http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-23329092
If guilty they should be both locked up for life and bring back the death penalty.
Sorry for the rant.
just for them? or across the board for murder?
Across. We need a serious deterrent for serious crime.
But would it work? Probably not.
Angry yes.
are there less murders in US states where they still have the death penalty?
not denying its a sad story but is it any worse that the other 600 odd murders in the UK last year?
The death penalty != fewer murders - this is proven in all countries which do have the death penaly.
Further, if there is a mis-carriage of justice its all a bit late to do anything about it...
Cheers
Danny B
I've got the tea and biscuits for when someone spots the Daily Mail readers "light the blue touch paper, bring out the pitchforks" part of the story.
That's the point, when the death penalty is just revenge.
Deterrent or not, people will still commit crime.
both ????? given that one of them denies the crime and is legaly presumed to be innocent, is not your decision a little premature not withstanding the merits or otherwise of your desire to kill people to make your self feel better.
ha ha at ian hislop :D, "the deterrent is killing the wrong people?"
If guilty they should be both locked up for life and bring back the death penalty.
Surely it's one or the other, unless you time it just right and hang them a few minutes before they pop their clogs from old age....
Sickening. Whatever your views on the death penalty, the current system obviously does nothing to deter scum like this.
Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life, and not in some hotel room with bars on the windows. No Sky TV etc - it ain't meant to be nice.
I know it would cost, but I'd happily pay another penny on my income tax to keep my family safe from these idiots.
Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder
Well that [i]is[/i] what we currently have. Anyone released from prison is on license for the rest of their life. Any crime commited by them and it is back to jail.
Oh and that "extra penny" would only protect your family against repeat offenders they would still be at risk from everyone else who hasn't previously commited a murder.
Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life, and not in some hotel room with bars on the windows. No Sky TV etc - it ain't meant to be nice.
IIRC this was done recently. Europe don't like it, so we can't.
If I find someone in my house, i will not be taking ANY chances at all. Better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.
Well that is what we currently have
No, that's not what we have, because you selectively quoted half of the sentance I wrote, which was:
Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life
oh, and screw Europe.
The issue is that tough sentences aren't a very good deterrent (to criminals) as demonstrated by the fact that people still commit crimes in countries with the death penalty.
I don't support the death penalty - as far as i'm concerned it is little more than medieval revenge, and i'd like to think we are better than that. (Just look at the majority of countries that still use it)
Besides - the death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent, as it only deters people who are capable of rational thought - and those who murder pensioners, or rape/murder School girls are clearly not capable of rational thought.
However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental - I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.
I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.
Don't hold your breath.
Yes we do. A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not however the same as a "whole life" tarrif which is what the recent appeal to the ECHR (different to Europe) was about. The tarrif that judges give out at sentencing is the [i]minimum[/i] time that must pass before a person can be considered for release. That does not mean that they will be released after that time and as I said any release is only on license.
However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental - I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.
Personally I think it's a good thing that Europe provide Daily Mail Free checks and balances over our rather spineles politicians who'd bring back the death penalty for not eating your greens if they thought it might buy them a few votes...
with life actually meaning whole life
A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not however the same as a "whole life" tarrif which is what the recent appeal to the ECHR
So, we actually don't have what Legoman originally suggested.
Death Penalties, SKY TV in prison, EHCR, renegotiating with Europe
whats next - are we to have 5 page thread on what stylish,understated yet practical oufit kate middleton will be wearing during the birth of the royal baby?
Well that rather depends on whether or not he meant "life sentence" or "life tarrif" when he said "life sentence". I rather naively assumed that he meant the [s]later[/s] doh Former.
Nonsense kimbers. The lovely Kate will be naked and oiled up. Her sister will be stood next to her in the same outfit gently mopping her brow.
Thing is, if we had the death penalty, we could kill both of these scum, and they would not be able to kill anymore innocent people. Forget all the do gooders, and bullllshitt about we are better than the death sentance.
Every one we killed would be one less parasite walking the planet, and believe me these people are parasites, they prey on elderly, lonely people who can't fight back.
Try sitting in court for a few weeks during a trial and consoling this mans family, what so you tell them when someone gets a life sentence, but will be released in 10 years on licence.
I dealt with a traveller some time ago, he had been fleecing an old man for 6 months, coming back on a monthly basis taking money from him, the old guy was too scared to tell his son, who was a doorman.
One day the son was at his dads mending the upstairs toilet, the traveller called by for more money, not expecting the son to be there, son overhead traveller threatening his dad, said traveller tried to leave, but was detained by the son after a very violent struggle where the son feared for his life and had to use reasonable force to detain he traveller until the cops arrived.
The traveller got 6 years custody, but if you cold see how it's affected this old mans life you would cry, I visit him every so often, and its heartbreaking.
so easygirl what would you say to the families of those wrongly convicted (and in your utopia) executed for murder?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases#United_Kingdom
Thing is, if we had the death penalty, we could kill both of these scum, and they would not be able to kill anymore innocent people. Forget all the do gooders, and bullllshitt about we are better than the death sentance.
So the whole argument about miscarriages of justice went right over your head? Wouldn't it bother you even a little bit if the state murdered innocent people?
They might be innocent of the current crime. But I'm sure they will have got off with plenty in the past, so I reckon its karma time
We could find some bleak and forsaken land on the other side of the world and just send them all there. Genius. 😀
We cold send em all to Scotland when they get independence, write in a clause that they take all the dross, and put them in a deep dark pit on the moors, then if they are innocent in 20 years, we can take em out the pit and let them have a bungalow in glentress
They might be innocent of the current crime. But I'm sure they will have got off with plenty in the past, so I reckon its karma time
So why not just let police shoot people in the head? After all, everyone has broken a law or two. And we can trust the police not to make stuff up, lose evidence or be corrupt, can't we?
Ben you crazy bastard!!!
It's like [i]the wire[/i]. I like it.
easygirl you are the woman Ian Hislop mocked on question time and I claim my bag of skittles
No that would be ridiculous, the police do not meter out punishment.
The police are there to uphold the law without fear or favour.
The courts are there to make decisions re sentences, and appoint relevant people to carry out the sentences.
So why not just let police shoot people in the head? After all, everyone has broken a law or two. And we can trust the police not to make stuff up, lose evidence or be corrupt, can't we?
and if they start, can we shot back with a carte blanche? I mean shirley just like everyone else, they'll have broken a law or two themselves...
Kimberly
No one mocks me cock
Anyway, got to go now, my brother will be back from the pub soon and he will want sex and his tea making
and if they start, can we shot back with a carte blanche? I mean shirley just like everyone else, they'll have broken a law or two themselves...
Even better! It'll be like [i]america[/i]
Will I be able to buy a Sig P229 in Asdas?
*excited*
Last time I in the American equivalent of Decathlon:
[url= http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/9312987563_94907a1bc4.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/9312987563/ ]Anyone need an assualt rifle?[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr
However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental
Except that's not actually the case, "Europe" doesn't dictate how long we can lock people up for. What it actually said was that you can lock people up for life, but must have some provision to look into the sentence at some predictable time in the future. There's no obligation to release the criminal at that point, just that the sentence should be reviewed. So no oubliettes or lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key, but at the same time no obligation to release dangerous and unrepentant criminals.
No that would be ridiculous, the police do not meter out punishment.
The police are there to uphold the law without fear or favour.
Um. Yes. In theory.
Apart from the times the police frame innocent people, bully witnesses into giving false statements, "lose" paperwork, and sometimes just go crazy and shoot someone several times in the head without warning.
But yeah, apart from that the police are great.
Last time I in the American equivalent of Decathlon:
They must be rigged for single shot only? They [i]must[/i] be......
But yeah, apart from that the police are great.
Generally the police do a great job.
The death penalty is great in theory, but we've moved on from the dark ages.
That, and the police do, sometimes get it very wrong.
punishment as a deterrent will always be ineffective. For a start you have to get caught first and no-one thinks they'll get caught.
Those two are a lost cause, but we need to change our society to try and get to the next two before they end up like that...
Sorry I went all rational there for a moment, Yeah - String em up, 'angings too good for em, feed em to the ****ing dogs, yeah sick scum like that should have sick nasty horrible things done to them, yeah, with coat hangers and rusty nails, pull their thumb nails, then glass em in the face, and set them on fire... that's what you have to do to sickos who think violence is good...
[i]But yeah, apart from that the police are great. [/i]
And you wouldn't miss them if they were sold off to G4S.
