if there was a vote to bring back the death sentence?
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated? I’m not looking for an argument I’m just curious. I think in an ideal world everyone who committed a crime would go to jail and come out a well rounded person but in reality it doesn’t seem so easy. Even if we ploughed millions into rehab I think some people would still re offendPosted 2 weeks agoP-JayMember
Assume the OP was reading about the recent hangings in Japan? I’ll admit I was surprised Japan still does that.
No, it’s a barbaric revenge killing to appease the hard of thinking.
Also, if I never have to suffer another referendum again I’ll be a happy man.
In regards to crime and punishment there seems to be two polarised schools of thought (as ever) the right seems to think no punishment is too severe, hang ‘em high! Lock ‘em up yadda yadda yadda and time and time again that sort of thinking only leads one way, higher crime rates and massive prison populations. Nations who actually use science to reabitate and re-educate offenders have much lower crime and are closing prisons for lack of demand, but you know, that sort of thing jsut isn’t ‘common sense’ is it?Posted 2 weeks agonickcSubscriber
I think some people would still re offend
don’t disagree with you, I think it’s almost a certainty. Still not a good enough reason to off them though, is it? Just because we can’t be arsed to deal with their re-offending?
You’d only ever reserve the death penalty for the most serious of crimes anyway, like murder. and those re-offenders are serial killers, and we lock those up in Rampton and Broadmoor, mostly for their own safety.Posted 2 weeks ago
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated? I’m not looking for an argument I’m just curious
No but serial offending is something that needs looking at
An assessment of the 3 strikes rules in California said it didn’t reduce crime but lower alcohol consumption did.
Being tough is seen as something that wins elections, nobody is going to take a policy of working with offenders and people at risk to an election.
Nations who actually use science to reabitate and re-educate offenders have much lower crime and are closing prisons for lack of demand, but you know, that sort of thing jsut isn’t ‘common sense’ is it?
It is but it takes a change of mindset.Posted 2 weeks agoP-JayMember
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated?
The evidence suggests yes.
Once you accept that ‘evil’ is a fictional thing, then you can accept criminals act for a few reasons, lack of options (the desperate) a lack of sense of belonging (the greedy) and poor mental health (the insane).
Thats not to say that someone like Fred West should have ever been freed if he had faced trial, but if he couldn’t have been then a secure mental facility and treatment, however unpalatable, was the right thing to do, even if it was never possible to ‘fix’ him in his lifetime.Posted 2 weeks agobikebouySubscriber
No, but those in long term imprisonment should be put to work and earn their keep. Not something to keep them occupied, but proper work that benefits society.
Id vote No to the death penalty, but do want to see more visiable repentance to society for the pain and damage the perpetrators cause.
HTHs.Posted 2 weeks agoseadog101Subscriber
Never. It’s not an effective deterrent, look at the USA. The risks of a miscarriage and taking the life of someone innocent is too much to accept.
Also, I don’t see it as punishment. Once you have been killed, there is nothing left to feel the pain of your sentence, you have, in effect, been released.Posted 2 weeks agobig yimMember
I’m not saying all murderers should be executed, and all criminals should be locked up and the keys thrown away.
I appreciate a lot of people are a product of their environment and the choices they had. But if your dad was a total scum bag then the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree in most cases. It’s breaking the cycle that seems to be the issue.
But on the other hand if some people are convicted beyond any doubt with bang on evidence etc and are locked up for the rest of their life with no chance of release then why are we paying to keep them alive?
Surely the money could be used to try and break that cycle and help people that can be helped?Posted 2 weeks agoPimpmaster JazzMember
If it was <span class=”skimlinks-unlinked”>me.who</span> had committed the crime Id much.rather be strung up than face the rest of my days in jail, with no possibility of release
There’s this and the risk of martyring convicts. There’s a reason the government never classified The Troubles as a war and never classed the IRA as soldiers. Similarly none that were convicted were given the death sentence (the hunger strikers were the closest to this, but it’s easily arguable their death was of their own making).
The last thing you want is tear-jerking folk songs rousing the rabble and romanticising someone dying for their cause/actions. Think of Tommy Robinson at the moment and what would happen if some of his nastier associates swung for some of their previous work. We – the great unwashed – would know their names, for a start.Posted 2 weeks agoMrPottatoHeadMember
I’m in the No camp, but what about offering a choice to the offender?
I’ve no idea what the mindset is of someone on a whole life sentence. Some people are just pure evil and they must know it. Maybe for them, death penalty might be preferable to a lifetime in prison, with certainty of no release. If we are talking about our humanity here, then which is the most humane option?Posted 2 weeks agomrmoMember
I have no evidence I admit. I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment. Maybe it would make people think about doing such heinous crimes prior to committing them. Again yes, your right. A huge part of me wants revenge when something affects you or your family so deeply!
the US has the death sentence, is it a murder free country?Posted 2 weeks agocornholio98Member
No for me.
Any state that believes they have the right to murder their citizens to keep them in line is in no way civilised imo.
harsher punishments do not reduce crime. it is a crutch for people who believe in good and evil but don’t want to address any of the issues in society. Much like the way the Americans like to arm themselves and protect their own rather than solve the problems in their community. Great for sound bites terrible for everyone.Posted 2 weeks agocornholio98Member
Maybe for them, death penalty might be preferable to a lifetime in prison, with certainty of no release. If we are talking about our humanity here, then which is the most humane option?
There me was an American documentary on prisons in Norway. They were amazed by the prisons the attitudes and the low reoffending rates. The inmates were saying although the system seemed light by comparison they were still separated from society and their life and that exclusion was the punishment and the rest was the reforming part
Question is do you think prison should be punitive (fines, lashes, eye for eye, death etc.) or reformative?Posted 2 weeks agodirkpitt74Subscriber
Depends if we can find a better way to rehabilitate offenders. We can’t carry on just locking people up the way we do.
Prisons are overcrowded and we also appear to have a lot of foreign criminals in the system who we can’t deport because of where they’re from and what will potentially happen to them.
Some people just don’t seem to be able or want to be rehabilitated – look at one of the James Bulger killers – how many chances and changes of identity has he had? You can’t tell me it’s in societies best interest to keep releasing him and giving him yet another chance? We have to draw a line somewhere with certain offenders.
What about the Moors murderers? How much did that cost us to keep those 2 vile creatures locked up in secure units?Posted 2 weeks agoLarry_LambSubscriber
Although I’d vote no, there really needs to be some serious reviews on the causes of people turning to crime. Especially serious crime to try and find answers to deter it.
As others have mentioned, does it make sense to keep sending someone back to jail or pay for someone to sit in a jail for the rest of their lives to die there anyway (well, till they’re let out on compassionate grounds to die at home).
Clearly death penalties doesnt work, see America. Similarly though prison doesn’t seem to either.Posted 2 weeks ago
How about investing in rehabilitation and working on the things that have taken people that far down a road?
Your’e a bit behind the times Mike, theyv’e been doing that for years & it isn’t very successful.
Ask any prison officer. In the 16 years I spent as a screw I saw very little success in the facilitation of reducing re-offending behaviour. (meaning that reducing offending behaviour is facilitated for but It’s not very effective, plus at my last jail there weren’t many who deserved the death sentence, even though I really thought otherwise in some cases)
At HMP Frankland, a Cat A high security prison, they had a SOTP (Sex Offenders Treatment Programme)
Even I though, as a ‘hardened screw’ would need to know that the perpetrator was 100% guilty of a crime worthy of the death sentence. IE, paedo rapists etc.Posted 2 weeks ago
Your’e a bit behind the times Mike, theyv’e been doing that for years & it isn’t very successful.
So the current approach taken doesn’t work? Is that what is being done elsewhere? Is there a better way of doing it?
Is there stuff that can be done at a society level that could reduce offending?Posted 2 weeks ago
Is there stuff that can be done at a society level that could reduce offending?
Probably, but as a now ‘ex screw’ I mainly remember the re-offenders that came back in!
Ending drug prohition would would reduce offending 90%
Hmmm… maybe not 90% but I’d say a good margin. However, most drug dealers/users aren’t murderers/worthy of the death penalty, just either local scrotes/smackheads.
Lots & lots of crimes are drug related but the death sentence candidates are the likes of Huntley, as an example.Posted 2 weeks agomickmcdMember
Interesting fact is that the Golf R is involved in 3% of UK crimes.
might need to rethink that thenPosted 2 weeks agoepicycloSubscriber
Declare one of the islands of South Georgia a badlands with no law, and just drop off the worst cases into an environment that they would surely enjoy.
They don’t like the rules of decent society, so decent society should provide them with a suitable environment with none of the appurtenances of decent society.
No telecomms, no infrastructure, nothing provided other than basic rations, & clothing dropped by air every month.
Let them make their own rules.
Could name it Dystopia… 🙂Posted 2 weeks ago
Essell, you have much more experience of prison than I ever will and I completely accept your point above but could it be that what has been tried, in your experience is just lip service or are therr things that haven’t been tried that could give better results? As an example, the war on drugs in the UK has been going on all my adult life but yet we still have junkies falling about the streets. Could it be that the “hang em high” attitude wins votes rather than fix the problemPosted 2 weeks ago
@pandhandj, I really don’t know what the solution is, but drugs don’t really seem to be the cause of much, if any, re-offending that warrants the death sentence. The likes of Huntley, Fred & Rose West, Hindley/Brady, Shipman etc weren’t (AFAIK) involved in any drug scene that caused/made/helped them do what they did, but (apart from Fred & Fred) the others were as guilty as sin & have cost the country Millions in keeping them locked up. They were never going to be released & after a few years they become so institutionalised theyr’e happy enough being locked up anyway, which defeats the object of taking away their freedom.Posted 2 weeks ago
Could it be argued that those countries with the death penalty have lower serious crime rates than they would have with no death penalty?
Only if you have evidence to show that, otherwise you are just making an claim with no basis, see page one with the link that shows US states with the death penalty have higher murder rates then those that don’tPosted 2 weeks ago
the link that shows US states
Are we talking about the US or the UK?
You can’t sensibly compare the two seeing as the US have MILES MORE crimes anyway due to the fact the US population is almost 4 times that of the UK & LOTS of guns.
Can we stick to the original subject please, IE, UK/death penalty. Otherwise it goes right off tangent.Posted 2 weeks ago
Essell, sorry mate my question was poorly worded (I blame the wine), drugs was just an example, in my opion – lived in the west coast of Scotland all my days – the war on drugs hasn’t worked here. could it be that the rehabilitation given to the murderers you mention hasn’t worked? There is a program about a Glasgow gangland hard man who did 20 years for murder in the 80s and he now teaches art to kids in the Glasgow schemes. He has been rehabilitated. Can others not be too? But then again, there has to be a line eventually.Posted 2 weeks ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.