This country is in a recession still, just on an economic point capitol punishment makes sense! Just for a case study on this point how much does an appeal, 90 days jail and a hanging cost compared to 20 odd years in a high security jail cost? As for the argument that the death penalty is cruel and unusual, that is based on the US model where the convicted were left to languish for decades before the deed was done! The British model was that the condemned spent 90 days in prison and had the right to 1 appeal they were then hanged. The other argument is that innocent people could be hung, this will always be a sticking point, with the advances in modern technology the chances of this will be slimmer, but the ultimate descision will always rest with the morally just individuals charged with sentencing, and on that note, judges need to take a look at them selves and get a grip!
I agree with dingerr, we are now so far removed from the days when we could be judgemental, intolerant or downright nasty to anyone that it's a dead duck fro the off. Hell, we can't even deport the tossers that publicly preach that their followers should kill non Muslims, treason doesn't seem to exist anymore (Apart from taking speeding points) Britain in ruined forever.
Unlike my left-wing probation officer brother, I am completely against the death penalty.
Criminal punishment has a number of constituent parts, only one of which is satisfied by a death sentence.
In no particular order: The first is Public safety. This is the one criteria that is met by killing criminals, but then again it is also met by life imprisonment or any number of less than death penalties. Once dead, the criminal cannot offend again.
Next is rehabilitation. In my humble opinion, it is pretty difficult to rehabilitate someone who is lying cold on a mortuary slab. No amount of corrective treatment or punishment can retrain a dead person.
Leading onto retribution, which is not fully achieved either. Sure the bastard suffers the uncertainty of when his life will end, and probably suffers the deep sense of regret from getting caught which affects any offender who is only sorry for himself. But once he is dead, where's the retribution? Wouldn't this be much better served by endless pointless hard labour? I am sure the old US cliche of breaking rocks, or the army glasshouse punishment of the 50's which involved shoveling a pile of coal from one place to another then back again, are much more effective in this regard. Retribution should be long, painful and observable for maximum satisfaction.
The last, and probably the least served by the death penalty, is deterrence. Most murders are carried out on the spur of the moment in a fit of rage, with no thought to either the effects or the consequences. Capital punishment is no deterrent at all in these cases. In addition, there are plenty of studies, and opinion from the law-enforcement community, which show that having the death penalty hanging over your head if you get caught, is a motivator to kill further in order not to get caught. Eliminating witnesses or even killing the cop who stops you on the road is not at all that unusual in places where the gallows, firing squad, gas chamber or lethal injection bed, beckon.
In my view, and no I am not a christian or indeed any other confession, it is simply cruel and savage to deliberately and coldly put to death anybody who has been rendered harmless by capture and imprisonment. On the other hand, I have absolutely no objection to anybody being killed during the execution of a crime in which the lives of others are in danger.
Additionally, and probably unsurprisingly, I think the punishment routine for those in jail should be extremely hard. I mentioned a couple of rock based examples earlier, but to be honest, anything pointless, difficult, endless and demoralising will fit the bill.
Interestingly, my left-wing probation officer brother is completely in favour of capital punishment. He says that if I had to deal with some of the people he does, and witness the consequences of their crimes, I would be too. My view is theoretical and based on my own logic applied from a comfortable distance, while he is in a much better position to judge so I won't second guess him.
Actually, I would bring it back on a case by case basis if t'wer up to me. Murder to still carry the same standard of proof as ever, but the death penalty to be voted on by the jury. In cases where 'beyond reasonable doubt' is established, but perhaps not beyond ALL doubt, one would hope that a jury would convict but not recommend the death penalty, thus negating the risk of stringing the wrong fellow up.
Yeah I noticed that too - it's all them pesky never served types innit?
I was gonna pick the first one - then I thought about Jill Dando and went for the last one.
Shame though it may be, but their hideous crimes are almost rewarded by the fact that such people wont ever have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, clean sheets, TV, games consoles, recreation, gym membership etc for the entire time they are 'serving' at HM's pleasure.
Unlike the inhabitants of Colchester Zoo, for example - who's only crime was to wander too close to some dude with a very large fishing net. Yeah I know - comparing animals with humans. Ironic, seeing as most of the time we call these people 'animals'.
No wonder the chimps show their arses so much when you stare at them through that glass.
If plod was infallible at fingering the right person, then capital punishment for some crimes might be justified. But, alas, as too many past and recent cases show, being able to fit up someone seems more important to them than finding the right one.
It is a badly set up poll, but I think the OP meant killing in captivity is never the answer. The military kill because they have to , in order to secure an objective etc .. a hangmans killing is an ordered act of killing per se.
There have been far too many miscarriages of justice for anyone to support the death penalty with any degree of confidence.Also, despite efforts to the contrary it is a fact that the best connected and wealthiest in society would end up with a better outcome on average than Joe Soap.
It's all irrelevant. The UK parliament has no authority to reinstate capital punishment. We ceded that authority long ago.
In addition, the European Court of Human Rights is currently looking into whether whole life tariffs breach the human rights of prisoners. If they decide it does then we'll see a load of psycho paedos, islamofascists and serial killers walking out the prison gates.
Hopefully they will then proceed to do what murderers do best and Dave will call a Euro referendum about a week letter.
Personally, I'd be happy to see Anjem Choudary getting nicked for benefit fraud.
No, not at all - i selected those cases (Lee Rigby's killers, Manchester cop killer and April Jones murderer) because all were premeditated, all are beyond any doubt and all the perpetrators would be capable of committing the same act if ever released - IMO.
The problem is not with the death sentence - it's with with errors leading to innocent men being hung. And if you introduce a higher standard of proof for capital cases, what does that do for those found guilty of very serious but lesser crimes? Pretty soon you start to tie the legal system in knots.
Nope - police have been shown too many times in the past to lie to gain convictions out of spite, due to incompetence or by being petty and vindictive.
However life should mean that, parole after half the sentence is served should be abolished and South Africa should be approached about opening up Robben Island to house violent long term criminals - I'm sure the old apartheid jail warders need work and would be happy to run it for a fraction of what it costs to jail convicts in the UK.