Death Penalty

[JR Texas]

No.

It's primitive. No evidence that it is a deterrent either. Apart from the unreliability of justice systems, especially in less-developed countries, but also in first-world countries.

I have a sneaking suspicion that those that cite 'justice' as a reason for supporting it, are deep-down really just feeling a blood-lust for revenge.

JR Texas: If a person murdered my wife, I would want revenge and would probably (and happily) put a gun to their head and pull the trigger. But, Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson aside, that is what justice should prevent.

I wonder if any person out there has seen this: "As of February 7, 2007, there have been 123 exonerations in 25 different States." It is from: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ The data are from the USA. These are people convicted, put on death row, and later exonerated......luckily before being executed.

Human beings do stupid things and make stupid mistakes........especially me. That is just the way it is. We can't allow innocent people to be executed. That is not right. I do not see why I we must have blood on our hands to feel that justice has been served.

If that is where we are going, we need to be more creative. How about burying people in the sand up to their necks, pouring honey over them, and letting the ants do their work? Or maybe, just cutting them up ...small slices....for hours until they finally die.

We could put it all on the internet, JUST LIKE THE TERRORISTS, for all to see. People could make bets on how long the offender will live under the torture. It could be pay per view. In fact, it could be based on a public vote....dial in for death or life in prison.........

I do not believe that a culture of violence is what human beings should be embracing at this point in our evolution. This is not 1607...it is 2007. Justice...yes, but peace if at all possible.

[Jet Gorgon]

"Bentley: the last man to hang in Britain" I think you ought to do more research. Bentley was not the last man to hang in Great Britain. There were 7 men and 1 woman who were executed after Bentley.

It is not up to me how the BBC decide to title their articles. Maybe you should contact them and complain.

I think Mr Hippo is correct in requesting posters to verify statements, especially for an issue as serious as the death penalty. Three sources are the norm for any reporter. And for TV readers' sake, it would be nice if posters could use their own wits to summarise lengthy articles and then post the web link, rather than cut and paste the whole nine yards in replies.

And if BBC can err in its reportage, as Hippo illustrated above, I continue to be against use of Wikipedia, an open contribution centre, as a source.

[garro]

"Bentley: the last man to hang in Britain" I think you ought to do more research. Bentley was not the last man to hang in Great Britain. There were 7 men and 1 woman who were executed after Bentley.

It is not up to me how the BBC decide to title their articles. Maybe you should contact them and complain.

I think Mr Hippo is correct in requesting posters to verify statements, especially for an issue as serious as the death penalty. Three sources are the norm for any reporter. And for TV readers' sake, it would be nice if posters could use their own wits to summarise lengthy articles and then post the web link, rather than cut and paste the whole nine yards in replies.

And if BBC can err in its reportage, as Hippo illustrated above, I continue to be against use of Wikipedia, an open contribution centre, as a source.

I am sorry that my posts didn't meet your high editorial standards I didn't realise there were rules on TV about this. Perhaps you should pin these rules somewhere I can see them before posting next time. I must point out that I never claimed to be a reporter. I also must apologise for not using my 'own wits' to summarise the article. I was just worried that someone like you would come along and claim that my summary was wrong.

Should I send my posts to you first so that you can decide if they are worth posting or not?

Is there only you or are there others that I need to check with first?

[garro]

Here are 3 sources for Bentley;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/134951.stm

http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/bentley.html

http://www.nodeathpenalty.org/newab009/bentley.html

Here are 3 sources for the Guildford Four;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/s...000/2490039.stm

http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/guildford4/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Northern_Ireland...1409087,00.html

I hope I have now met Jet Gordon's rules for posting on TV

[garro]

BTW, if you read the main article you would realise that it does not claim that Bentley was the last man to be hanged in Britain. It is used in the title to mean that the Bentley case helped bring about the end of executions in the UK.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/134951.stm

Edited April 1, 2007 by garro

[Jet Gorgon]

No problem, Garro. Multi sources are suggestions: If you verify your facts first, then other posters won't pick at your statements. Just logic. And my other comments were also suggestions to make comments more enjoyable to posters. No malice intended.

[onzestan]

Especially for the political correct on this forum, and especialy for those with the "why bother" attitude.

Please have a look at lady justice :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Lady_justice_standing.png

Note that the scale is in balance, meaning that the punishment should fit the crime.

Also note the sword in the right hand to enforce the law by force if necessary.

Law without implementation is worthless.

Onzestan

[sceadugenga]

I have a sneaking suspicion that those that cite 'justice' as a reason for supporting it, are deep-down really just feeling a blood-lust for revenge.

Justice or revenge, if some scumbag hurts me or mine without being provoked, either will do!

Unless he's a scumbag with a rich daddy who gets some top flight lawyers in to get him off, but then what's money for if you can't keep your kids out of jail?

[jetjock]

I voted yes however I am in favor of the death penalty only in applicable murder cases and nothing else.

IMHO I would like to see some changes made in how the sentencing decision is made as to whether it is life in prison or the death penalty. The victims family seems to be forgotten in many cases and yet they are the ones that suffer the most and that is why I think the victims family should have the final decision on whether someone is given life in prison or the death penalty instead of the being made by a judge with a jury recommendation as is the current practice here in the US. I would also like to see someone in the victims family being given the option of pulling the lever or pushing the switch if the person is put the death.

I do not consider myself bloodthirsty but merely someone who puts a high value on justice for a victims family and the people the victim has left behind. Each individual and country has to come to their own decision on this issue based on their society and laws and I can totally understand someone who it opposed to the death penalty as this is one of the tough decisions faced by any society.

I do think 'No" will win out on the TV poll as I think Europeans are much more liberal thinking than Americans on this issue and I would guess that the vast majority of TV members are European. With this thought in mind, I was surprised to see how close the current poll is running.

Edited April 1, 2007 by jetjock

[Flysiam]

Can't we all just get along?

[ratcatcha]

Edited April 1, 2007 by ratcatcha

[ratcatcha]

Wow! some pissed off people on here. im really uncomfortable with the killing of murderers/kiddyfiddlers/rapists and would not do it myself unless they killed/molested my brother/mother/gf/niece. if you wouldnt be prepared to do it yourself i dont see how you can agree with it. sorry

with regards killing drug smugglers i reckon its disgusting. people might say "theyre killing the drug users" etc but that is nonsense. to kill someone that supplies a product to people that want it is absolutely farked. yeah its the law but is it right? nah. no ways. try to justify it and convince me please because every time i see news of a hanging for a couple of ounces of smack i really feel like puking. shame on the whole of asia for this disgusting, cruel and pointless punishment of people who are often addicts themselves.

[robert2]

Thailand has a buddhist majority. Buddhism speaks against killing your fellow man. But self defense is allowed.

There is monk for the convicted on death row. The execution of drug smugglers, murderers etc. is perceived as Thai society using self defense.

Edited April 1, 2007 by robert2

[sceadugenga]

Thailand has a buddhist majority. Buddhism speaks against killing your fellow man. But self defense is allowed.

There is monk for the convicted on death row. The execution of drug smugglers, murderers etc. is perceived as Thai society using self defense.

My concept of Buddhism is it only shows you the way. It's up to you to take it or not.

[robert2]

Thailand has a buddhist majority. Buddhism speaks against killing your fellow man. But self defense is allowed.

There is monk for the convicted on death row. The execution of drug smugglers, murderers etc. is perceived as Thai society using self defense.

My concept of Buddhism is it only shows you the way. It's up to you to take it or not.

True, buddhism leaves you responsible for your choices and actions.

[garro]

Thailand has a buddhist majority. Buddhism speaks against killing your fellow man. But self defense is allowed.

There is monk for the convicted on death row. The execution of drug smugglers, murderers etc. is perceived as Thai society using self defense.

The Buddha showed great compassion for everyone including mass murderers. In a famous sutta called the Angulimala sutta an example of this is given;

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html

Augulimala killed many people and collected their fingers to wear as a necklace. He met the Buddha and became a monk. The local king had sent a party of men to execute Augulimala but his execution was cancelled as he became a monk and learnt the error of his ways.

Edited April 1, 2007 by garro

[garro]

The Buddha also said;-

All tremble at violence; all fear death. Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn...hp.10.budd.html

[Nebukanezar]

Thailand has a buddhist majority. Buddhism speaks against killing your fellow man. But self defense is allowed.

There is monk for the convicted on death row. The execution of drug smugglers, murderers etc. is perceived as Thai society using self defense.

The Buddha showed great compassion for everyone including mass murderers. In a famous sutta called the Angulimala sutta an example of this is given;

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.086.than.html

Augulimala killed many people and collected their fingers to wear as a necklace. He met the Buddha and became a monk. The local king had sent a party of men to execute Augulimala but his execution was cancelled as he became a monk and learnt the error of his ways.

Yeah I know that whole not mass murdering pepole and wearing their fingers as decorative accessories is kinda a tricky concept to get ones head around....but really do you think he had to go to a monistary to know that what he was doing was wrong??????

This concept of forgiveness is common in many religions. Islam has a similar story of a murderous wicked man who Killed many men before he came across a Mullah (cleric) who told him about Islam and that he should change his ways. The man agreed and was told to go to a city some distance away were there were men there that would educate him further and help him to turn his life around.

On the way to this city he him self was killed (I forget the details surrounding his death) the angels measured the distance he had travled from the city he was in to the one were he was headed, and because he was closer to the one he was headed then from the one he came from, it was deemed that he had accepted Allah and was ready to change his evil ways and thus was forgiven and admitted into paradise.

I don't think in such henious cases it is the place for men to judge.... instead we have a obligation to bring these pepole swiftly before their makers so that they can be judged by the only ones that truely can.

[bendix]

I'm not a bleeding heart liberal. Far from it. I'm slightly to the right of Genghis Khan on most issues. However, I'm totally against capital punishment in any circumstances - intellectually, emotionally and logically.

It's encouraging that the civilised world is increasingly realising it is neither humane, nor a deterrent.

It's a shame the uncivilised world - USA, China, Iran, Japan, Iraq, Singapore, Saudi Arabia etc - haven't developed into mature states yet.

It's also encouraging that while Thailand retains it on its statute books, it seems increasingly unwilling to use it. There have been no executions here for 3 years, and none pending

Edited April 2, 2007 by bendix

[dumspero]

Absent blowing ourselves apart on a global scale, I wonder whether we won't instead reach the point where, in a far more civilized age and an acompanying super-low level of crime generally and violent crime in particular, capital punishment will be seen as the only rational and just response to premeditated murder where the evidence is relatively overhwelming. In other words, we will recognize that the sanctity of human life means that one forfeits his own when he knowingly takes the life of another. Anything less may be considered insufficient. Recognize this is a minority view, but interested in any (substantive) response.

[dumspero]

Bendix- By 'civilized' do you include standing by while millions of fellow humans are being murdered, such as the popular favorite, the ever 'neutral' Switzerland?

For me, I believe humans need to struggle against regimes that kill at the state level without justification, and I believe that even though discerning gray cases can be difficult, it doesn't eliminate the need for other nations to stand against killer regimes. The concept of just versus unjust wars, for example.

[bendix]

Bendix- By 'civilized' do you include standing by while millions of fellow humans are being murdered, such as the popular favorite, the ever 'neutral' Switzerland?

Ummm .i'm not sure what that has to do with the debate at hand, but if you want to deal in illogical extremes, well i agree. But name a country in the world that hasn't - at one point or another - stood idly by while another country has perpetruated atrocities on its own or another's population. Everyone stood by while the Jews were dying in Belsen. Few cared about Rwanda. A few got upset when Iraq massacred the Kurds, but - frankly - not many.

We're not talking about shonky responses to human-made catastrophes. We're talking about something very different.

Interesting point though.

[siam2007]

I have never been supporting the death penalty in my entire life (which I mostly spent in Western Europe)..... but after living in Thailand for 2 years, and learning that people do kill each other here for no f.u.c.k.i.n.g reason (f.e.: after they lost face, they just HAD to kill their opponent), I now support, but only for murder.

rapists or drugdealers should go to jail, but I think the death penalty is then too harsh for that....

learning about the useless KOH PHANGAN killing of an Israeli tourist today, this convinces me even more that the death penalty should be carried out sometimes. though, that "son of a local politician" will probably never experience this kind of punishment....