The Tyburn Jig

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by Track_Link, Nov 10, 2009.

  1. Yes - Let em swing

  2. No - It's barbaric


Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I watched 'The Execution of Gary Glitter' on Channel 4 last night.

    A couple of good performances let down by some utter shite ones. The program failed IMHO to tackle the issue it appeared it set out to do.

    Should we bring back hanging.

    So over to you Swingers.

    Personally if the sentence was carried out within 30 days and only one appeal was allowed and the technique perfected by Albert Pierrepoint was used I say let's do it.
  2. Well, 54% of the general populace seem to want it (as of Sept 2009) and 100% of 5 Arrse users want it back.

    I thought the programme had some well reasoned ideas and arguments about the restoration of Capital offences; and the majority of the "Good" books are quite clear on what to do with child rapists and killers, so we don't even have to offend our Christian morals by doing it!

    Its quick, cheaper than gas or leathal injection, easy to set up and desidely less messy than Mme Guilotine. Let the Feckers swing I say.
  3. Having read Pierrepoint's autobiography, the hanging scenes were pretty inaccurate. I think his record was about 9 seconds from restraint and hooding to dropping, the point of hooding them in cell being that they expected a long few minutes walk to the execution chamber which in reality was next door. Little point in hooding him on the trap as the whole point of hooding was to make them as passive and unprepared as possible.

    As for the acting, pretty superb I thought and I almost, ALMOST had some sympathy for Glitter at the end. Then I remembered my daughter is ten herself.

    So IMHO it suceeded in bringing about some serious debate. I can imagine there will be some furious legal action from the glitter camp.

    I shall now fcuk off to the naafi and post some perverted drivel. Oh, this is the naafi.
  4. Ladies would need specially reinforced gussets to prevent their organs popping out
  5. The problem is not with the execution - Pierrepoint proved that, but in deciding who should swing.
    Timothy Evans?
    Derek Bentley?
    If only we could be certain that we'd never get it wrong and top an innocent person...
  6. Or when given a Life sentance, it means LIFE (99 Years)!
  7. old_fat_and_hairy

    old_fat_and_hairy LE Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    Actually, after the hanging of a woman in 1867, when that actually happened, all females were made to wear canvas bloomers in which to capture the sweetmeats.
  8. Ravers

    Ravers LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    It was actually after the hanging of Edith Thomson in 1923 that this happened. Many people believed she was pregnant at the time, hence all the nice bits coming out.
  9. This is an argument often put forward, but the counter argument is this; how many convicted murderers have gone on to kill again? Evans and Bentley are always quoted but it is hard to find the names of those who have died at the hands of a killer who has been released,

    If life meant just that then no problem, but we were lied to (again) by people who are better protected and do not have to face the consequences of their decisions.
  10. If I was a woman being dropped, I'd want to inconvenience the batards as much as possible after my death so would insist on wearing a lacy thong and rhubarb and tripe for my final meal. Clean that up you fcukers....
  11. Hanging should only be used in cases where guilt has been proven beyand ALL doubt; Huntley, Tobin, Blair etc.

    We know these untermench committed the crimes and there is no reason to keep them alive at tax-payer's expense.

    For everyone else, the people convicted of a single murder, the sentance should be life imprisonment without parole - or privilages such as tv, books, visits, free gyms and the rest. They should be locked in a bare cell 24/7.

    That way, if new evidence comes to light casting doubt on their conviction they can be re-tried/released and compensated. Hard to do that with someone who's danced the Hemp Fandango.
  12. I thought it was a superb documentary and the performances, especially that of the guy playing Glitter was very good. However, all the way through it I couldn't help but think of the fact that they were fictionalising the public execution of someone who was still alive, albeit a convicted paedophile who deserves no sympathy.

    Conclusively after it though, I decided that I most definately didnt want to be in his gang!
  13. old_fat_and_hairy

    old_fat_and_hairy LE Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    Agreed. The number of murderers who are released and re-offend is quite substantial. But numbers apart, even one is too many.
    Then there are the IRA scum. The Brighton bomb plotters would be history, no popping up on national televison and being statesmanlike.
    The oft-quoted balls is that there are no stats to show that state-sponsored eath prevents or deters murder, but it does stop re-offending. And, trying to quantify something as nebulous as a deterrent is like trying to knit jelly.
  14. As has been previously stated, if the judicial system wasn't so inadequate then I don't feel that there would be need to re-introduce the death penalty, however that said the legal system does seem to fail the majority of society by handing out woefully inadequate sentances for what are clearly unspeakable acts.

    Maybe we should just have a purge to clear out the many hotels (I mean prisons) that are currently housing the dregs of society and reintroduce hanging for all those convicted of the more serious offences (Just to ease overcrowding you understand) :twisted:
  15. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    I think the producers used GG as his case is widely known. If they wanted a fictional one they would have had to use a large part of the programme detailing the crimes/trial etc. I also think they used GG as the chances of him suing are remote.

    I agree the person playing GG was excellent in what was a very good fiction-documentary.