After recent events. I would be interested to know how many people believe that the death penalty is justified or not.

I have voted number 3. If a countries law, states that a crime is punishable by execution. Then anybody committing that crime, in that country, should be punished accordingly.

IMHO, I also believe it should be brought back inn the UK but only in the case of murder.

If the penalty fits the law on the books I forsee no problem with it.

Cost alone is reason enough - life in prison is well exhorbantly expensive and I honestly believe some really sick/twisted individuals should make a hasty exit from this world.

I have no moral problem with someone who took another's life being forced to forfiet their own. My faith in any justice system to get it right 100% of the time however, is zero, and I've seen too many wrongful convictions to want to see it restored in my own country, or used anywhere else.

What happend to that wonderful phrase used at the end of sentences in the old days "...at hard labour"?

cv

Cost alone is reason enough - life in prison is well exhorbantly expensive and I honestly believe some really sick/twisted individuals should make a hasty exit from this world.

Excecuting someone because they killed someone is one thing, but killing people because it's cost-effective is just sick.

cv

Cost alone is reason enough - life in prison is well exhorbantly expensive and I honestly believe some really sick/twisted individuals should make a hasty exit from this world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excecuting someone because they killed someone is one thing, but killing people because it's cost-effective is just sick.

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well let me clarify - those who've done murders, child pedos and perhaps even throw in rapists. Pedos/Rapists - because they so fk up another person's life. (like to be 100% certain, however innocent die and guilty walk every day, so in essence there is a balance of sorts)

I agree that there is a chance of the innocent being executed and so the appeal process would have to robust. However, I definately think in the circumstances of multiple / mass / serial murderers i.e. the likes of Dr Shipley, or the savoury guys in this link http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/

There is absolutely no doubt of their guilt and so should be executed.....and yes, save the Taxpayers money.

Well let me clarify - those who've done murders, child pedos and perhaps even throw in rapists. Pedos/Rapists - because they so fk up another person's life. (like to be 100% certain, however innocent die and guilty walk every day, so in essence there is a balance of sorts)

So if it was yourself, or a relative who was facing excecution wrongfully you'd shrug your shoulders and reason that it will balance out someone who got away?

I can understand someone facing the pain at a loved one's murder calling out for the death penalty, but I doubt you or anyone would stick by your convictions if it was one of yours facing the noose, or the needle.

Imagine your wife, mother, brother, or similar who you believe to be innocent is going to be put to death tomorrow.

How strong are your convictions?

cv

Well let me clarify - those who've done murders, child pedos and perhaps even throw in rapists. Pedos/Rapists - because they so fk up another person's life. (like to be 100% certain, however innocent die and guilty walk every day, so in essence there is a balance of sorts)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So if it was yourself, or a relative who was facing excecution wrongfully you'd shrug your shoulders and reason that it will balance out someone who got away?

I can understand someone facing the pain at a loved one's murder calling out for the death penalty, but I doubt you or anyone would stick by your convictions if it was one of yours facing the noose, or the needle.

Imagine your wife, mother, brother, or similar who you believe to be innocent is going to be put to death tomorrow.

How strong are your convictions?

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very strong including reles!!!

Well let me clarify - those who've done murders, child pedos and perhaps even throw in rapists. Pedos/Rapists - because they so fk up another person's life. (like to be 100% certain, however innocent die and guilty walk every day, so in essence there is a balance of sorts)

So if it was yourself, or a relative who was facing excecution wrongfully you'd shrug your shoulders and reason that it will balance out someone who got away?

I can understand someone facing the pain at a loved one's murder calling out for the death penalty, but I doubt you or anyone would stick by your convictions if it was one of yours facing the noose, or the needle.

Imagine your wife, mother, brother, or similar who you believe to be innocent is going to be put to death tomorrow.

How strong are your convictions?

cv

Very strong including reles!!!

Fair enough.... you're hard core

cv

The death penalty is directly tied to deterrence.

To know that someone could take a life and not lose theirs, albeit do some time, (and probably not that much with a good lawyer and good behavior) may be a tipping point for some.

At some point, in everyone's life, we all wanted to kill somebody, it's the deterrence of retribution, legal or otherwise that keeps us in check.

The death penalty is directly tied to deterrence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The fear of being caught is directly tied to deterrence much more than the penalty. If you know you won't be caught the penalty is irrelevant.

The death penalty is directly tied to deterrence.

To know that someone could take a life and not lose theirs, albeit do some time,  (and probably not that much with a good lawyer and good behavior) may be a tipping point for some.

At some point, in everyone's life, we all wanted to kill somebody, it's the deterrence of retribution, legal or otherwise that keeps us in check. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Err ,I don't think so Tim. I've had the urge to give somebody a good smack around the ears,but never murder.You sound like a nice chap. Deterrence of retribution never entered the equation mate.

No.

No.

Just get to the point ok?

cv

I think its justified if the crime is severe enough.

Rapists

Murderers

Terrorists

Serial sex offenders etc

(also more personal choices but we won't go into that )

Saves money also, no costs for keeping them behind bars.

No.

Just get to the point ok?

cv

you know what, why don't people just say what they mean. I get fed up of people going on and on and on and.........

Seriously though Rinrada. Not even for those who are in the link i posted above? Is that an absolute NO, without exeption?

The deterrence value of the death penalty is nugatory. Even with the death penalty people still murder, and the fact that having committed one murder the punishment can't get any worse, perhaps encourages some to go on a killing spree.

You may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb (although best ask a New Zealander about that one).

Scouse.

If you want to learn about how sparrows interact and unerstand what makes them tick you go out and you study sparrows...you don't kill every one you see. If you want to learn about how skunks interact and understand what makes them tick youi go out and you study skunks...you don't kill every one you see. If you want to learn about how children interact and understand what makes them tick you go out and you study children...you don't kill everyone you see.

Society would benefit more by locking up killers for life and studying them than by killing them.

Most mureders in the US are crimes of passion and the death penalty is not a deterent to these.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY. This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator. Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

Society would benefit more by locking up killers for life and studying them than by killing them.

Most mureders in the US are crimes of passion and the death penalty is not a deterent to these.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Many of them are "studied", however, all that seems to come from those studies is another book (with movie rights soon to follow). These people are kept on death row for over 20 years in most cases before they are finally put to death.

I believe it is true that most people murdered in the U.S. are killed by someone they know. More and more murders seem to be random acts of violence (drive-by shootings, etc.) and many are never solved.

True that the Declaration of Independence states that, however, the Bill of Rights clearly states that the Government may deprive one of life, liberty, etc with due process of the law:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It further states in Amendment X that some issues are left to the various States or to the People. Thus we have some states that do not have a death penalty and some that do.

I have no pity for murderers. They showed no pity or mercy for their victims, so why should they receive mercy at the hands of other people. Murderers sit on death row for years, decades even, while their lawyers go through one appeal after another. Their victims are dead though and the families of the victims have to deal with the loss of a loved one and, often, have to suffer through a trial which outlines the grisly details of how their loved one died at the hands of the murderer. Pity I save for those who deserve it.

mandl

Society would benefit more by locking up killers for life and studying them than by killing them.

Most mureders in the US are crimes of passion and the death penalty is not a deterent to these.

The Declaration of Independence of the US claims that people are endowed by the creator with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that these are rights THAT CAN NOT BE TAKEN AWAY.  This does not mean can not be taken away except.....it means it is impossible to take these rights away and if anyone or any gov't tries this they are simply infringing on the rights which were given by the creator.  Gov't executions are murder....regardless of whatever etemological rationalization you want to use to try to justify this barbaric form of coersion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Many of them are "studied", however, all that seems to come from those studies is another book (with movie rights soon to follow). These people are kept on death row for over 20 years in most cases before they are finally put to death.

I believe it is true that most people murdered in the U.S. are killed by someone they know. More and more murders seem to be random acts of violence (drive-by shootings, etc.) and many are never solved.

True that the Declaration of Independence states that, however, the Bill of Rights clearly states that the Government may deprive one of life, liberty, etc with due process of the law:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

It further states in Amendment X that some issues are left to the various States or to the People. Thus we have some states that do not have a death penalty and some that do.

I have no pity for murderers. They showed no pity or mercy for their victims, so why should they receive mercy at the hands of other people. Murderers sit on death row for years, decades even, while their lawyers go through one appeal after another. Their victims are dead though and the families of the victims have to deal with the loss of a loved one and, often, have to suffer through a trial which outlines the grisly details of how their loved one died at the hands of the murderer. Pity I save for those who deserve it.

mandl

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Declaration of Independence of the US clearly indicates that state sanctioned killing of criminals is a violation of rights that are bestowed by the creator...its as simple as that.....killing criminals is murder....and is a violation of their creator given human rights....it is barbaric....it calls on the basest animal instincts still active in some humans. Just because the constitution of the US allows murder of criminals does not make it right. The Dec of Ind says that the right to life is 'inalienable'....that means it can not be taken away....that means that convicted killers have the right to life and this right can not be taken away from them....this also means that killing them is a violation of their rights....rights that can not be taken away.....regardless of what your personal feelings are about criminals.

I think its justified if the crime is severe enough.

Rapists

Murderers

Terrorists

Serial sex offenders etc

(also more personal choices but we won't go into that )

Saves money also, no costs for keeping them behind bars.

I tend to agree with Dave on this but you have to be sure that there is absolutely no doubt of guilt. Crimes of passion, whilst still warranting serious punishment, may not warrant death.

I also think that prison should be much more than watching TV and playing pool. Offenders should be put to work, every day, be it breaking rocks, sewing mailbags or cleaning streets.

Chain Gangs in bright orange boiler suits or striped pyjamas, cleaning up the countryside, mowing fields or painting houses should be an everyday sight.

I abstained.

If anyone harmed either of my kids. I would not rely on the law.

Did you know that if you chop the head of a paddy it takes two weeks for him to die of thirst

Que dit la loi? Tu ne tueras pas! Comment le dit-elle? En tuant..!

"What does the Law say? You will not kill! How does she say it? By Killing!"

Did you know that if you chop the head of a paddy it takes two weeks for him to die of thirst

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did you know that if you chop the head of a paddy it takes two weeks for him to die of thirst

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A paddy.

where does one find such an animal??

The Declaration of Independence of the US clearly indicates that state sanctioned killing of criminals is a violation of rights that are bestowed by the creator...

That's fair enough Chownah. The US has a law but what is your view? Or are US citizens not allowed to have one? This Declaration also seems to be a bit confused with itself, as mentioned earlier, some states allow the death penalty.

Additionally, the US Declaration of Independance (as confused as it is) means not a jot to anybody outside of the US. And why should anybody, outside of the US, even bother to take it seriously, when your own country's leaders can't even decide to implement the same law in every state?

Did you know that if you chop the head of a paddy it takes two weeks for him to die of thirst

thats why you lop off both his hands.............

No.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just get to the point ok?

cv

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you know what, why don't people just say what they mean. I get fed up of people going on and on and on and.........

Seriously though Rinrada. Not even for those who are in the link i posted above? Is that an absolute NO, without exeption?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes.

If the death penalty is a punishment in a particular country, then that law must be respected. It doesnt matter what I feel about it. That is the law and so be it.

I would like to see it brought back here in Oz but only for confessed murder, by this I mean that even if a person admits to murder but pleads not guilty due to passion or whatever and that person is eventually found guilty of murder then the death penalty should apply.

But if it is within the law of another country to be put to death for a particular crime and you commit that crime in that country then you have to accept that country's punishment.