PDA

View Full Version : Bring back the death penalty?



Fez
30-05-2009, 04:30 PM
I think we have all realised that our justice system is unfair and possibly corrupted. A burglar who comes to your house in the intent of stealing your things, or killing you, then stealing things: if you harm him or even touch him then you can be trialled against.

Murder. If someone murders someone else, and given a sentence of around 6 years then they will be released after 3 years. Or even be given curfews or something. But they'll never face their full sentence.

Our justice system is unfair, and the tears being shed just tell a tale on their own. So, this begs the question. Should we bring back the death penalty to make a fairer system?

I think bringing it back wouldn't even make a fairer system myself, but with it being incorporated into the sentence structure.. might put a bit of pressure. I believe however that we only need a fairer and justified justice system, not some poncy system to save prison money.

eight
30-05-2009, 04:37 PM
I want it back to get rid of the extreme murderer's (Ian Huntley etc.), Serial killers, and sheer cold hearted acts, Like raping a child.

Other than that, Life should mean life, only if proven 100% guilty, not just because a jury think so.

Chaos
30-05-2009, 04:41 PM
No it shouldnt be brought back at all.

Although i agree with it that people who kiddie fiddle and mass murder should it still shouldnt be brought back.

Loads of innocent people get wrongly accused and that could easily be anyone.

eight
30-05-2009, 04:47 PM
No it shouldnt be brought back at all.

Although i agree with it that people who kiddie fiddle and mass murder should it still shouldnt be brought back.

Loads of innocent people get wrongly accused and that could easily be anyone.


Obviously providing enough evidence and catching them red handed!

Immenseman
30-05-2009, 04:48 PM
Of course it shouldn't. We live in a world where such barbaric measures should be outlawed globally. I know it still happens in distant regions, which is wrong. Sure there are people in this world who have committed hideous crimes.

Killing them is easier for them - hence why many people in prison try to commit suicide. It's just media driven hype that convicts get such an easy ride with games consoles etc. This isn't the case in all circumstances, prison is a horrible place to be as numerous of my family members have spent time inside. Killing people who have killed others doesn't let them experience a horrible experience for the next 10 years of their life or whatever.

Also, there is the whole thing of "what if they're found to be innocent". It has happened before and it'll happen again. People being released after a stint in prison because they found the real guilty person not the person mistakenly accused. If they had died, how horrific would that be.

It definitely should not be re-implemented into society because there is no room for it.

FlyingJesus
30-05-2009, 04:52 PM
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=446475

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=470252

Rosii
30-05-2009, 05:02 PM
No they shouldn't bring it back. The Police nowadays make sooo many mistakes and would kill an innocent person :l

Jahova
30-05-2009, 06:02 PM
No, but I think prison sentences should be longer and kept to the real length and not shortened or waived.

Technologic
30-05-2009, 07:28 PM
The death penalty punishes the innocent and let's the guilty go free (metaphorically speaking).

It should not be brought back.

Caution
30-05-2009, 07:42 PM
No, it's totally contradicting why it is actually done. Say, someone kills someone, they then get killed by death penalty. But the person who killed them by penalty should surely be killed as well if they're killing someone. It's a vicious circle and it's an easy way out. I'd like to agree with it and I know you want it to happen to someone if you've lost someone.

leah
05-06-2009, 07:37 AM
No it shouldn't, long periods in prison is much worse than just being killed as the criminal suffers for a smaller amount of time. If the death penalty was to be used then I think it should be for dangers to society and only done on solid evidence as there are always wrongful convictions (birmingham 6) and if someone was killed for a crime they didn't commit, and then their innocence was discovered there would be hell up.

J0SH
05-06-2009, 09:13 AM
That's stupid, if there's a buglar in your house you'd batter them wouldn't you? After all it's self defence so as long as you don't leave them for dead nothing will happen to you. But if people such as Josef Fritzl are getting a really long sentance, just bring back the electric chair, what a waste of tax payers money, he's going to be in there for ages reading, being lazy, sleeping etc.. Just a waste of a prison cell, they should kill him.

GommeInc
05-06-2009, 09:55 AM
As tempting as it may sound to kill of murderers, chavs and half of the people on the benefits system. It still isn't right to take another persons life, enough lives have been lost already. I support the prison sentencing of murderers, though disagree with how the prison system works. People on life sentences deserve life, and life should mean life in either the lifestyle or "livelyhood", or for the rest of their life. Not 20 years but you can ask to be kicked out at 5 for example, and they should be in horrible prison cells that not even a nun would want to stay in - small, cramped and miserable. For smaller crimes, like stealing, then maybe home sentencing, so they can't leave? Though I suspect this costs alot. At the moment it is a shambles, looking at what the prisons look like at the moment, and you never hear of people saying how miserable it is and get scarred from it.


But if people such as Josef Fritzl are getting a really long sentance, just bring back the electric chair, what a waste of tax payers money, he's going to be in there for ages reading, being lazy, sleeping etc.. Just a waste of a prison cell, they should kill him.
The eletric chair is horrible, anyone who suggests the use of it should be chucked on it themselves to rid the world of sick-minded people.

Mentor
05-06-2009, 02:47 PM
Well i couldn't really make much sense of the original post here, but i am 100% against reintroducing barbaric practices such as the death penalty in to the UK.

My primary reasons for this are;
1) Killing people legally (via the justice system) is no better than killing them illegally. It's purely hypocritical and indirectly makes everyone who would support such a legal structure responsible for someones death. (should we put them to death as well?)

2) No evidence can ever be 100%, reality just isn't that easy. Id rather not kill an Innocent person, regardless of how rare it may happen.

3) Prison is a much worse sentence than death for most, it can also be undone if new evidence appears.

4) Using the US as a basis, it is significantly cheaper to imprison someone for life than to
kill them under the death penalty.

5) The majority of people on death row tend to be mentally ill (based on the US, check the stats yourself), these are people we should be helping, not murdering. They are societies failures, not there own.

6) We generally scorn 3rd world countries when we here some one got stoned to death. Yet brining back capital punishment is paramount to asking us to introduce that exact same practice here.

7) By placing the power to kill in to the hands of the legal system you are more aless asking for corruption and abuse of such a system. After all, any whistle blowers would end up dead...

buttons
05-06-2009, 03:33 PM
I guess I'm the only one totally for. I believe in "a life for a life" and "do the crime pay the time." If you murder then you should 100% be killed too. I agree with whoever said about the Death Penalty totally contradicting itself, no-one has the right to murder anyone under any circumstances, the death penalty is a form of murder and if anyone is sentenced to death said way then it should be a continuous circle of murdering whoever murders the other person which isn't going to solve anything but even then it's not just murder it's a punishment which is deserved. For any crime that isn't murder directly or indirectly then it should be the "do the crime pay the time" because that's what they deserve, a life away from the ones they love and without their luxury. I don't think hanging is acceptable as such because according to some (no idea how they figure this out) it's a "good" way to go because of the headrush you get before it, which sounds so stupid but why should they die happy?

I couldn't say if the death penalty works already. However, if you look a Singapore - who has the death penalty? - they have one of the lowest crime rates. I'd say that's probably down to the fear of what will happen if they commit such crimes, although in USA I know they've a very high crime rate (not as high as UK!). People don't want to go to jail but they fear death more. Death Penalty may kill a few lives but it also saves lives. Even without the death penalty, all countries are murderers. War for example, killing innocent people, at least with the Death Penalty it's killing dangerous people to society, in a sense killing someone through Death Penalty is not murder, it's a punishment in it's extremest form. Even people on Death Row get time to say goodbye, make a will, decide what they want at their funeral and then what about the innocent whom were murdered by these sick freaks? Did they get this chance?

I'm all in favour of Death Penalty if it's a murderer, if it's a minor crime they should do the time.

Lost
05-06-2009, 03:49 PM
You wont believe how many arguments/debates i've had about this. so i'm only gonna say this: i think it should be brought back for certain people who have commited certain crimes (i.e really bad ones) however when the death penality was about, it wasn't properly thought through with cases, there was one woman who was falsely accused for murdering someone, and she automatically got the death penality.

I think it should be used on sick people like the men in the paper who stabbed two french students at least 250 times.

i think sentences are too easy nowadays, like pedofiles who can endager and mess up hundereds of childrens lives, only get like? what? 5-10 years in some cases? were as if you rob a bank you get like 20 years.

Basically if they were to bring it back i'd make sure the case was investigated down to a T, and it would only apply to really serious and offensive crimes such as seriel killings and perhaps child murder/rape...

although it can be a bit unfair as being a pedofile isn't something you can help, it's like being gay, you're born with that sexual urge, however if they brutally murdered the child and raped them, then yeah death pentality.

Also, if they did bring it back, I think it would be good in some cases because it would probably make loads of people think twice about what they are about to do (commit a crime) which can lead to preventing serious murders or rapes to happen.

Mentor
05-06-2009, 04:05 PM
You wont believe how many arguments/debates i've had about this. so i'm only gonna say this: i think it should be brought back for certain people who have commited certain crimes (i.e really bad ones) however when the death penality was about, it wasn't properly thought through with cases, there was one woman who was falsely accused for murdering someone, and she automatically got the death penality.

I think it should be used on sick people like the men in the paper who stabbed two french students at least 250 times.

i think sentences are too easy nowadays, like pedofiles who can endager and mess up hundereds of childrens lives, only get like? what? 5-10 years in some cases? were as if you rob a bank you get like 20 years.

Basically if they were to bring it back i'd make sure the case was investigated down to a T, and it would only apply to really serious and offensive crimes such as seriel killings and perhaps child murder/rape...

although it can be a bit unfair as being a pedofile isn't something you can help, it's like being gay, you're born with that sexual urge, however if they brutally murdered the child and raped them, then yeah death pentality.

Also, if they did bring it back, I think it would be good in some cases because it would probably make loads of people think twice about what they are about to do (commit a crime) which can lead to preventing serious murders or rapes to happen.

Your right, i don't believe it? You want the death penalty for serious crimes, yet give no though to the fact nothing can be proved beyond doubt and that situations change. Most crimes are committed out of desperation and necessity, not because it might be fun. Hence the think twice effect does not really apply.
Your main argument applys mainly to the fact are prison sentencing structure is a mess, people get 20 years for a minor crime and 5 for a major one. This i agree with you on, but equally i still dont think it justifies the death penalty.
If killing is so wrong that it should deserve the death penalty in peoples minds, how can they then justify killing, indirectly, the person who originally killed someone else.
Equally life in prison is a much worse punishment than simply killing them outright and much cheaper too, meaning we can invest more money in catching other criminals instead of wasteing it all on just killing one.
Just my two cents "/

Japan
05-06-2009, 09:33 PM
I don't think the death penalty should be re-introduced.
Lots of the people on death row in america are innocent and Amnesty International are highlighting this. Using jail sentences instead of death penalty means that cases can be re-opened and innocent people can be freed whereas if the death penalty was used it would have been too late.
The justice system needs improving but the death penalty isn't the answer.

-:Undertaker:-
06-06-2009, 12:42 AM
I want it back to get rid of the extreme murderer's (Ian Huntley etc.), Serial killers, and sheer cold hearted acts, Like raping a child.

Other than that, Life should mean life, only if proven 100% guilty, not just because a jury think so.

You've took the words right out of my mouth.

J0SH
08-06-2009, 01:28 AM
As tempting as it may sound to kill of murderers, chavs and half of the people on the benefits system. It still isn't right to take another persons life, enough lives have been lost already. I support the prison sentencing of murderers, though disagree with how the prison system works. People on life sentences deserve life, and life should mean life in either the lifestyle or "livelyhood", or for the rest of their life. Not 20 years but you can ask to be kicked out at 5 for example, and they should be in horrible prison cells that not even a nun would want to stay in - small, cramped and miserable. For smaller crimes, like stealing, then maybe home sentencing, so they can't leave? Though I suspect this costs alot. At the moment it is a shambles, looking at what the prisons look like at the moment, and you never hear of people saying how miserable it is and get scarred from it.


The eletric chair is horrible, anyone who suggests the use of it should be chucked on it themselves to rid the world of sick-minded people.

Lets keep them in a prison for all them years then, yes they've commited a really serious crime, he'll be in there for about 30 years? He's already a old man, he's going to die soon.. But it's just a waste, he's a sick man he should be killed.

alexxxxx
08-06-2009, 10:34 AM
it's been proved it doesn't even work as a deterrent plus it's proven to be REALLY expensive as well for some reason... so not really worth it imo.

and killing people is wrong. doesn't matter if they killed first, it's still wrong.

Samishlol
08-06-2009, 10:38 AM
No it shouldn't be brought back. It's wrong to kill someone even though they may have done worse.

-:Undertaker:-
08-06-2009, 01:42 PM
I'd rather the state pay a few thousand in cash to rid the world of these people than have them let out after their 'life' sentence which usually lasts around 5 years then when they are out again they murder again/commit more crimes which costs the state even more. You take a life, you have yours taken - very simple and couldn't be more fair.

GommeInc
08-06-2009, 02:18 PM
Lets keep them in a prison for all them years then, yes they've commited a really serious crime, he'll be in there for about 30 years? He's already a old man, he's going to die soon.. But it's just a waste, he's a sick man he should be killed.
Oh wow, he's a sick man who should be shot to put him out of his misery. He isn't a dog ;) Teach him he's done wrong by making him experience horrid conditions, not cutting him short like he's not done anything wrong.

I'd rather they shrunk prison cells for "life" sentenced people (life as in, their whole life, not what is currently considered life), and give them a poor quality of life. What would killing them do? Teach them nothing, cost alot, teach others nothing and so on. At least locking people up looks bad to other people, because they know suffering to some degree is involved, not no suffering or lessons learnt, as you get with the death sentence (among of things). It's not about removing someone for something, it should be about preventing others from doing something too.

Arch
08-06-2009, 09:18 PM
Depends on the crime,
but id still prob say no :O

J0SH
08-06-2009, 09:24 PM
Oh wow, he's a sick man who should be shot to put him out of his misery. He isn't a dog ;) Teach him he's done wrong by making him experience horrid conditions, not cutting him short like he's not done anything wrong.

I'd rather they shrunk prison cells for "life" sentenced people (life as in, their whole life, not what is currently considered life), and give them a poor quality of life. What would killing them do? Teach them nothing, cost alot, teach others nothing and so on. At least locking people up looks bad to other people, because they know suffering to some degree is involved, not no suffering or lessons learnt, as you get with the death sentence (among of things). It's not about removing someone for something, it should be about preventing others from doing something too.

Horrid conditions? He gets to sleep, watch TV etc all day, I wouldn't call that horrid.

GommeInc
08-06-2009, 09:37 PM
Horrid conditions? He gets to sleep, watch TV etc all day, I wouldn't call that horrid.
Not in current conditions, no. If you've readmy responses to these threads before, I support worse prison sentences and enviroments - no TV. :O

J0SH
08-06-2009, 09:58 PM
If he doesn't have TV he'll still have books to read and people to talk to etc. I witnessed a stabbing and the guy who commited the stabbing showed up in court with a navy suit and everything, they deffinately get treated better than we think. :P Why do you think when people get put into prison, they do more crimes to go back in?

GommeInc
08-06-2009, 10:59 PM
Exactly, the system needs to become horrific and miserable, to stop people re-commiting, :P

luce
09-06-2009, 06:46 AM
No it shouldn't, long periods in prison is much worse than just being killed as the criminal suffers for a smaller amount of time. If the death penalty was to be used then I think it should be for dangers to society and only done on solid evidence as there are always wrongful convictions (birmingham 6) and if someone was killed for a crime they didn't commit, and then their innocence was discovered there would be hell up.

But that wouldn't happen becuase if people knew they were going to die for commiting a crime they wouldn't do it. The death penalty is in place as a deterrant more then a punishment. It is used if it has to be. Alot of people commit these crimes in hope they don't get cought but if they do owell a couple of months is a coushy cell. It would completely slash all crime rates. Therefor people wouldn't wrongly be killed becuase the amount of evidence you need to acutally scentance someone to death is monumental. So like you have people wrongly going to jail now that would be stopped aswell.

Sorry i just read back on the thread and everyone is like "people would be kille for nothing" it's not the 19th centry anymore people the days of McCarthyism and witchcraft trials are well are truly over the death penalty will birng order and structure to a very week and currupt system

Ill be back after school *runs for bus*

Catchy
10-06-2009, 12:49 PM
No, but for people like paedophiles etc, torture them everyday etc. Mmmm would be hot;)


lol jkz

Immenseman
10-06-2009, 12:56 PM
No, but for people like paedophiles etc, torture them everyday etc. Mmmm would be hot;)


lol jkz
Why do you say jkz lol it would be, mm.

luce
10-06-2009, 04:10 PM
Why do you say jkz lol it would be, mm.

you sicken me hubby :(

Nxrissa
21-06-2009, 03:27 PM
GOD YES they should deffo bring it back! do you think people who have killed people on purpose derserve to be alive ?

then again there are other sides if they get the wrong person. well there stuffed. but in the long term i think there should be tests and stuff to prove it was the person and then they should go and die.

e5
21-06-2009, 03:29 PM
sum ppl can just have a moment on unexplained insanity, do these sort of people deserved to be killed for that? =| not really.

Nxrissa
21-06-2009, 03:34 PM
true. it should be brung back but deppending on the circumstances.
some people are so sick killing babys, children adults etc. that have done no harm what so ever.

ifuseekamy
21-06-2009, 03:56 PM
GOD YES they should deffo bring it back! do you think people who have killed people on purpose derserve to be alive ?
Irony overload.

RastaLulz
02-07-2009, 03:39 AM
I think that if you kill someone, you should receive the death penalty regardless of the situation (unless it's in self-defense, or accidental) if you take another persons life. As why should you be granted a life, while the person you murdered doesn't get that option?

GommeInc
02-07-2009, 02:23 PM
I think that if you kill someone, you should receive the death penalty regardless of the situation (unless it's in self-defense, or accidental) if you take another persons life. As why should you be granted a life, while the person you murdered doesn't get that option?
Ever heard of man slaughter? Because accidentally murdering someone comes under that ;) Also, saying people should be legally murdered for accidentally killing someone is stupid :/ A bus driver should be killed if he survives a hugh pile up where one or more of his passengers were killed in the accident, silly much? Don't say "that's an exception" because exceptions shouldn't be taken into law because what's the point in believing in fair trials? Another good example, what if a doctor loses a patient? Should he be killed because he couldn't save someone in his care and protection?

Murder and man slaughter are different, one's intentional and the other isn't. The person who does the killing in the death penalty should be killed too by this irrational and certified brain dead logic, and the person who kills the executioner should be killed too, and so on, and so on, and so on...

Notice a problem? I do, and so do many people ;)

-:Undertaker:-
02-07-2009, 04:38 PM
However that person/s are employed by the state and the state laws would allow for that because it is state execution. It is like the sex limit, people under 16 aren't legally allowed to have sex whilst those over 16 are allowed to have sex. The law is full of exceptions and without exceptions we'd either live in the most liberal country in the world or the most harsh & irrational country in the world, neither of which we would want.

GommeInc
02-07-2009, 04:56 PM
However that person/s are employed by the state and the state laws would allow for that because it is state execution. It is like the sex limit, people under 16 aren't legally allowed to have sex whilst those over 16 are allowed to have sex. The law is full of exceptions and without exceptions we'd either live in the most liberal country in the world or the most harsh & irrational country in the world, neither of which we would want.
Harsh and irrational pretty much sums up the Death Penalty ;) What justice does it serve? None. Zero. Surely harsher prison sentences are better? I don't see why people for the death penalty prefer murderers to get out the easy way, yet rant on about how justice is served and how they deserve it. They get out of life scot free. Why not make them suffer in life, by living in hell on earth in groggy prisons (of course, things would need to change the system) :/

It's funny, because Brits are for developed countries filled with rational thinking and act more civil, yet people demand for incivilised and barabaric practices :/ What's next? Saving the sewage system by peeing in the streets? How about canabilism to save on food?

They maybe employed by the state, but morally they're still murderers and deserve the same treatment, whether the sorry government says otherwise or not ;) Heck, the wholedeath penality is based on false morals anyway! It is wrong to kill - yes, that's morally wrong but killing another person is still morally wrong - what is it? The death penalty makes anyone in support of it sick and confused with what is morally and legally wrong :/ I'd hate to meet someone paid to kill, as would many others - no-one would want such a job unless they're seriously sick in the head.

-:Undertaker:-
02-07-2009, 05:42 PM
The only people who have made the death penalty seem uncivillised are the do gooders, just as they made it racist to talk about immigration back in 2005 with Conservative leader Michael Howard when he was accused of racism. I would prefer life sentences, that doesn't mean two years, 50 years, 100 years, 500 years - it means life. I still think the penalty should be reserved for exceptional circumstances but the fact remains, that if a member of my family or a friend was killed by someone i'd want them dead as I see that as justice, especially in this country where murderers and criminals are treated like they are the victims. If my mum/grandad - anyone in my family was killed, unprovoked in cold blooded circumstances i'd gladly throw the switch rather than having them taking art class in prison or going to the prison gym - having the luxaries most normal people can't afford and the luxaries that my relative now couldn't enjoy because they are dead.

GommeInc
02-07-2009, 06:31 PM
The only people who have made the death penalty seem uncivillised are the do gooders, just as they made it racist to talk about immigration back in 2005 with Conservative leader Michael Howard when he was accused of racism. I would prefer life sentences, that doesn't mean two years, 50 years, 100 years, 500 years - it means life. I still think the penalty should be reserved for exceptional circumstances but the fact remains, that if a member of my family or a friend was killed by someone i'd want them dead as I see that as justice, especially in this country where murderers and criminals are treated like they are the victims. If my mum/grandad - anyone in my family was killed, unprovoked in cold blooded circumstances i'd gladly throw the switch rather than having them taking art class in prison or going to the prison gym - having the luxaries most normal people can't afford and the luxaries that my relative now couldn't enjoy because they are dead.
How is that justice? Surely you want them to suffer, not get out of it that easy? Life should mean life when it is a life sentence, and that's what the problem is with the current system, as well as how the current system seems to be Premium Inns converted into prisons. I don't see killing another human being for murdering someone as justice. If someone in my family was killed, I would want them dead through blind rage - tunnel vision, but after that stage I'd want them to suffer after realising that "Hey, that's far to easy for them".

If the prison system was a prison system, and not a free stay at an exclusive Premier Inn, then I'd be happy with the system, but like you said, they get luxuries and freedom within the prisons.

But I don't agree with the death penalty, it's flawed inside and out and doesn't provide any sort of justice other than for the barbaric who should of gone extinct in the tribal/middle-ages.

-:Undertaker:-
02-07-2009, 07:13 PM
How is that justice? Surely you want them to suffer, not get out of it that easy? Life should mean life when it is a life sentence, and that's what the problem is with the current system, as well as how the current system seems to be Premium Inns converted into prisons. I don't see killing another human being for murdering someone as justice. If someone in my family was killed, I would want them dead through blind rage - tunnel vision, but after that stage I'd want them to suffer after realising that "Hey, that's far to easy for them".

If the prison system was a prison system, and not a free stay at an exclusive Premier Inn, then I'd be happy with the system, but like you said, they get luxuries and freedom within the prisons.

But I don't agree with the death penalty, it's flawed inside and out and doesn't provide any sort of justice other than for the barbaric who should of gone extinct in the tribal/middle-ages.

I could say wanting them to suffer is just as uncivillised, if not more. I'd far prefer them dead rather than living from my taxes having fun in prison, because lets not pretend about it; prisons under this government have become holiday camps. Actually I think its such an important issue it should go to a public referendum, then the issue would be settled, if not then our justice system needs a massive overhaul because at the moment it is a disgrace and the setences being handed out are nothing more than a farce.

alexxxxx
02-07-2009, 09:42 PM
it costs an awful lot of money to execute someone. in the usa it can cost up to $200million to execute just 7 people, as it has to go through tonnes and tonnes of different courts, appeal processes etc. it would have cost alot less to just keep them in jail.

plus, i don't believe anyone has the right to take anyone's life. morally, killing anyone for any purpose/reason/action is as bad as killing them for no reason.

just reform the prisons, take out the xboxes and the sky tv and maybe use them in places that would benefit communities to take people away from crime. when you've got money to give prisoners toys, you've got money to benefit others.

Zox
02-07-2009, 10:09 PM
Of course we should bring the death penalty back. Many murderers are sentenced for 12 years, just to come out of jail in 5 years. People are now commiting crimes just to get into jail! What kind of community are we if we allow this to happen? England would see a dramatic decrease in criminal activity if the Death penalty came back.

Zox

GommeInc
02-07-2009, 11:14 PM
I could say wanting them to suffer is just as uncivillised, if not more. I'd far prefer them dead rather than living from my taxes having fun in prison, because lets not pretend about it; prisons under this government have become holiday camps. Actually I think its such an important issue it should go to a public referendum, then the issue would be settled, if not then our justice system needs a massive overhaul because at the moment it is a disgrace and the setences being handed out are nothing more than a farce.
Taxes would pay for the executions, so bringing in taxes is kinda irrelevant - and they do cost alot. Also, suffering in dull prisons is hardly uncivilised, at least they're not being tortured and killed barbarically. If the prison system wasn't a holiday club, people would be put off doing crimes - the death penalty wouldn't, because large numbers wouldn't be put immediately to warrant it, incase innocent people are killed off. It will cost the government hundreds of millions to check, then double check, and check a few times more to make sure the guy is guilty.

Besides, killing terrorists who are mass-murderers would cause even bigger troubles and more wasted money - we would be no better than the terrorist cells who execute innocent British/American citizens...

Oleh
03-07-2009, 06:32 AM
Death penalty should not come back, If lets say you accidentally murdered somebody and you was enforcing the death penalty, it would be highly ironic for your life to be took under that system? Plenty of people here are saying they want it back, but dont think of the logistics that back then they didnt think of either, If you have a disability would you get away with murder? if you were drunk and walking with a bunch of mates on a pavement next to a busy road, and you slipped on the curb and grabbed your mate to steady you but in fact you pull him into the road and he gets hit by a car, would the court rule it accidental or intentional?

Frodo13.
03-07-2009, 11:19 AM
No, I don't want the death penalty back.

I'll be the first to admit that the prison/legal system is not all that perfect, and I would give full support to harsher prison conditions. Personally, I would recomend the prisioner being in a cell on their own, with just a toilet and a bed, with 3 basic meals a day. I don't think prisioners should even be made to socialise with other prisioners. When you look at people like Ian Huntley, his greatest wish is to die. Where is the justice in executing a man who wants to die? He just be left to rot in prison.

I would also like to see corporal punishment brought back, in the home, in schools and in prisons. I'm not affraid to admit the fact that I personally have grown up in a home, where getting whipped by my Dad with his belt is commanplace, and I've grown up to be a law abiding adult, who has never been in any problems with the police etc.

alexxxxx
03-07-2009, 12:33 PM
No, I don't want the death penalty back.

I'll be the first to admit that the prison/legal system is not all that perfect, and I would give full support to harsher prison conditions. Personally, I would recomend the prisioner being in a cell on their own, with just a toilet and a bed, with 3 basic meals a day. I don't think prisioners should even be made to socialise with other prisioners. When you look at people like Ian Huntley, his greatest wish is to die. Where is the justice in executing a man who wants to die? He just be left to rot in prison.

I would also like to see corporal punishment brought back, in the home, in schools and in prisons. I'm not affraid to admit the fact that I personally have grown up in a home, where getting whipped by my Dad with his belt is commanplace, and I've grown up to be a law abiding adult, who has never been in any problems with the police etc.
i think you're right for the first one, wrong for the second. my parents have never hit me (or even grounded me), limited my use of the computer or done much at all really and I haven't had any trouble with police at all.

iDenning
03-07-2009, 09:35 PM
No, definitely not.

Innocent 'criminals' get killed.

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

That for example, the old Christopher Craig story back in the day.

GommeInc
03-07-2009, 09:50 PM
i think you're right for the first one, wrong for the second. my parents have never hit me (or even grounded me), limited my use of the computer or done much at all really and I haven't had any trouble with police at all.
Me neither :/ Infact, the ideas behind what our parents do or do to us is aload of bull crap.

My dad smoked, and he told myself and my two brothers not to smoke or do drugs, saying it's a discusting habit (hypocritcal, yes) - he smoked ever since he was very young, so 50+ years of an addiction would be incredibly difficult to tackle when trying to stop - he tried, got ulsers and got very ill. None of us have smoked or done drugs, ask Mentor and he may give you a lecture on how badly I HATE smoking and drugs - I swore at one of friends and two other friends for encouraging it, wasn't very happy :P He never really hit us, he was rough haded with my older brother, but picking a (was) 7 year old, chucking them in a chair and shouting at him was hardly whipping them with a belt.

So yeah, hitting children doesn't mean all children will be good citizens, arguably hitting children causes distance between the child and the parent(s)/guadians - shouting is usually what stops children from mis-behaving, it's sort of what dealt with children at school. Nowadays teachers ***** foot around pupils, making sure they keep their jobs at the end of the day, rather than teaching the little beggars to behave.

Frodo13.
04-07-2009, 10:38 AM
i think you're right for the first one, wrong for the second. my parents have never hit me (or even grounded me), limited my use of the computer or done much at all really and I haven't had any trouble with police at all.


Me neither :/ Infact, the ideas behind what our parents do or do to us is aload of bull crap.

My dad smoked, and he told myself and my two brothers not to smoke or do drugs, saying it's a discusting habit (hypocritcal, yes) - he smoked ever since he was very young, so 50+ years of an addiction would be incredibly difficult to tackle when trying to stop - he tried, got ulsers and got very ill. None of us have smoked or done drugs, ask Mentor and he may give you a lecture on how badly I HATE smoking and drugs - I swore at one of friends and two other friends for encouraging it, wasn't very happy :P He never really hit us, he was rough haded with my older brother, but picking a (was) 7 year old, chucking them in a chair and shouting at him was hardly whipping them with a belt.

So yeah, hitting children doesn't mean all children will be good citizens, arguably hitting children causes distance between the child and the parent(s)/guadians - shouting is usually what stops children from mis-behaving, it's sort of what dealt with children at school. Nowadays teachers ***** foot around pupils, making sure they keep their jobs at the end of the day, rather than teaching the little beggars to behave.

I am no way saying it is the most tried and tested alternative/deterent to crime, but I know it worked in my case. My Dad tried all of the above ways of stopping me misbehave, but I was still a brat until he gave me a whipping with his belt, and it has certainly stopped me from doing the things that have earned me the belt from their on.

AgnesIO
04-07-2009, 10:59 AM
I think that if you kill someone, you should receive the death penalty regardless of the situation (unless it's in self-defense, or accidental) if you take another persons life. As why should you be granted a life, while the person you murdered doesn't get that option?


So if some mad man comes running at you with a knife and is gonna stab you, you wouldn't hurt them (and matybe accidently kill them)? And if you did escape with your life, but sadly killed a murderer you think you should be killed to?

Something should be done, maybe the death sentance, as at the moment Britain is a corrupt state. Those ******s in jail who complain about their ******* human rights (After they have murdered about 5 people), should get cut up in the most painful way possible. The *******s should rot in hell.

RastaLulz
04-07-2009, 08:12 PM
So if some mad man comes running at you with a knife and is gonna stab you, you wouldn't hurt them (and matybe accidently kill them)? And if you did escape with your life, but sadly killed a murderer you think you should be killed to?
Obviously if it was in self defense (s)he should not be charged with anything, as (s)he was protecting his/her own life. But if someone kills someone intentionally (other than self defense), they should receive the death penalty regardless. I'd honestly spend my life in jail, alive, than dead. But that might just be me..

AgnesIO
05-07-2009, 08:29 PM
Obviously if it was in self defense (s)he should not be charged with anything, as (s)he was protecting his/her own life. But if someone kills someone intentionally (other than self defense), they should receive the death penalty regardless. I'd honestly spend my life in jail, alive, than dead. But that might just be me..


Oh sorry I just realised you said 'Unless' :)

My mistake!

syko2006
06-07-2009, 10:07 PM
I personally don't think the death penalty should be put back into ways of punishment.
I think it's just the easy way out. Instead of that person who has committed a crime living up to what they have done, they get to be killed, and not ever be seen or heard of ever again.
Where as if they were put into prison, and let out after some time (depending on what crime they have committed) they would have to live up to the humilliation when they go out, the torture of the guilt, (again, depending on this person's personallity) and just knowing what they have done, and how that has to follow them to their grave.

For exmaple:

Say if a human gets charged with rape, and gets let out after say, 5 years (not too sure about crime times :P) and the case was so huge, that it was broadcast all over the UK and millions of people knows this person's face. One day he/she goes out to get some eggs cos' he/she fancies a fry up, and someone who has seen this case sees this person in the shop. Chances are, this member of the public will be pretty annoyed, and maybe attack this person or shout abuse at this person. The person will feel worthless, and unliked. The Family of this person might not be supportive of this person, his/her friends could turn and hate them for what they have done. By now, I suppose you would probably get the point.

ANYWAY..if this person was sentanced to death, there would just be satisfaction of knowing he/she is dead, but there is so much more that they can pay for, SO much more.

If you generally get my point, then post up, but if you're just gonna' slate, don't bother I won't lower down to that level, I have my opinion and I've chosen to share it with you. :D

EDIT: Ah, and another thing, what if someone was tried for something they DID NOT DO, and given the death sentance?
That would be devastating for the Family and friends of this person.

Thanks for reading! :D

RastaLulz
07-07-2009, 02:38 AM
I personally don't think the death penalty should be put back into ways of punishment.
I think it's just the easy way out. Instead of that person who has committed a crime living up to what they have done, they get to be killed, and not ever be seen or heard of ever again.
Where as if they were put into prison, and let out after some time (depending on what crime they have committed) they would have to live up to the humilliation when they go out, the torture of the guilt, (again, depending on this person's personallity) and just knowing what they have done, and how that has to follow them to their grave.

If it were the "easy way out," then don't you think every criminal in jail would kill themselves? Obviously they'd rather live their life in jail, than be dead. Seeing as it'd be quite easy for them to kill themselves, and take the "easy way out". But for some reason they don't, and choose to live.

Inspiration
07-07-2009, 04:33 AM
If it were the "easy way out," then don't you think every criminal in jail would kill themselves? Obviously they'd rather live their life in jail, than be dead. Seeing as it'd be quite easy for them to kill themselves, and take the "easy way out". But for some reason they don't, and choose to live.

Most criminals get used to jail and jail life and in fact documentaries show that many of them see jail as a "second home". and a few of them can actually come out worse than they all ready were simply due to the fact that they are around the same kind.

However bringing the death penalty back would not be a solution! As some user said in an earlier post "It's contradicting itself" and they question has to be asked ~


Will two wrongs make a right?

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!