[Closed] Bringing back the death penalty..

without a flicker of guilt.

I doubt that very, very much.

cougar - its more about preventing reoffending. Rehabilitation is what is needed.

Its really all rathe3r complex for this debate - its more fun to point out the massive holes in ilovemygears drivel 🙂

the jail population consists of the mad, the bad and the sad. they need different approaches. Giving them life skills both in terms of skills to get work and skills to help them interact with people in a "normal"manner.

Effective drug rhebilitation

Help with low self esteem

All the sorts of things that the daily wail hates "holidays for cons"

community sentances work better than incarceration does.

Read some of Erwin James writings

me? im not a troll...

That's worrying then... 🙄

any of you bloke having a two penneth on this thread got kids?
i know teej has not so he is exempt from answering.

can you imagine a bloke being allowed to live after he has been found guilty of and sentenced for sodomising and murdering your teenage daughter?

and answer me honestly........would you want him to die.

But what would you give to prevent the crime in the first place, seems those supporting the death sentence are only concerned with revenge after the fact, and those supporting slow violent deaths seem to be closer to committing crimes of violence themselves.

Answer please

TandemJeremy - Member

"we will have to make sure in a way that id 100% cant be to hard,"

What is it then? At the moment its "beyond reasonable doubt" thats the standard of proof required.

Now please define a new standard that means Fred West gets executed but the Birmingham 6 or Stephen Downing don't.
Posted 3 minutes ago # Edit

The obvious solution is for society to identify and work with those most likely to commit crime at an early age to prevent them taking that path, however, thats not practical.

So how do you identify these people?

MSP, like any decent bloke, i want a sociaty where my kids/gandkids are safe, where my wife is safe.
but we do not have one do we.
and since the death penaly/capital punishment was abolished murder rates have risen.

go figure!

ton - you do know the murder rate is at a 20 year low? We actually have a very safe environment with a very low murder rate.

that was 30 od years ago, useing modern tecnoligy he would never have been convicted!

that was 30 [b]od[/b] years ago, [b]useing[/b] modern [b]tecnoligy[/b] he would never have been convicted!

😯

Answer the questions!

ton - Member
MSP, like any decent bloke, i want a sociaty where my kids/gandkids are safe, where my wife is safe.
but we do not have one do we.
and since the death penaly/capital punishment was abolished murder rates have risen.

go figure!

it seems simple to me

MSP, like any decent bloke, i want a sociaty where my kids/gandkids are safe, where my wife is safe.
but we do not have one do we.
and since the death penaly/capital punishment was abolished murder rates have risen.

Generally speaking our society is very safe indeed. Some people need to stop reading tabloid fear-mongering.

teej, is the muder rate as low as it was in 1964?

grum, the only paper i ever read is the rugby leager

Answer the questions!

I take it you mean Stephen Downing?

Her blood on him, signed confession. (IIRC) what more do you want?

It really comes down to three things.

first is whether we as a society want to go down the route of barbarism and sanction killing people and have their blood on our hands even if they are guilty.

second is whether we are willing to accept erroneous executions. they will happen so we have to weight that up against our desire for the third thing.

third is whether punishments are meant to be deterrent and/or correctional or simply about revenge. The reason that people affected by cases in the uk aren't allowed to be involved in the scentencing is because our laws say we don't punish for revenge. sentences should be fair and consistent.

If you believe that revenge should be a reasoning behind sentencing and advocate the death penalty then say so, don't hide behind the statement that it'll make people think twice or that it'll have an overall deterrent effect because that's been clearly shown to be incorrect.

I have a son so apparently I'm qualified to answer the other question 🙄

I'd quite possibly want the guilty party dead at least sometimes. In the mean time.in order to have what is IMO a safer, better society I'd rather have that option taken away. Emotive responses are rarely or even never the best ones.

Generally speaking our society is very safe indeed. Some people need to stop reading tabloid fear-mongering.

if you live in a nice middle class bit that is!

if you live in a nice middle class bit that is!

No, by world standards, even the most deprived areas of this country are pretty damn safe.

Intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population
by region and subregion, 2004[6]
Southern Africa 37.3
Central America 29.3
South America 25.9
West and Central Africa 21.6
East Africa 20.8
Africa 20
Caribbean 18.1
Americas 16.2
East Europe 15.7
North Africa 7.6
World 7.6
North America 6.5
Central Asia and Transcaucasian countries 6.6
Europe 5.4
Near and Middle East/South-west Asia 4.4
Oceania 4
South Asia 3.4
Asia 3.2
South-east Europe 3.2
East and South-east Asia 2.8
West and Central Europe 1.5

Nicked it

ok maybe very occasionally mistakes will be made, but we can learn from them and not make them again in the future. Pales tell me though how you could ever compare this to Fred west who spent hour after hour describing how he killed,

ton - its down to the level in the 70s

There is no evidence or even any good reason to think the death sentence deters murder.

Most murder is done in temper, most is done by people who know the victim. Its not a rational decision that can be deterred.

ok maybe very occasionally mistakes will be made, but we can learn from them and not make them again in the future.

So you'd be happy (or would at least find it acceptable) for an innocent person to be executed by the State? nice...

TandemJeremy -
Member
Answer the questions!

yes it's frustrating when folk don't.

ilovemy gears - answer the questions!

Are you now accepting that innocent people would be killed? are you prepared to accept an innocent member of your family being executed by mistake?

TandemJeremy - Member
ton - its down to the level in the 70s

There is no evidence or even any good reason to think the death sentence deters murder.

Most murder is done in temper, most is done by people who know the victim. Its not a rational decision that can be deterred.

yes but they cant do it again once there dead, people need to take responsibility for there own actions at all times! Im not talking about that sort of crime any way. im talking about people that plan then go rape and kill children etc!

ilovemy gears - answer the questions!

Are you now accepting that innocent people would be killed? are you prepared to accept an innocent member of your family being executed by mistake?

but we can learn from them and not make them again in the future.

Like when an innocent person gets executed?

BoardinBob, you'd identify them by pinpointing the areas with a high proportion of criminals based on historical data, look for similarities be the social problems, high unemployment etc and treat the root cause through community initiative; it would be an indirect and long process.

By giving people self esteem you are likely to increase their empathy towards others.

innocent victims get killed every day, no one gives a **** about that, just the criminals and his rights..

so ilovemygears - please define how you make sure these people get executed and people like Stefan Kiszko and Stephen downing do not?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Downing_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Kiszko

there is always gonna be some miscarrage of justice.
but the list of cold hearted evil twisted people sat in our prisons, costing the country vast amounts of money, far outweighs the few unlucky ones.

Like when an innocent person gets executed?

TandemJeremy - Member
so ilovemygears - please define how you make sure these people get executed and people like Stefan Kiszko and Stephen downing do not?

well as it would be such a rare event i don't thin it would be a problem

so you would be quite contrent for your child to be wrongly convicted adn excecuted then?

Wrongful convictions for murder do happen and keep on happening

so the only cost.is financial?

a nation wide vote.. we would have to vote to get some one executed!

Hello - earth to ilovemygears - is there anyone there?

bigbrother TV executions then?

Ilovemygears

Assuming not are not a troll:

If your perp is mentally ill or insane, would you pull the trigger?

How can you have a serious discussion - when you have complete idiots come out with moronic posts such as this ... 😳

TandemJeremy - Member
Right - define that then.
How about people who kill kids by hitting them with their cars?
How about people that loose their temper and shake a kid and kill it?
How about the mother who has the baby in her bed and accidentaly rolls onto it and smothers it?
How about the parent with mental health difficulties who kills a child in despair?

TandemJeremy - Member
a nation wide vote.. we would have to vote to get some one executed!

Hello - earth to ilovemygears - is there anyone there?

calm down old man.. not every one thinks like you im sorry if that upsets you!!

If your perp is mentally ill or insane, would you pull the trigger?

well as it would be such a rare event i don't thin it would be a problem if we only execute the worst of the worst then it will be ok

Retard. I don't mean that in an offensive way, it's just that you actually demonstrate retarded intelligence. Fascinating stuff.

Mooman I can';t tell if you are being sarcastic or what - but that was in response to this

ilovemygears - Member

people that kill kids should die, horribly

I was just showing how ridiculous that is and trying to get ilovemygears to define where he would draw the line.

You do realise that the truly evil killers get whole life tariffs don't you? They never get out. Unless their conviction is overturned.

I have a son if any one hurt him i would want him dead, I may in the wrong circumstances do something to end the wrong doers life horribly . That is called a loss of objectivity, that is not part of a civilized justice system and why the victim or there family's views should not take precedence in either determining guilt or punishment.

I do not want my child growing up in a country with the death penalty especially one he shares with people like ilovemygears who sees the state sanctioned execution of an innocent as an acceptable risk and learning opportunity.

And mate i know far more about modern forensic technology and the chances of a miscarriage of justice than you.

TandemJeremy

i know no one ever wanted to sleep with you so children were never a issue. but for some of us the idea that people that hurt them can ever walk free again is disgusting!

[img] [/img]

retard

I think this thread is in a similar vein.

So - are you going to answer any of the questions I have put to you?

I've reported this thread for being retarded

a nation wide vote.. we would have to vote to get some one executed!

Sorry, but you're an idiot and you shouldn't be allowed to vote on x-factor, never mind being allowed to vote on someone being executed

crankboy has just hit the nail on the head.
whole life tarrifs.
they never ever get released.
so why should we pay to look after them.
a lethal injection is not inhumane.

and all the people in named in my list are on full life tarrif's.

mooman - Member
How can you have a serious discussion - when you have complete idiots come out with moronic posts such as this ...

TandemJeremy - Member
Right - define that then.
How about people who kill kids by hitting them with their cars?
How about people that loose their temper and shake a kid and kill it?
How about the mother who has the baby in her bed and accidentaly rolls onto it and smothers it?
How about the parent with mental health difficulties who kills a child in despair?

TandemJeremy - Member

So - are you going to answer any of the questions I have put to you?

?????????????????????????????????????

So - are you going to answer any of the questions I have put to you?

which ones??? i think i have!

Not one answer yet. Here are 3 simple questions

1) how do you define this new category of guilt you want that allows you to execute?

2) how do you differentiate between different degrees of child killing to decide who gets a death sentence?

3) do you accept that miscarriages will happen and thus would you be content for your son to be executed for a crime he id not commit?

I think it makes perfect sense to make the moral judgement that killing people is wrong and then punish people who kill people by killing them.

Yes, that is both logical and sensible.

FFS.

I think it makes perfect sense to make the moral judgement that killing people is wrong and then punish people who kill people by killing them

Wasn't Ian Huntly mentally ill?

no, he pretended he was, but is in wakefield hmp.

ILMG You are a prince amongst men.

This sums it up.

No man is an island, entire of itself
every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main
if a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were,
as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were
any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls
it tolls for thee

Wasn't Ian Huntly mentally ill?

1) how do you define this new category of guilt you want that allows you to execute?

2) how do you differentiate between different degrees of child killing to decide who gets a death sentence?

if it was sexual in nature!

3) do you accept that miscarriages will happen and thus would you be content for your son to be executed for a crime he id not commit?

i aim would be to crate a system that meant that could not happen, i dont think we should have a death penalty carried out untill that time. much investment must be made in this first.

sooner or later the bell tolls for us all...

i aim would be to crate a system that meant that could not happen, i dont think we should have a death penalty carried out untill that time. much investment must be made in this first.

[img] [/img]

i would still rely on the good old british judiciary system.

So ton, you've never objected to what you've considered light sentencing?

Those that think executing people is cheaper than keeping them banged up need to wake up, in the US (have to use as an example as they're one of the last western "civilisations" to still use the death penalty) i believe the average time spent on death row is over ten years, in which the state is constantly paying for their legal representation (legal aid), it is not cheap and it is in fact usually cheaper to lock them up for life.

Thankfully reading the pro arguments on here have convinced me that they are so badly put together and only held by extremists that they have no chance of ever getting the death penalty back.

What was your sentence ton?

Al, i was meaning if you go to court and get found guilty then that's that.
how many people get off who are guilty?

Thankfully reading the pro arguments on here have convinced me that they are so badly put together and only held by extremists that they have no chance of ever getting the death penalty back.

lets hope we dont have a vote about it then!
sun paper vote = 79.99% want it back

Government survey = 58% but up to 76% for child murder

1) how do you define this new category of guilt you want that allows you to execute?

ILMG has answered this one

2) how do you differentiate between different degrees of child killing to decide who gets a death sentence?

Any act that is accepted to cause harm and leads to the death of a child- I like the ambiguity of this one as it could get some drunk drivers strung up as well

3) do you accept that miscarriages will happen and thus would you be content for your son to be executed for a crime he id not commit?

Collateral damage, in general it would be for the greater good so if a few slip through the net so be it

Collateral damage, in general it would be for the greater good so if a few slip through the net so be it

Is it better to point out to Ben just how stupid he sounds or just laugh at this?

given point 1 and the robust nature of the evidence required and the likely years of appeals do you think people would slip through?

given point 1 and the robust nature of the evidence required and the likely years of appeals do you think people would slip through?

I'm not sure you'd always get a tape of them doing it, is that an essential?

there is always gonna be some miscarrage of justice.
but the list of cold hearted evil twisted people sat in our prisons, costing the country vast amounts of money, far outweighs the few unlucky ones.

I'd rather pay the price for keeping them in prisons rather than having the "unlucky few" pay the ultimate price.

Jeezus Ton, get a grip.

mate, we all have a right to a opinion.

mate, we all have a right to a opinion.

Yeah, I know, but like the Bendy fella says, get a grip.

"1) how do you define this new category of guilt you want that allows you to execute?"

you would have to produce irrefutable evidence, for example the 13 minute tape of the Mira hyndley killing a small child.. maybe a min of three bits of evidence of equal quality

right - so thats the same irrefutable evidence that convicted Downing then.

You still have not defined it. at the moment we have "beyond reasonable doubt" You want another category thats a higher standard than that. define it

"2) how do you differentiate between different degrees of child killing to decide who gets a death sentence?"

if it was sexual in nature!

so only killers of children with sexual motives get a death sentence then?
The 17 yr old boy with his 15 3/4 yr old girlfiend get a bit carried away with erotic asphyxiation and she dies. he gets executed. Thomas Hamilton ( the dunblane killer) does not.

"3) do you accept that miscarriages will happen and thus would you be content for your son to be executed for a crime he id not commit?"

i aim would be to crate a system that meant that could not happen, i dont think we should have a death penalty carried out until that time. much investment must be made in this first.

so somehow you are going to create an infallible system of jurisprudence. Something no country everywhere has ever been able to do.

I'm both deeply saddened and amused at the same time by gears' ability to troll us to 4 or 5 pages in such a short amount of time. He's in Cornball isn't he? Not Surf-Mat messing with our heads is it?