# Bring back capital punishment!



## Faithkat (21 June 2010)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10369277.stm


----------



## zefragile (21 June 2010)

Horrible, absolutely horrible, but I will move to another country if they bring back capital punishment.


----------



## Kat (21 June 2010)

Isn't this rather old news........


----------



## Ignition (21 June 2010)

no, put on a news channel. We knew he'd been arrested but it wasn't revealed what for until now.


----------



## Luci07 (21 June 2010)

Awful about Jon Venables, but the answer is NOT a knee jerk reaction and bringing back capital punishment. It has been proven time and time again that is it does not put people off - has made no difference to the numbers in jails in the US counties where it is still "used". On the basis that our judical systems makes mistakes, I am not prepared to vote for a system where this could happen. Look at the last 2 people hung in this country - Ruth Ellis - murdered her unfaithful lover - would CP have stopped that? and Derek Bentley - hung because he was the right age, even though he was mentally incapicatated.


----------



## Kat (21 June 2010)

hmm sure I heard that it was for child porn not long after it happened. 

To be honest capital punishment is just too difficult to work in a just way. The americans end up with prisoners sitting on death row for years on end while they go through all the appeals etc. 

It is no cheaper than giving them life because housing death row inmates and dealing with the legal challenges is more of a problem. Death row prisoners are also notoriously dangerous to manage because they don't have any thing worse to fear. 

Personally I couldn't live with the thought of sending someone to death and it possibly being the wrong decision. Imagine if we had not abolished the death penalty back in the sixties, what would have happened to the birmingham six??? Or Stephen Downing??


----------



## pastie2 (21 June 2010)

Katt said:



			hmm sure I heard that it was for child porn not long after it happened. 

To be honest capital punishment is just too difficult to work in a just way. The americans end up with prisoners sitting on death row for years on end while they go through all the appeals etc. 

It is no cheaper than giving them life because housing death row inmates and dealing with the legal challenges is more of a problem. Death row prisoners are also notoriously dangerous to manage because they don't have any thing worse to fear. 

Personally I couldn't live with the thought of sending someone to death and it possibly being the wrong decision. Imagine if we had not abolished the death penalty back in the sixties, what would have happened to the birmingham six??? Or Stephen Downing??
		
Click to expand...

I must admit to initially thinking that that dreadful boy should have been taken out of society for ever, but, having read your very illuminating post, I tend to agree with you.


----------



## perfect11s (21 June 2010)

Faithkat said:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10369277.stm

Click to expand...

Castration....... that's the way to fix perverts and sex ofenders.....


----------



## chessy (21 June 2010)

I'm very strongly against capital punishment for reasons already mentioned in this thread, though I'd probably support public hanging on Tower Hill for everyone featured on that Super Sweet 16 TV programme.


----------



## Spudlet (22 June 2010)

Luci07 said:



			Awful about Jon Venables, but the answer is NOT a knee jerk reaction and bringing back capital punishment. It has been proven time and time again that is it does not put people off - has made no difference to the numbers in jails in the US counties where it is still "used". On the basis that our judical systems makes mistakes, I am not prepared to vote for a system where this could happen. Look at the last 2 people hung in this country - Ruth Ellis - murdered her unfaithful lover - would CP have stopped that? and Derek Bentley - hung because he was the right age, even though he was mentally incapicatated.
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this. ^^


----------



## Berpisc (22 June 2010)

No I think we are better off without capital punishment for the good reasons stated on this thread.  Castrations sounds promising though.
What really galls me is the money it has taken to set this creature up with a new life, for him to indulge in further vile criminal activity.  Maybe if he is found guilty he could be stripped of that.  I dont suppose for one moment that would happen, but it would reflect  the violation of those children whose images have been used.


----------



## pastie2 (22 June 2010)

Of course!!!! castrations, good idea. Thats the way forward!


----------



## LynneB (22 June 2010)

the prisoner executed last week had been on death row for 25 years!  I honestly cannot see how that is the way to go, as opposed to life meaning life.  The amount of money his endless appeals would have cost would have been paid by the tax payer.  

I do think life should mean life, with no chance of parole.  I don't agree with capital punishment as so many are still being released, decades later for crimes they did not commit.  I also don't agree with it as most of these people, Ian Huntley etc, would rather die and maintain control, than live as captives.  I would rather see them endure captivity for a very long time, where they have no control at all.


----------



## BBH (22 June 2010)

If a life sentence truly meant a life sentence and no privileges  and hard labour then yes fair enough, but I think a lot of people are fed up with the justice system because it seems to weigh so heavily in favour of the criminal. 

If it were announced that the likes of Robert Black, Ian Huntley and Roy Whiting were to be hanged I for one would have no trouble sleeping.

I don't think this issue will ever be for public debate or implemented as I can't imagine a government brave enough to offer a vote.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (22 June 2010)

pastie2 said:



			Of course!!!! castrations, good idea. Thats the way forward!
		
Click to expand...


actually, castration doesnt work in alot of cases where the behaviour is ingrained apparently. I think it was Germany who (used to?) have voluntary chemical castrations for sex offenders. 

I think life should mean life but am anti-death penalty. the idea that someone can be put to death and the person in charge can do twitter updates about it (in the US last week) I think is totally abhorrent and shouldnt be acceptable in a civilised society. 

HHO has changed in the last few years, we once had a huge thread on the death sentence with most people on here being pro.


----------



## Kat (22 June 2010)

In many of these cases life does mean life. Roy Whiting has a minimum tarriff of 40 years, that means he will be in his eighties before he can even be considered for parole. 

There are American States that use Castration, it is used on a voluntary basis as a way for prisoners to get an early release on parole. They use depo-provera to chemically castrate them. The problem with this is that although they can't function sexually and may not have a sex drive they will still find the same things desireable. So it doesn't necessarily stop all abuse, particularly not porn offences. 

It is very difficult to know what to do with these sorts of offenders.......


----------



## perfect11s (22 June 2010)

LynneB said:



			the prisoner executed last week had been on death row for 25 years!  I honestly cannot see how that is the way to go, as opposed to life meaning life.  The amount of money his endless appeals would have cost would have been paid by the tax payer.  

I do think life should mean life, with no chance of parole.  I don't agree with capital punishment as so many are still being released, decades later for crimes they did not commit.  I also don't agree with it as most of these people, Ian Huntley etc, would rather die and maintain control, than live as captives.  I would rather see them endure captivity for a very long time, where they have no control at all.
		
Click to expand...

  on a cost basis then  getting them to the chair, injection  ASAP would seem the best option however leaving them a few years  give them time to reflect and for any apppeals to take place..
Oh well guess in a few years we will be a muslim country and they will stone these sort of people to death the day after....


----------



## mtj (22 June 2010)

Whilst I do sympathise with those wishing to reintroduce the death penalty, the US system is a great example of why we should not.

I spent a couple of years living in the US. Its widely accepted in the US media that lawyers provided by the state  have been less than competent/effective in many death row cases.  The quality of the legal representation really is a matter of life or death in the US penal system.


----------



## Kat (22 June 2010)

perfect11s said:



			on a cost basis then  getting them to the chair, injection  ASAP would seem the best option however leaving them a few years  give them time to reflect and for any apppeals to take place..
Oh well guess in a few years we will be a muslim country and they will stone these sort of people to death the day after....
		
Click to expand...

Yeah on a cost basis we'd be better off hanging them on the day the sentance is passed. Problem is we do that and then some joker comes along and discovers DNA profiling or whatever...... and then we discover that the guy isn't guilty afterall....... so an appeal is launched........ but oops too late he's already six feet under........


----------



## BBH (23 June 2010)

Katt said:



			Yeah on a cost basis we'd be better off hanging them on the day the sentance is passed. Problem is we do that and then some joker comes along and discovers DNA profiling or whatever...... and then we discover that the guy isn't guilty afterall....... so an appeal is launched........ but oops too late he's already six feet under........
		
Click to expand...



I think the incidence of a serial murderer being found innocent is remote these days with the advancement of DNA.It would have to be a co-incidence of astronomical proportions for an innocent person's DNA to be present at all murder sites and put that with means, motive, method etc and guilt is guaranteed. 

 I can understand more a single murder miscarriage of justice.


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

you'd hope that would be the case, but what if, for example, someone was killing people and planting someone else's DNA at the scene.  It isn't beyond the realms of possibility, so you cannot have capital punishment on DNA evidence alone.  It may be rare, but I wouldn't like anyone I know to be the one rare case it happened to.  Even with DNA you are reliant on the collection and processing of it to be accurate.


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

few things to mention

under the eu (lisbon treaty is its name i think?) agreement that was signed last year no eu country can use capital punishment whilst an eu member state.

so to bring it back we would have to leave the eu.

which i know is prolly a a favourable thing on here anyway.lol

also innocent people being executed, this has not occurred in modern day america, any one wrongly convicted has been pardoned etc before being executed.

yes the lawyers provided are not great however one on death row they get very good assistance in their appeals.

i would say its highly unlikely in a civilised modern country for a wrongly executed person to occur.


----------



## Jim Moriarty (24 June 2010)

Not sure I'd be too happy living in a country where the state murders 10 year old offenders.

And in this instance, I wonder, as a 10 year old entering the penal system, whether he was abused within that system, and whether such abuse has created the adult we now see.


----------



## Kat (24 June 2010)

JimMoriarty said:



			Not sure I'd be too happy living in a country where the state murders 10 year old offenders.

And in this instance, I wonder, as a 10 year old entering the penal system, whether he was abused within that system, and whether such abuse has created the adult we now see.
		
Click to expand...

He was (if I recall correctly) abused before he entered the system, and had a life that no one would consider ideal for a child.


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

Katt said:



			He was (if I recall correctly) abused before he entered the system, and had a life that no one would consider ideal for a child.
		
Click to expand...

from what i just researched he was not in any way abused.

his parents seperated when he was young but lived close together and he spent equal time with both.

they were both average parents who never sexually or physcially abused theor children.

there was no reports of any abuse outside the home either.

he had a disabled brother and sister and he had a form of adhd it is believed.

he was a regular truant and thief though as a child and had a violent tendency.

i did wonder if he was perhaps abused and as such re enacting that but it appears not.

they have a sexual link to the murder also as the boy was naked waist down and had been played with.

so it seems he was potentially already on this path before being convicted etc ...


----------



## BBH (24 June 2010)

Another one who needs executing is Peter Tobin 

Disgusting individual.


----------



## Puppy (24 June 2010)

ceiron said:



			also innocent people being executed, this has not occurred in modern day america, any one wrongly convicted has been pardoned etc before being executed.
		
Click to expand...

Erm, but the fact people have been wrongly convicted goes to show the room for error. 




			yes the lawyers provided are not great however one on death row they get very good assistance in their appeals.

i would say its highly unlikely in a civilised modern country for a wrongly executed person to occur.
		
Click to expand...

I would not expect a civilised society to execute anyone.


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

Puppy said:



			Erm, but the fact people have been wrongly convicted goes to show the room for error. 



I would not expect a civilised society to execute anyone.
		
Click to expand...

you can only call it by the evidence provided and if it points to the wrong conviction then you can fault the jury etc ...

in time any wrong convictions are lifted, unfortunate for the individual but no system is perfect and i would rather they er on the side of caution and have a 99% success rate then wait for absolute proof ie someone being killed again etc ...


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

ceiron said:



			i would say its highly unlikely in a civilised modern country for a wrongly executed person to occur.
		
Click to expand...

And you would be surprised how wrong you are.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

The death penalty is a failed system and should be stopped the world over.

It costs millions for a death penalty case to be tried - in fact it costs more money to try a death penalty case than it does to jail someone for life. The figures to support that are available on the website I have linked above.

States where the death penalty exist have higher murder and crime rates than states who do not have the death penalty so its clearly not a deterrant. Statistics to support this are also availble on the website above.

There is a massive capacity for error - if one person is wrongly put to death for a crime they did not commit thats one person too much and you cannot take that back - imagine if it was you!!


----------



## Sarah Sum1 (24 June 2010)

Not sure about capital punishment, would hate to think of an innocent person being killed. Also an eye for an eye, just ends up with the whole world blind as they say. 
I do however get extremely annoyed at the fact that convicted criminals are sitting in cells with sky t.v and the like. I think prisons should be a place to fear. Small cells, preferbally with rats running around and sitting their own excrement. But of course human rights do not allow for this (and prob rightly so) I think the justice system is messed up and i also think prison should be harsher than it is. 

Disclaimer, I have not thought long and hard about this


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

sarahsum1 said:



			Not sure about capital punishment, would hate to think of an innocent person being killed. Also an eye for an eye, just ends up with the whole world blind as they say. 
I do however get extremely annoyed at the fact that convicted criminals are sitting in cells with sky t.v and the like. I think prisons should be a place to fear. Small cells, preferbally with rats running around and sitting their own excrement. But of course human rights do not allow for this (and prob rightly so) I think the justice system is messed up and i also think prison should be harsher than it is. 

Disclaimer, I have not thought long and hard about this 

Click to expand...

I think you are right to an extent. While I dont think the "sitting in their own excretement" is going to wash with the human rights mob - I do think prisons should be providing the very basic human requirements - food, water, a place to sleep and access to health care if required.


----------



## Sarah Sum1 (24 June 2010)

Hevs said:



			I think you are right to an extent. While I dont think the "sitting in their own excretement" is going to wash with the human rights mob - I do think prisons should be providing the very basic human requirements - food, water, a place to sleep and access to health care if required.
		
Click to expand...

 Ok perhaps not that bit, but yes the basics. I bet they eat better than i do! I remember watching a prog on prisons back in the day (not sure how long ago, but must be 100 plus years) They had tiny square cells, which they could not stand up in, they slept in their own urine etc and rats were the only comapany they had. They had enough water to keep them alive and a bit of slop once a day if that. The cell had green slime dripping off the damp wet walls and they slept on the concrete floor. Surely that would put more people off commiting crimes. These days criminals commit more crime just to go back to prisin becasue its a ggod life for them. They also can get hold of drugs inside. Crazy.


----------



## micramadam (24 June 2010)

Sick to death of all the human right's activists who all appear to be on the side of the criminal. Bugger off the lot of you, that's why todays society is ****. You have your place when it comes to fighting injustice (but criminals don't deserve your support) also what about the human rights of the victim who always seems to be forgotten?
IMO if you commit a crime you should give up a degree of your human rights. 
The worse the crime is the more human rights you give up i.e. you could end up with only the basic rights of food, water and shelter. Would put an end to most of them having Sky TV etc. They are in prison to be punished not to live a life of luxury and study law to see how they can appeal or claim or get away with their next crime when they get out. 
Also bring back the stocks. I imagine being in the stocks and being ridiculed by the public or being pelted with rotten fruit (sod off all u oh you say you cant do that they might get hurt) would make quite a few think before commiting a crime. After all no-one likes to be ridiculed or embarrassed in public!
I'm a decent law abiding citizen and I can see both the positive in negative in capital punishment but I am getting to the stage now where I am beginning to believe that I am in the minority. As for racism - don't get me started.


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

Actually I can categorically state that no public prisons in the UK have Sky tv - I work for Sky TV, I would know   They might have Freeview but not subscription channelsand most definately not in their cells

Just wanted to clear that one up


----------



## Sarah Sum1 (24 June 2010)

Hevs said:



			Actually I can categorically state that no prisons in the UK have Sky tv - I work for Sky TV, I would know   They might have Freeview but not subscription channels.

Just wanted to clear that one up
		
Click to expand...

LOL But don't forget they are criminals, so prob have it rigged up to Mr Jones sky down the road


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

sarahsum1 said:



			LOL But don't forget they are criminals, so prob have it rigged up to Mr Jones sky down the road 

Click to expand...

LOL never thought of that 

Actually just remembered, some of the privately ran prisons have Sky - Dovecoat and Lowdham Grange do - they are owned by Serco I think?  If it were up to me they would get Sky but the religious channel would show all day 27/7   Oh and country music cause that would probably drive them to suicide after a while    (jk before I get flamed)


----------



## Sarah Sum1 (24 June 2010)

Hevs said:



			LOL never thought of that 

Actually just remembered, some of the privately ran prisons have Sky - Dovecoat and Lowdham Grange do - they are owned by Serco I think?  If it were up to me they would get Sky but the religious channel would show all day 27/7   Oh and country music cause that would probably drive them to suicide after a while    (jk before I get flamed)
		
Click to expand...

PMSL!! fab idea! torture for the ears, love it


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

micramadam said:



			Sick to death of all the human right's activists who all appear to be on the side of the criminal. Bugger off the lot of you, that's why todays society is ****. You have your place when it comes to fighting injustice (but criminals don't deserve your support) also what about the human rights of the victim who always seems to be forgotten?.
		
Click to expand...


I don't think anyone has said the criminal should have more rights, but we cannot 100% say someone who is convicted of a crime is guilty.  What if it were your son, or husband, who was convicted of a crime they did not do.  

I am absolutely in favour of them remaining in jail, I don't think they should ever get out to commit another crime, and I am talking murderers, paedophiles etc.  to say they have shown good behaviour in prison is ludicrous as a reason to let them out, as quite honestly, there are no children in prison, so they have to behave!  It is when they have access to them again that they will reoffend.

It also cannot be said that in modern day America no innocent person has been executed.  It is possible that is true, but how do you really know.  I am not in favour of criminals at all but I am wholly in favour of the innocent who may be found guilty through a miscarriage of justice and it is those we need to protect by not having capital punishment.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (24 June 2010)

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

Researchers Radelet and Bedau found 23 cases where innocent people were executed since 1900 (In Spite of Innocence, Northeastern University Press, 1992). 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-pen...eath-penalty-and-innocence/page.do?id=1101086


----------



## Puppy (24 June 2010)

micramadam said:



			Sick to death of all the human right's activists who all appear to be on the side of the criminal. Bugger off the lot of you, that's why todays society is ****. You have your place when it comes to fighting injustice (but criminals don't deserve your support) also what about the human rights of the victim who always seems to be forgotten?
IMO if you commit a crime you should give up a degree of your human rights. 
The worse the crime is the more human rights you give up i.e. you could end up with only the basic rights of food, water and shelter. Would put an end to most of them having Sky TV etc. They are in prison to be punished not to live a life of luxury and study law to see how they can appeal or claim or get away with their next crime when they get out. 
Also bring back the stocks. I imagine being in the stocks and being ridiculed by the public or being pelted with rotten fruit (sod off all u oh you say you cant do that they might get hurt) would make quite a few think before commiting a crime. After all no-one likes to be ridiculed or embarrassed in public!
I'm a decent law abiding citizen and I can see both the positive in negative in capital punishment but I am getting to the stage now where I am beginning to believe that I am in the minority. As for racism - don't get me started.
		
Click to expand...

Do you read the Daily Mail by any chance?


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

peteralfred said:



http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

Researchers Radelet and Bedau found 23 cases where innocent people were executed since 1900 (In Spite of Innocence, Northeastern University Press, 1992). 

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

http://www.amnestyusa.org/death-pen...eath-penalty-and-innocence/page.do?id=1101086

Click to expand...

that was prior to 1973, i dont know how far back actually tbh.

the point is i said modern civilised society.

so from about 1973.lol

all depends when you define it tbh.

but as it stands i stand by my comment no innocent person has been executed in the us.

its prolly rife in some countries but most arent modern or civilised imo.


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

ceiron said:



			that was prior to 1973, i dont know how far back actually tbh.

the point is i said modern civilised society.

so from about 1973.lol

all depends when you define it tbh.

but as it stands i stand by my comment no innocent person has been executed in the us.

its prolly rife in some countries but most arent modern or civilised imo.
		
Click to expand...

You must have missed my post - and I would hardly consider 1973 that long ago!!

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

The most recent execution being called into question was 2004 and as I stated in my previous post...one mistake is one too many and its too a big a risk to take IMO


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

but you just can't say that...all it means is there is a possibility that someone was executed and their innocence was not discovered.  It may be true that there has not, but you cannot possibly say it is 100% certain that all executed prisoners were guilty.

Read this, 100 innocent people have been found on death row in 29 years..this poor guy was convicted TWICE of something he did not do...

http://forejustice.org/wc/ray_krone_JD_vol2_i9.htm

if 100 people have been discovered to be innocent, I will never believe there may have been even just 1 who has been executed who should not have been.


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

Hevs said:



			You must have missed my post - and I would hardly consider 1973 that long ago!!

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/exec...sibly-innocent

Click to expand...

its more then a lifetime for me.lol

i did read your post, however none are proven and so it could be biased either way and some have been disproven.

so its more anecdotal evidence then real evidence imo.


----------



## ceiron (24 June 2010)

LynneB said:



			but you just can't say that...all it means is there is a possibility that someone was executed and their innocence was not discovered.  It may be true that there has not, but you cannot possibly say it is 100% certain that all executed prisoners were guilty.

Read this, 100 innocent people have been found on death row in 29 years..this poor guy was convicted TWICE of something he did not do...

http://forejustice.org/wc/ray_krone_JD_vol2_i9.htm

if 100 people have been discovered to be innocent, I will never believe there may have been even just 1 who has been executed who should not have been.
		
Click to expand...

no true, i should of phrased it as i did earlier in all likelyhood.

you can rarely 100% so thats a valid point.

the main point is those found innocent havent been executed so the system seems to work if a little rusty in places.


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

ceiron said:



			its more then a lifetime for me.lol

i did read your post, however none are proven and so it could be biased either way and some have been disproven.

so its more anecdotal evidence then real evidence imo.
		
Click to expand...

The point is not that they were not proven - the point is that there is considerable doubt cast over the decision of the court to find them guilty and put them to death.  Doubt enough to raise the question where they put to death unfairly?  Thats enough for me, they dont need to prove that they were innocent to convince me that the death penalty is completely wrong and is far too much of a risk.  The fact that 85% of death penalty convictions are overturned is damn scary - and the figures I have quoted dont even cover the years that some people spend in jail before being found innocent and released.

It is far too much of a risk to take when you are talking about ending someones life permenantly and it has no place in modern civilised society.


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

how hard do people continue to try to prove innocence after someone has been executed though.  They have to fund it themselves and may not be able to.  Capital punishment as a deterrent doesn't work, America is one of the most violent places in the world to live, yet their police have guns and many states have the death penalty.  I am sure if life meant life, no parole, no even asking for parole every five minutes like Myra Hindley did, then people may accept that prison is enough for these people.


----------



## Kat (24 June 2010)

For all those talking about prisons being made harsher, there is a prison governor is the states who has a particularly entertaining view on how prisons should be run. I wish I could remember the name, it is a maximum security prison in one of the southern states...... 

Amongst his special rules are, all prison issue clothing (right down to the undies) are a fetching shade of baby pink. They have no aircon, and any compalints are met with reminders that the weather is not as bad as the troops in Iraq are putting up with. The communal TV is available for all to watch but the only channels they can get are the disney channel, the weather channel (so they can see how unpleasently hot it will be tomorrow) and the god channel. 

Oh I wish I could remember the details, I'll have to get googling!


----------



## micramadam (24 June 2010)

Puppy said:



			Do you read the Daily Mail by any chance?
		
Click to expand...

Actually don't get time to read any of the papers. Too busy working bloody hard for a living like most decent people.


----------



## Shutterbug (24 June 2010)

Katt said:



			For all those talking about prisons being made harsher, there is a prison governor is the states who has a particularly entertaining view on how prisons should be run. I wish I could remember the name, it is a maximum security prison in one of the southern states...... 

Amongst his special rules are, all prison issue clothing (right down to the undies) are a fetching shade of baby pink. They have no aircon, and any compalints are met with reminders that the weather is not as bad as the troops in Iraq are putting up with. The communal TV is available for all to watch but the only channels they can get are the disney channel, the weather channel (so they can see how unpleasently hot it will be tomorrow) and the god channel. 

Oh I wish I could remember the details, I'll have to get googling!
		
Click to expand...

I saw that on TV - I think the man in a genius.


----------



## Kat (24 June 2010)

This guy: 

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


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

is this him?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929920,00.html


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

oops cross posted lol


----------



## Kat (24 June 2010)

Yep that's the guy, not perhaps the greatest role model but some interesting ideas!!!


----------



## LynneB (24 June 2010)

no he does have some that are open to criticism, but he has also implemented some very good ones it seems

(not criticism by me though, I think they all seem ok!)


----------



## perfect11s (24 June 2010)

Puppy said:



			Do you read the Daily Mail by any chance?
		
Click to expand...

 possibly they do  but  better that rag  than reading the guardian   now  that REALY should be a capital offence.......  polly toynbee and that mombiot idiot ...santimonous hipocritacal twats


----------



## CorvusCorax (24 June 2010)

QR For those prepared to look someone in the eye (or stick a black hood on, whatever) and kill them, fine. Do it. Pick up a needle or a gun or a noose and do it. Slaughter the evil barsteward. Would that make you feel better than them?

If you couldn't and you'd prefer to let someone else do it for you...then I don't want to hear your arguments.


----------



## HarrietLong (25 June 2010)

Obviously capital punishment would have to be properly enforced. You couldn't go killing people here there and everywhere haha. However, people bring up time and time again people that have been wrongly accused and murdered in the US. However, people seem to forget that our justice system is so much better. For one, DNA sample are far more widely used over in the UK, reducing the risk of false accusation. 

I totally condone capital punishment - might actually act as a deterrent.


----------



## CorvusCorax (25 June 2010)

That's not the point, it's the coat holding.

Yeah! Kill him! Go ahead, someone else, er, Mr Executioner, you kill him, I'll hold your coat.


----------



## HarrietLong (25 June 2010)

CaveCanem said:



			That's not the point, it's the coat holding.

Yeah! Kill him! Go ahead, someone else, er, Mr Executioner, you kill him, I'll hold your coat.
		
Click to expand...

If what the person had done was so bad that a judge had sentenced him to death - I would have no qualms about administering the injection. I'm not the sort of person who wouldn't want to do something but hands it over to someone else. 
Granted it isn't my ideal line of work haha, but I would have no moral objections.


----------



## Sarah Sum1 (25 June 2010)

As i said, the saying ' an eye for an eye, will and up with whole world blind' fits. I think if we had a tougher prison system with less luxuries and more punishment, then that would be better. After all once your dead your dead (ok life after death debates aside) So to suffer for a crime in a dingy cell in my opinion is better. Who knows where we go after death, could be paradise for all we know. 

IMO it;s a bit like the parents who bite their child back when they bite. It sends out the message, It's ok for me to hurt you , but you must not do it, it's wrong.

ETA I also agree with the 'coat holding' I for one could not take another life, be it in anger or for 'justice'


----------



## Luci07 (25 June 2010)

HarrietLong said:



			Obviously capital punishment would have to be properly enforced. You couldn't go killing people here there and everywhere haha. However, people bring up time and time again people that have been wrongly accused and murdered in the US. However, people seem to forget that our justice system is so much better. For one, DNA sample are far more widely used over in the UK, reducing the risk of false accusation. 

I totally condone capital punishment - might actually act as a deterrent.
		
Click to expand...

No, it has been proven time and time again that Capital punishment does not act as a deterrent. You only need to see the crime figures in the US states that support this to see that is the case.

I researched this area for a debate and broadly speaking, it would appear you can put criminals into 3 categories - 1. Those who think they are above the law and can do what they want (think mafia or Kray brothers - CP didn't stop them. 2 Those who are mentally unstable and aren't responsible for their actions. 3. Crime of passion - so you don't think of the consequences at the time - although France recognises a crime of passion as a defense, UK doesn't. I can't think of any other categories and under those bandings - CP would not have prevented it.

and if you think its alright for there to be the odd slip up - just think how you would feel if it was someone in your family - or even yourself. 

We need to look at making prisons tougher without losing sight that prisons are supposed to help redeem their inmates. Granted, the likes of Ian Huntley will struggle to be "redeemed" but his sentence is made worse (deservedly) as he is in permanent danger form other inmates. Long may he suffer in jail.


----------



## HarrietLong (25 June 2010)

I didn't say slip ups were ok!? I said it would be unlikely we would have slip ups in the UK due to DNA etc etc. 

If you take that approach then nothing will act as a deterrant - so why do we bother even having prisons, according to you it is a waste of time as it makes no difference as to whether commit crimes.


----------



## LynneB (25 June 2010)

having prison sentences and having capital punishment are two separate arguments.  Of course people have to go to prison if they commit certain crimes.  Miscarriages of justice do happen in the UK and there is not always DNA evidence to use.  One poor guy was in prison for 30 years for something he didn't do, he would have been dead by now, just for having a learning disability and not knowing what he was admitting to.  If anyone thinks "it is only one so ok" again, I would say, imagine that 1 person sitting waiting on death row being your dad.


----------



## Shutterbug (25 June 2010)

HarrietLong said:



			I didn't say slip ups were ok!? I said it would be unlikely we would have slip ups in the UK due to DNA etc etc. 

If you take that approach then nothing will act as a deterrant - so why do we bother even having prisons, according to you it is a waste of time as it makes no difference as to whether commit crimes.
		
Click to expand...

Unlikely is not good enough - unlikely still leaves room for error and still makes the death penalty too much of a risk - one innocent person executed is one too many no matter how many guilty people are executed.

I agree with Luci07 that the death penalty does not act as a deterrant - I have also studied the death penalty and its affects on modern America - it is statistically proven that states with the death penalty have more murders and serious crimes punishable by death, than states without the death penalty.  This only means that the argument for the death penalty, that its a deterrant, does not hold up to scrutiny. It doesnt mean we do away with the whole justice system - just the death penalty part.


----------



## Nickijem (25 June 2010)

I am a bit of a fence-sitter when it comes to the question of capital punishment.  I certainly wouldn't leave the country or lose any sleep if were brought back but I wouldn't be campaigning for it either.
I suppose, in theory, I should support it as I know that if someone were to break into my house and threaten me or my family I would shoot to kill - I would have absolutely no qualms about it.  I know this is a completely different argument but I'm sure you get my point!


----------



## m00ey (25 June 2010)

perfect11s said:



			Castration....... that's the way to fix perverts and sex ofenders.....
		
Click to expand...

+1, bang on.


----------



## Alec Swan (26 June 2010)

I have stumbled on this thread.

It cannot be right for society to commit the same crime as the criminal,  and capital punishment,  in a civilised society,  is just that,  a crime.  

I have never actually come to terms with the death of Jamie Bolger;  the enormity of the crime being compounded by the fact that it was committed by children.  

Society is responsible for crimes such as these,  and as we're all members of that society,  so we all carry a degree of the same implied responsibility.  

Over the last 50 years,  or so,  the gap between right and wrong seems,  to me anyway,  to be widening.  Whilst the world is most certainly becoming a better place,  from the perspective of good,  so the evil aspects appear to be finding fresh levels of degradation.  

I don't have any clear answers,  except that society must apply its defective brakes,  and take every step to resist further levels of depravity,  in the name of justice.

Right,  rant over!  Horses are so much simpler,  and more giving too.

Alec.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (26 June 2010)

a1b2c3 said:



			I have stumbled on this thread.

It cannot be right for society to commit the same crime as the criminal,  and capital punishment,  in a civilised society,  is just that,  a crime.  

.
		
Click to expand...

quite-a society that has capital punishment has no regard for life-it cheapens life IMO.


----------



## YorksG (27 June 2010)

Re the idea of castration for sex offenders, this does not work! The theory of offending with regard to sex offenders is not about the sex act itself, but a means of humiliating, demeaning and having power over the victim. If the (male ) offender is unable to use the appropriate part of his own body, then it is likely that implements will be used. Also the idea of castration suggests that all sex offenders are male, this is NOT the case, there are a number of female abusers (often the mother, in the case of interfamilial abuse) castration is not an option for these offenders


----------



## EAST KENT (30 June 2010)

yorksG said:



			Re the idea of castration for sex offenders, this does not work! The theory of offending with regard to sex offenders is not about the sex act itself, but a means of humiliating, demeaning and having power over the victim. If the (male ) offender is unable to use the appropriate part of his own body, then it is likely that implements will be used. Also the idea of castration suggests that all sex offenders are male, this is NOT the case, there are a number of female abusers (often the mother, in the case of interfamilial abuse) castration is not an option for these offenders 

Click to expand...

Oh really..OK then I`d quite happily "demean" the likes of Whiting..bugger the "chemical castration" it`d be me and my trusty little old rusty pen knife. The threat of losing,in the literal sense,their testicles would put the fear of God in most men. Oh ..and no anaesthetic !


----------

