling that if we execute them and get it wrong we are just as bad !

I wonder if the doubt is as strong in the eyes of victims and their families ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

YES YES YES YES YES!!!

For all those people who have murdered and have been proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Such as the guy who murdered those 2 policewomen, he walked into a police station and admitted he done it not much chance of a miscarriage of justice there.

Id go even further for all those people that are a constant drain on police time, the repeat offenders lets get rid of them all. And relax Sigh

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"What happens in our 'civilised ' society is that we all go to every possible effort to cite reasons not to bring back the death penalty .

Examples of miscarriages of justice are cited and we all get that feeling that if we execute them and get it wrong we are just as bad !

I wonder if the doubt is as strong in the eyes of victims and their families ?

How wpuldn't you feel if loved one of yours was wrongly executed as a result of a miscarriage of justice?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

Would you support the death penalty if your daughter was wrongly convicted and executed?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

I think there are two element to this debate:

- is it right for the state to take a life as punishment for a crime; for soem crimes I believe so

- can the judicial process be 100% accurate - simply not possible

It is the second element of the debate which sets me against the death penalty as inncocent people wrongly convicted could be executed

But a life sentence should mean life

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Without wishing to spend an inordinate amount if time looking fir statistics to back up the argument I am happy to say my _iew is my own and has no substantiation crystal wheels .

If one of my own was executed wrongly , I would indeed be pretty pissed off !

If one of my own was the victim of a child killer and he got 20 years in a cushy cell with cable tv I would be just as pissed off !!!!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icecouple561Couple over a year ago
Forum Mod

East Sussex

"Yes, but the sentence can only be carried out by an immediate member of the victim's family, and that person can then be put on a murder charge if subsequent evidence finds the executed person innocent.

How does that sound? Controversial and trollish enough? Discuss?"

If harm was caused to a member of my family I would probably carry out the death sentence myself possibly without the benefit of the legal system.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

"Without wishing to spend an inordinate amount if time looking fir statistics to back up the argument I am happy to say my _iew is my own and has no substantiation crystal wheels .

If one of my own was executed wrongly , I would indeed be pretty pissed off !

If one of my own was the victim of a child killer and he got 20 years in a cushy cell with cable tv I would be just as pissed off !!!!

So if you would be just as pissed off to have a family member wrongly executed as you would to have a family member murdered then how can you condone the death penalty?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

[Removed by poster at 21/02/13 09:24:51]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

How does that sound? Controversial and trollish enough? Discuss?

If harm was caused to a member of my family I would probably carry out the death sentence myself possibly without the benefit of the legal system."

If you are prepared to kill those who you believe have harmed a member of your family, without recourse to the legal system, then would you not deserve the death penalty?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"YES for child murderers drug dealers cop killers mass murderers and terrorists long drop on short rope "
wot about the people wrongly convicted and or even worse, framed by the police??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Yes... For people who drive those big big yaris's and micras' and need two spaces because they can't park straight in a car park or have to park in the middle of two spaces on the road.... Long painful deaths...

Why pick on micras

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *iewMan over a year ago
Forum Mod

Angus & Findhorn

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Only for timewasters

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I think there are two element to this debate:

- is it right for the state to take a life as punishment for a crime; for soem crimes I believe so

- can the judicial process be 100% accurate - simply not possible

It is the second element of the debate which sets me against the death penalty as inncocent people wrongly convicted could be executed

But a life sentence should mean life "
i agree with the 1st part but what happens when its a moment of madnees when lets say a 18yr old kills someone in a fight? you saying he/she is beyond rehabilitation?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethany10Couple over a year ago

falkirk

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

The point here is that there were over 23,000 cases of pedophile attacks last year alone .

The sentences are no deterrent and terrorism , drug offences and other such behaviour also continues unabated .

In clearly obvious cases of organised crime of this nature we should make an example of the scum , and put the deterrent in place and save money too .

The issues around pedophiles is interesting . It is really an innate thing in general. Think about it, we are all turned on by certain sexual things and unfortunately for pedophiles it is sex with children. I don't believe it is something you decide to do one day when you wake up. Of course, all adults are aware of what is illegal and what is not. The point I am trying to make is that treatment rather than draconian punishments would work better. Capital punishment in any form does not solve the problem as well pointed out by many posters on the forum.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Yes if you hundred percent person is guilty. Saves tax money and gives victims family a sense of justice and you know a hundred percent he/she isn't going to re offend

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Yes if you hundred percent person is guilty. Saves tax money and gives victims family a sense of justice and you know a hundred percent he/she isn't going to re offend "
you cant KNOW if there 100% guilty, theres far too many miscarridges of justice/police framing people for it to be ok to have the death penalty!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I think there are two element to this debate:

- is it right for the state to take a life as punishment for a crime; for soem crimes I believe so

- can the judicial process be 100% accurate - simply not possible

It is the second element of the debate which sets me against the death penalty as inncocent people wrongly convicted could be executed

But a life sentence should mean life i agree with the 1st part but what happens when its a moment of madnees when lets say a 18yr old kills someone in a fight? you saying he/she is beyond rehabilitation? "

Kill someone in a fight would be classed as manslaughter which carries a lighter sentence. But you have to ask why fighting in the first place?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

One innocent person executed by the state is one too many. I vote no.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I think there are two element to this debate:

- is it right for the state to take a life as punishment for a crime; for soem crimes I believe so

- can the judicial process be 100% accurate - simply not possible

It is the second element of the debate which sets me against the death penalty as inncocent people wrongly convicted could be executed

Kill someone in a fight would be classed as manslaughter which carries a lighter sentence. But you have to ask why fighting in the first place? "
theres been plenty of people been convicted for murder while fighting, plus your right you would have to ask why they was fighting, there may be a very valid reason for the fight, killing 1 innocent person makes the death penalty wrong.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"One innocent person executed by the state is one too many. I vote no. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Yes if you hundred percent person is guilty. Saves tax money and gives victims family a sense of justice and you know a hundred percent he/she isn't going to re offend you cant KNOW if there 100% guilty, theres far too many miscarridges of justice/police framing people for it to be ok to have the death penalty! "

If the person confesses or is seen doing it then that is 100% isn't it ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I think there are two element to this debate:

- is it right for the state to take a life as punishment for a crime; for soem crimes I believe so

- can the judicial process be 100% accurate - simply not possible

It is the second element of the debate which sets me against the death penalty as inncocent people wrongly convicted could be executed

Kill someone in a fight would be classed as manslaughter which carries a lighter sentence. But you have to ask why fighting in the first place? theres been plenty of people been convicted for murder while fighting, plus your right you would have to ask why they was fighting, there may be a very valid reason for the fight, killing 1 innocent person makes the death penalty wrong. "

Think the person provoked into fighting/defending them self is different to the idiots who go out looking for trouble

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

If the person confesses or is seen doing it then that is 100% isn't it ?"
NO!! do witnesses ever lie?? and many people have been forced to sign confessions under pressure from the police to crimes they NEVER committed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

Absolutely not ever. Posthumous pardons after a miscarriage of justice are about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

It will never happen anyway.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *G LanaTV/TS over a year ago

Gosport

If the person confesses or is seen doing it then that is 100% isn't it ?"

Confesses no, unfortunately there are plenty of unstable people in the world who confess things to the police they have no involvement with. Some because they suffer inducements to do so, although hopefully this is rare in the UK. Some due to mental illness which I presume is down to a need to attention however distructive the personal consequences are.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *li87Man over a year ago

Manchester/Kendal

Personaly yes but your not killed till 6 years after you where found guilty. Plenty of time to appeal and for new evidence. That way less chance of miss justice.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Absolutely not ever. Posthumous pardons after a miscarriage of justice are about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

It will never happen anyway."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

some crimes are so jaw droppingly heinous it makes you wonder sometimes

we need to be tougher on prisoners tho. get them in manual labor camps and lets get some use out of them. 3 bog standard meals a day and nothing but a bed and bog in their cells

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"some crimes are so jaw droppingly heinous it makes you wonder sometimes

we need to be tougher on prisoners tho. get them in manual labor camps and lets get some use out of them. 3 bog standard meals a day and nothing but a bed and bog in their cells

"
how about changing our culture, better education at a very early age? making our children have better morals?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Perhaps we should allow these people who blight our lives provide some form of entertainment to compensate for years of misery making.

Lets start a new TV show called hangman along the lines of Take me out, instead of dating we bring a convicted killer in front of a 30 strong jury and plead his innocense... hear paddy mcGuinness saying NO LIKEY NO LIFEY Better than Im a celebrity!!

Or a spoof of the running man where we let convicts out of prison to be chased by the Fox hunting brigade chase him down and let the dogs do their worst...Think ill send in a script to ITV...maybe put on before Songs of praise so we can repent later.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

no how about we are tougher on prisoners

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

" how about changing our culture, better education at a very early age? making our children have better morals? "
And perhaps early intervention at school age - some children already display disturbing behaviours then so this would be a good time to start? As would supporting families where there is nothing but chaos for the children to go home to? I often think when you know the whole story of what some people have experienced in early life - while it does not justify their criminal action in later life, it sure paints a different picture.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

No because people will be framed and mistakes will be made. If one person wrongly loses their life the legal system becomes no better than the murderer.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

" how about changing our culture, better education at a very early age? making our children have better morals? And perhaps early intervention at school age - some children already display disturbing behaviours then so this would be a good time to start? As would supporting families where there is nothing but chaos for the children to go home to? I often think when you know the whole story of what some people have experienced in early life - while it does not justify their criminal action in later life, it sure paints a different picture. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Id go even further for all those people that are a constant drain on police time, the repeat offenders lets get rid of them all. And relax Sigh "

That would include shoplifters, teenage d*unks motorists and many more drains on police time.

Death penalty is not for a civilised society. We need to find a better way.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

It ain't gonna happen.

No electable party will have it in their manifesto and any free vote will always be in favour of keeping the situation as it is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

If the person confesses or is seen doing it then that is 100% isn't it ?

Good point but if a person confesses, and then goes on to be medically proven sane then after a short time in prison then it's fair to execute them

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

"if so why? if not also why not? discuss x"

What's your take on it ?

Discuss, talk over with anothe altercate, argue, bounce off, canvass, compare notes, confabulate, confer, consider, consult with, contend, contest, converse, debate, deliberate, descant, discept, discourse about, dispute, dissert, dissertate, examine, exchange _iews on, explain, figure, get together, go into, groupthink, hash over, hold forth, jaw, kick about, knock around, moot, put heads together, reason about, re_iew, sift, take up, thrash out, toss around, ventilate, weigh up

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Death penalty is not for a civilised society. We need to find a better way. "
Absolutely - as much as the emotional response to horrific crimes may suggest death penalty as an option (and I can totally empathise with that) ... two wrongs don t make a right and we calim to live in a civilised society. There has got to be another way

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"some crimes are so jaw droppingly heinous it makes you wonder sometimes

we need to be tougher on prisoners tho. get them in manual labor camps and lets get some use out of them. 3 bog standard meals a day and nothing but a bed and bog in their cells

Victorian prisons were pretty tough - didn't prevent crime in any way whatsoever. Hard labour also did not prevent recidivism either.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

Death penalty is not for a civilised society. We need to find a better way.

Absolutely - as much as the emotional response to horrific crimes may suggest death penalty as an option (and I can totally empathise with that) ... two wrongs don t make a right and we calim to live in a civilised society. There has got to be another way

It isn't just about civilised v barbaric. Capital punishment doesn't work.

You only have to look at crime in countries where the death penalty still exists to see that.

Yes, it plays well to the blood lust of certain sections of the community, but that's about all.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Those that vote yes on this seem to think they have the monopoly on outrage.

I would hope it goes without saying that people in the no camp can be just as heartbroken by what happens in their every day lives.

By taking another person's life in this way, for whatever reason you might give, makes you the same as the person you are trying to eradicate.

From my own personal experience, I am one of four boys. We all had the same chances and similar education. Three of us turned out ok, but one was a terror. Nothing violent, granted, but nevertheless was nothing but grief to us all for years.

He is now fifty plus with a mature family and is happily married. But it took him a long time to get there. Should we maybe have been more draconian with him then and locked him up for years on end, where he would have picked up some great habits and maybe gone onto more violent crimes, resulting in a death penalty? I'm glad for one that didn't happen.

Joe x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

For all those who think prison is cushy with cable tv in every room, can I suggest you've never actually been in one? They're not "cushy" in the slightest. Problem is people are always on about prison as if that's a form of rehabilitation and there's no evidence that it is. Death penalty is also pointless and I suggest as well that victims families don't feel better in countries where death penalty exists. It makes you "think" justice has been done but it doesn't bring anyone back or cure their problems.

Having said that I'm in favour of it when people spell the word should as "shud! "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Death penalty is not for a civilised society. We need to find a better way.

It isn't just about civilised v barbaric. Capital punishment doesn't work.

You only have to look at crime in countries where the death penalty still exists to see that.

Yes, it plays well to the blood lust of certain sections of the community, but that's about all."
I agree

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Yes for time wasters lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *riskynriskyCouple over a year ago

Essex.

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!

What a sick thing to say. You know that they were acquitted and therefore innocent? "

Acquitted doesn't mean innocent it means not enough evidence or the evidence is questionable. They may still be guilty but not enough evidence to prove it...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

I love when people say that, for a safer society, miscarriages of justice are a fair price to pay. Wonder how they would feel if it were one of their loved ones, or themselves, suffering a miscarriage of justice? It's ok when it happens to someone else.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"Those that vote yes on this seem to think they have the monopoly on outrage.

I would hope it goes without saying that people in the no camp can be just as heartbroken by what happens in their every day lives.

By taking another person's life in this way, for whatever reason you might give, makes you the same as the person you are trying to eradicate.

Joe x"
A great example of giving people another chance, allowing them to mature and become responsible - I am glad it worked out for him (and of course, in a way for you as well as he is your brother. There is also something about the milk of human compassion - and before anybody labels this statement as coming from a "do-gooder" - I do believe in law, order and clear, firm boundaries as well as in compassion.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

this perfect world everyone seems to want is never going to materialize. crimes on every level will never be eradicated. sure you can take steps to try and reduce and im all for that

but we still need to be tougher and make use of the prisoner we have and always will have. put them all to work in shackles and give them the bare minimums to live on

prison aint a holiday camp its a punishment

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!

What a sick thing to say. You know that they were acquitted and therefore innocent?

Acquitted doesn't mean innocent it means not enough evidence or the evidence is questionable. They may still be guilty but not enough evidence to prove it..."

Well lets just convict them then, even if they're just a little bit guilty. Hope you never get wrongly accused of anything.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *OOMBBYWoman over a year ago

NOT IN THE MIDLANDS

"No. Too many famous miscarriage of justice cases where death penilties would have been given. Probably most famously in the UK are the Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!

What a sick thing to say. You know that they were acquitted and therefore innocent?

Acquitted doesn't mean innocent it means not enough evidence or the evidence is questionable. They may still be guilty but not enough evidence to prove it..."

Actually that's "a not guilty" verdict, acquitted means they have no case to answer and therefore are innocent of the crime they've been accused of

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icky55Man over a year ago

Warm an cosy cave. Brist

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Can you tell me a country where the death sentence has been proven to be an effective deterent ?

The country Abu Hanza came from, If they catch a thief they chop thier hands off. They have a death sentence which is why Abu Hanza fought his extrdition. they also have the loset crime rate in the world.

ps because a court fined some one "not guilty" does not make them inocent, there may not of been enough evidence or there was dought. there has been documented cases where key evidence has been ruled out because of a technicality.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

Can you tell me a country where the death sentence has been proven to be an effective deterent ?

Do you mean Saudi? Lol well feel free to crack on over there because technically being on this website would also produce the death penalty for all the women here

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!

What a sick thing to say. You know that they were acquitted and therefore innocent?

Acquitted doesn't mean innocent it means not enough evidence or the evidence is questionable. They may still be guilty but not enough evidence to prove it...

Actually that's "a not guilty" verdict, acquitted means they have no case to answer and therefore are innocent of the crime they've been accused of"

Thought to be guilty but without enough evidence, at least in Scotland, is Not Proven.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *awkeye and HotlipsCouple over a year ago

Takeley

Capital punishment has no place in a modern society. One miscarriage of justice is ireversable. My grand mother knew Albert Pierpont, who saw his job as his duty and took great pride in performing it to the best of his ability. Who are we as a society to employ someone however to take a life in the name of the state? Does that make us better than the convicted. It's about deterent. Sentences are too short, the human rights of the convicted are too often at the top of the agenda. Make prison somewhere that you don't want to go back to. Make them break rocks, chain gang work ethic, make them pay their debt to society. No TV, No creature comforts. Never going to happen, like the reintroduction of capital punishment.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hangovCouple over a year ago

sheffield

Pierrepoint himself was of the opinion that capital punishment was not a deterrant.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

can't be arsed to read the whole thread.

how many people sitting behind keyboards have volunteered to pull the lever so far?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

Those who want the death penalty reintroduced often cite it as a deterrent - yet all evidence thus far in hundreds of years lays testament to this not being the case whatsoever.

Therefore we are left with punishment or revenge.

Punishment should mean that whoever is being punished is utterly guilty - and this is never so easy to assume in any way, even after someone has been found guilty - we all know about miscarriages of justice.

Then there is revenge - is it the correct stance to have in a so-called civilised society to have a state which is vengeful in such a manner? How civilised would be be then?

Capital punishment will never return - ever. All the debates have been done to death - no pun intended.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *or Fox SakeCouple over a year ago

Thornaby

If killing someone is wrong, and punishable, then why should the state do it?

It's wrong and barbaric and I thought we were better than that.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"can't be arsed to read the whole thread.

how many people sitting behind keyboards have volunteered to pull the lever so far?"

the usual...

same old same old..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilised society.

Nor has murder , paedophiles , rape , terrorism etc .....

With no deterrent these abhorrent crimes will continue .

So how do we get a civilised society with so many sick people continuing to perpetrate such atrocities ?

"
you heal those sick people

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Nope i never have and never will agree with the death sentence

Reason why

Off the top of my head the guilford 4, four innocent people who was sentanced to life, at their trial the judge actually said....it is a shame the death sentance in not still in place in this country, a sentance i would have no problem passing in this case

That would be for innocent people dead and thats just one case of the top of my head, how many other innocent people would die if it was bough back

Theres never such a thing as being 100% someone is guilty, they was framed by the police and the goverment as they was on a dead line to catch the bombers so they pulled in anyone, the guilford 4 had a alibi to prove they was nowhere near the pub at the time of the bombing that was hidden from the defence, the police actually arrested the real bombers shortly after the guliford 4 was sentanced yet they still left them in prison there for a further 15 years rather than admit they fucked up and framed four innocent people and face trial themselves, if they was on death row the police would have happily let four people they knew was innocent die, how can we bring back the death sentace with a justic system like that?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ctavius StuntMan over a year ago

london

we have a shoot to kill policy.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hetalkingstoveMan over a year ago

London

Those saying it should be applied if there is 100% proof or a confession - there can never be 100% proof. There's always the possibility of false evidence/testimony or of confessions extracted by torture/intimidation.

Why are you so confident that the police/legal system can be trusted never to kill an innocent person?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"we have a shoot to kill policy."
Thought the mods had stopped all cruelty to fellow fabsters a while ago?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"we have a shoot to kill policy.Thought the mods had stopped all cruelty to fellow fabsters a while ago?

"
Only joking - before anybody thinks I am trolling.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *rtemisiaWoman over a year ago

Norwich

No death penalty. Who amongst us has the right to press the button? Or flip the switch?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Senior citizens have to sell up often enough to pay for their care. What do prisoners pay?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Those saying it should be applied if there is 100% proof or a confession - there can never be 100% proof. There's always the possibility of false evidence/testimony or of confessions extracted by torture/intimidation.

Why are you so confident that the police/legal system can be trusted never to kill an innocent person?"

So a person witnessed sticking the knife in or pulling the trigger is still not 100% guilty. How much proof do you need seriously?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"Senior citizens have to sell up often enough to pay for their care. What do prisoners pay?"

Their freedom - what price would you put on that? I visited Colditz some years ago (before it was turned into a hotel it was a museum) and it was astonishing how many escape attempts there were from it - the prisoners knew they could face death if caught but the value they put on their freedom was worth the risk, in their eyes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *evilwolfCouple over a year ago

Leicestershire

"Senior citizens have to sell up often enough to pay for their care."

Yet big businesses manage tax avoidance... There is something to be said for an economy of truth.

The savvy pensioners have already set up their estates in a 'trust' for their beneficiaries to avoid having their house sold from under them to pay for such things - well worth looking into if your elderly loved one has played the game 'straight' all their lives and put much across the taxmans counter - because governments rarely play the game 'straight' at all

Wolf

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arl828Man over a year ago

warrington, Cheshire

[Removed by poster at 21/02/13 13:38:35]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Why are you so confident that the police/legal system can be trusted never to kill an innocent person?"

There are many cases where police have perverted the course of justic to get a result they want

I also think unless your prepaired to 'flick the switch' yourself you dont really have the rights to agree with the dealth sentance, its easy sat here saying.....yeah id happily kill a phedo, but when it came to the crunch could you really take another persons life, i know i couldnt and im not ashamed to admit that, i could only harm someone if it was one of my children they had hurt, because its personal to me, i dont think i have it in me to kill someone who had no inpact in my lifer at all, no matter what they had done

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

I'm sure there's plenty of sociopaths on here willing to flick a switch.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Why are you so confident that the police/legal system can be trusted never to kill an innocent person?

So a person witnessed sticking the knife in or pulling the trigger is still not 100% guilty. How much proof do you need seriously?

Witnessed by who? Do we absolutely trust what the witness claims to see? People see what they want to see. One persons stabbing someone maliciously might be seen by someone else as fending someone off and the knife got stuck in them. Who's knife is it for example? Absolute certainty is never absolutely certain.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

"I'm sure there's plenty of sociopaths on here willing to flick a switch."
Aside from how I feel about the death penalty - I am actually struggling to imagine anybody would WANT to be the one pushing the button/ giving the injection or whatever it is. I simply I(maybe naive here) cannot imagine any human being would feel comfortable about doing this. I really cannot.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I'm sure there's plenty of sociopaths on here willing to flick a switch.Aside from how I feel about the death penalty - I am actually struggling to imagine anybody would WANT to be the one pushing the button/ giving the injection or whatever it is. I simply I(maybe naive here) cannot imagine any human being would feel comfortable about doing this. I really cannot."

I suspect anyone who "wants" to do it, should be immediately be prevented from doing it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Yeah why not. Thin the herd a bit. Just make sure you have the right person

But drug dealers? No. That's just stupid. Unless they are injecting kids with smack. If they sell it to them then a long prison sentence

Why not make all prisons like Tent City in the US. That'll make anyone not wanna go there.

Bring back the stocks in town. Humilate the cons.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

I suspect anyone who "wants" to do it, should be immediately be prevented from doing it"

And perhaps they should be on the receiving end at some point if they are so keen to end a life.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icky55Man over a year ago

Warm an cosy cave. Brist

I have a dilemma with this part.

“By taking another person's life in this way, for whatever reason you might give, makes you the same as the person you are trying to eradicate.”

Taking the life of a person to protect others does not make you the same as person taking a life for the thrill of it.

Other dilemmas are.

Is self-defence of the country wrong, if so why do we have solders killing people outside of the uk

Is self-defence of the public wrong., if so why do the police have power to shoot suspect terrorist without trial.

Those that have lost their lives by murder can never return. Yet the people who took those lives can return and kill again.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *phroditeWoman over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Just another thought - should the mere fact that there are so many dilemmas and uncertainties about this topic, opinions so divided... should this not in itself tell us about the the death sentence not being a genuine option?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"Just another thought - should the mere fact that there are so many dilemmas and uncertainties about this topic, opinions so divided... should this not in itself tell us about the the death sentence not being a genuine option? "

That's why it'll never return.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *riskynriskyCouple over a year ago

Essex.

"we have a shoot to kill policy."

No we don't. Death is often a side effect of being shot, but there is no shoot to kill policy in the UK...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"we have a shoot to kill policy.

No we don't. Death is often a side effect of being shot, but there is no shoot to kill policy in the UK..."

The phrase 'a shoot to kill policy' has pejorative connotations but, if you're going to shoot at someone - legally in the UK - your expectation has to be to kill them.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andysod1965Man over a year ago

Southall

Chop their goolies off

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andysod1965Man over a year ago

Southall

"Chop their goolies off

"
Or make them watch jedward for 12 hours

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"Chop their goolies off

Or make them watch jedward for 12 hours

That's a cruel and unusual punishment and against the Human Rights Act.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

No however life should mean just that life until you die no chance of parole

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No however life should mean just that life until you die no chance of parole "
no rehabilitation then for a 18yr old who made 1 mistake??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *riskynriskyCouple over a year ago

Essex.

In the UK police are sometimes forced to shoot people. The policy is shoot to stop. As I said the side effect is sometimes death. However death is not the intention or desired result. The incapacitation of the target is...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"Birminham Six, Guildford Four and Maguire Seven.

I thought those were good reasons to bring it back!"
what?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No however life should mean just that life until you die no chance of parole no rehabilitation then for a 18yr old who made 1 mistake??

Even then. One mistake that has taken another is one too many

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *inkyScot22Man over a year ago

Anniesland

There are hundreds of people on nhs waiting lists (blood/bone marrow/corneas/livers/kidneys/etc) and hundreds of healthy criminals... can you see where I'm going with this...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In the UK police are sometimes forced to shoot people. The policy is shoot to stop. As I said the side effect is sometimes death. However death is not the intention or desired result. The incapacitation of the target is..."
so then why do they always seem to hit them in the chest/head?? they are highly trained with them weapons, they should be able to shoot at there lower body therfore making them incapacitated.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

"
yep! because its lowered the murder rate in every country which has the death penalty hasnt it??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

The world is a beautiful and wondrous place and there are some beautiful and inspiring people but if i stay on here reading the opinions of the boot hill brigade i will despair for mankind

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"There are hundreds of people on nhs waiting lists (blood/bone marrow/corneas/livers/kidneys/etc) and hundreds of healthy criminals... can you see where I'm going with this..."

Seriously? I mean SERIOUSLY?

Disgusting idea. Absolutely abhorrent.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Thats why I said "I doubt it"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

There's a good explanation re 'shooting to wound' on the Articles tab of the Police Firearms Officers Association website.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icky55Man over a year ago

Warm an cosy cave. Brist

"we have a shoot to kill policy.

No we don't. Death is often a side effect of being shot, but there is no shoot to kill policy in the UK..."

Try telling that to the relatives of the mistaken terrorist that was shot 7 time in the head at point blank range by the police (That was shoot to kill with out a dought), just because one officer was taking a piss behined a tree and did not see him leave his flat, all he did was run to catch a train.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"we have a shoot to kill policy.

No we don't. Death is often a side effect of being shot, but there is no shoot to kill policy in the UK...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *icky55Man over a year ago

Warm an cosy cave. Brist

From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

"They also revealed that de Menezes - whose death brought to light a police "shoot to kill" policy in dealing with suspected suicide bombers - was being restrained by an officer before being shot eight times."

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Why are you so confident that the police/legal system can be trusted never to kill an innocent person?

So a person witnessed sticking the knife in or pulling the trigger is still not 100% guilty. How much proof do you need seriously?

Ok didn't happen in this country ( happened to a Brit woman in teneriefe ) but male caught on CCTV following woman into shop. Stab her to death, decapatate her then carry her head outside into the street where is the doubt in this?? And please don't say the camera lies

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

And he was being 'restrained' which meant they held him down and then shot him. He was, therefore, already incapacitated without a single shot being fired.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *orestersCouple over a year ago

The Forest

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually."

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Yes execute them all let god sort it out

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

Waits for the hate mail lol

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *orestersCouple over a year ago

The Forest

"Yes execute them all let god sort it out "

Or put them all in the same prison, with no individual cells, and let them sort it out

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

[Removed by poster at 21/02/13 17:27:41]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose."

Ooh now you've done it you mentioned the B word

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *nnyMan over a year ago

Glasgow

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

The officer did indeed want to make sure Menezes wasn't just wounded.

Where, exactly, do you shoot somone once to ensure they're incapacitated? So completely incapable of movement they can't trigger an explosion in a confined space?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose.

Ooh now you've done it you mentioned the B word

I believe I am right for the reason stated! If you follow that logic (which is what Ghandi was propounding - yes, he was opposed to it, as am I) then it is neverending. You take a life close to me, I take one close to you, you take one of mine, I take one of yours, etc. If the logical response is to take the life of someone if they take someone else's life where do you draw the line - regardless whether this is state sanctioned - that is the logic of the comment ' a life for a life'. That is all I was saying. Sorry it did not come across clearly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"YES for child murderers drug dealers cop killers mass murderers and terrorists long drop on short rope "

oh you mean like for the birmingham six do you

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose.

Ooh now you've done it you mentioned the B word

I'm on your side trust me all I meant was awhile back I mentioned an eye for an eye and the bible and got crucified ( no pun intended )

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *B9 QueenWoman over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose.

Ooh now you've done it you mentioned the B word

I'm on your side trust me all I meant was awhile back I mentioned an eye for an eye and the bible and got crucified ( no pun intended ) "

But I was actually using Ghandi as an illustration - perhaps I worded it wrongly. I only mentioned the bible as the quote he subverted was originally from there.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amschwingerzCouple over a year ago

West

In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

"
what is 100% guilty??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *amschwingerzCouple over a year ago

West

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty?? "

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"I believe in a life for a life.

If you take anothers life then as far as I am concerned then you forfeit yours.

I doubt it but it might just make someone think before they kill..

A life for a life - is a neverending conundrum though, is it not?

And - taking the next part of the quotation and adding Ghandi - 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind'. So a life for a life kills everyone - eventually.

What makes you believe Ghandi was right? The original quote was from the bible, in favour of, and Ghandi paraphrased it to oppose.

Ooh now you've done it you mentioned the B word

I'm on your side trust me all I meant was awhile back I mentioned an eye for an eye and the bible and got crucified ( no pun intended )

But I was actually using Ghandi as an illustration - perhaps I worded it wrongly. I only mentioned the bible as the quote he subverted was originally from there."

I know x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt"
who's doubt? the police? they handle/gather the evidence, they arnt 100% honest and trustworthy im afraid

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"No. The death sentence has no place in a civilized society."

I agree! Why should we be as evil or worse than those we want to execute? Executing someone does not solve the problems of society and it doesn't protect us anymore than life without parole does.

I don't know about the UK, but in the US it is a lot more expensive to execute someone than it is to put them in jail for life.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt"

So essentially you're not in favour of the death penalty. Rock solid beyond any doubt is not really a burden of proof in British Law. Beyond Reasonable Doubt is the current criminal burden and that leaves quite a large gap for error. Also, what we then get towards is what crimes carry a capital punishment? Used to be Treason. In Islamic States it's adultery (their definition not the swinging defintion) so I suggest no one from here ventures anywhere on that particular list. Terrorism, is another interesting one, does that include drone strikes at weddings? Kiddy porn? Pictures of children of what age? 17?16? 15? Remember that it's not too long ago that Bill Wyman was going out with a 14 year old and SHE was the wild child. What if you're carrying a "blade" because you're a chef? Or in some cases a Martial Arts Instructor on your way to teach a Iaido class? What the hell is a "Psycho?", is this a mental health assessment? Because people with psychoses are mentally ill unless we're also going to get rid of Paranoid Schizophrenics as well?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt who's doubt? the police? they handle/gather the evidence, they arnt 100% honest and trustworthy im afraid "

You seriously think there's doubt with the likes of Yorkshire ripper, Hindly& Brady or even the Krays?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he_original_poloWoman over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

For repeat self-confessed paedophiles, yes.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt who's doubt? the police? they handle/gather the evidence, they arnt 100% honest and trustworthy im afraid

You seriously think there's doubt with the likes of Yorkshire ripper, Hindly& Brady or even the Krays? "
So what about the hundreds over the years that have been wrongly convicted?? be away with them, lets call it collateral damage hey? if theres 100% no fail system to prove guilt for every person who stands trial then lets bring it,while its in human hands its not and never will be 100% so until then its gota be no

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

The officer did indeed want to make sure Menezes wasn't just wounded.

Where, exactly, do you shoot somone once to ensure they're incapacitated? So completely incapable of movement they can't trigger an explosion in a confined space?"

According to my brother who knows about these things its a spot on the lower side of the skull near the ear. one round will do it tho. no need for another six or seven. hit the right spot and all reflexes cease. I assumed they're tried to hit it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

trained not tried

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bbandflowCouple over a year ago

South Devon

"For repeat self-confessed paedophiles, yes."

I assume you mean paedophiles who have murdered.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"YES for child murderers drug dealers cop killers mass murderers and terrorists long drop on short rope "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he_original_poloWoman over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

"For repeat self-confessed paedophiles, yes.

I assume you mean paedophiles who have murdered."

You assume wrong.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

The officer did indeed want to make sure Menezes wasn't just wounded.

Where, exactly, do you shoot somone once to ensure they're incapacitated? So completely incapable of movement they can't trigger an explosion in a confined space?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

No. I would also rather talk about swinging in a fun sense than ape the ravings of the Daily Mail.

Nice to the Swinger Right out in force though. Human rights are distasteful to some but they protect us all from what are clearly tendencies based upon ignorance.

Indeed in countries where the death penalty is practiced there are high violence and murder rates. Check the US for a perfect example.

I take the line which is simple. Too many have been found guilty in courts, including self confessors (I know but ask a psychologist or sociologist and they will explain the various reasons behind such acts), to then be shown as not guilty further down the line of time.

If one person dies innocently then each of us party to the hanging by the State are guilty of murder. Have a think about it and you'll see why any sane minded person would feel repulsion at the death penalty.

And before anyone starts I had a parent who was murdered. I understand grief and anger. Not a Daily Mail reader with too much frustration in their lives.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *he_original_poloWoman over a year ago

a Primark shoebox in Leicester

"No. I would also rather talk about swinging in a fun sense than ape the ravings of the Daily Mail.

Nice to the Swinger Right out in force though. Human rights are distasteful to some but they protect us all from what are clearly tendencies based upon ignorance.

Indeed in countries where the death penalty is practiced there are high violence and murder rates. Check the US for a perfect example.

And before anyone starts I had a parent who was murdered. I understand grief and anger. Not a Daily Mail reader with too much frustration in their lives."

You're obviously very open minded.... ermmmm

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt who's doubt? the police? they handle/gather the evidence, they arnt 100% honest and trustworthy im afraid

You seriously think there's doubt with the likes of Yorkshire ripper, Hindly& Brady or even the Krays? So what about the hundreds over the years that have been wrongly convicted?? be away with them, lets call it collateral damage hey? if theres 100% no fail system to prove guilt for every person who stands trial then lets bring it,while its in human hands its not and never will be 100% so until then its gota be no "

That's not what I or others are saying I'm saying 100% sure no chance of a mistake, caught sticking the knife in shouting look at me I'm killing for no reason and also have signed proof that I'm as sane as the day is long. Then yes execute them no question

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

The officer did indeed want to make sure Menezes wasn't just wounded.

Where, exactly, do you shoot somone once to ensure they're incapacitated? So completely incapable of movement they can't trigger an explosion in a confined space?

but a rubber bullet to the head won't stop someone flicking a switch. trust me,as far as terrorism is concerned the police do have a shoot to kill policy whether they admit it or not

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt"

no such thing in my opinion

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"In certain cases yes 100%..

Psycho's

Terrorists

Nonce cases (providing they were 100% guilty)

Anyone who blatantly gos out to kill someone.

Anyone who admits to a killng and doesnt fancy the rest of their life behind bars

In cases were someone has died as a result of falling and sustaining an injury as the result of a punch up or something that borders on manslaughter

...then no,

I would also introduce laws were anyone caught carrying a blade...10 years no remission, using it, 15, ..double those figures for guns.

Drink driving, 5 year ban first offence, life ban after that..and in both cases the persons car taken and auctioned, with the money going to victims of crime.

Anyone caught with kiddy porn...5-25 years..and no segregation either.

what is 100% guilty??

Rock solid proven beyond any doubt

no such thing in my opinion"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

I really don't care about the death penalty either way - I don't have kids, and if someone killed my loved one I wouldn't have too much of a problem ending the killer's life.

But to those arguing that it could never be 100% proven, how about if you saw the person yourself, murdering your own child, and you knew and recognised the person. Would it be 100% proven to you then? With the technology that exists now, in comparison to the 60's, 100% proven is much more likely.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

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

"From the news, and my appolgies it was eight times not seven.

One would think 1 shot would off completly incapacitated him, what were the other seven for, Target practis or did the officer want to make sure he wasn't just wounded.

The officer did indeed want to make sure Menezes wasn't just wounded.

Where, exactly, do you shoot somone once to ensure they're incapacitated? So completely incapable of movement they can't trigger an explosion in a confined space?

but a rubber bullet to the head won't stop someone flicking a switch. trust me,as far as terrorism is concerned the police do have a shoot to kill policy whether they admit it or not"

Seriously have you seen a rubber bullet it isn't rubber and trust me if it hits you in the head you Arnt going to flick a switch. But I do agree that there's a shoot to kill policy. Armed personnel are trained to aim for largest part body and hence shoot to kill

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *bbandflowCouple over a year ago

South Devon

"For repeat self-confessed paedophiles, yes.

I assume you mean paedophiles who have murdered.

You assume wrong."

Silly me!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)