Originally Posted by
-:Undertaker:-
From what I remember you fully supported them ambushing the thieves and giving them a good beating? - on the difference, yes there is. While it does not involve death, the one you support is vigilantism which does not involve a trial or any sort of court/justice. The death penalty meanwhile would be given based on hard-hitting evidence in a professional court of law. That is a major difference. On if I was accused, i'd feel angry of course - but that would not mean I would not loose support for it and for my fellow inmates such as the likes of Ian Huntley and Ian Bradey. As I have said in the past, it would be introduced and used only for the most serious of crimes which can be proved without a doubt using DNA evidence and any other means.
Yeah and its called local democracy, it would mean the community get a say in what they want to be built rather than the council/s which don't have a very good track record in spending/picking useful projects. UKIP can make their own decisions, however they believe it should be the people who make the choice and not the politicians.
UKIP do not want to end immigration, all I want and all UKIP wants, and what most people want is just some form on control over it to stop the extremists and the criminals getting in - what is so hard to understand about that simple concept? It is so simple yet so far. On the referendums, i'm afraid Switzerland manages it and they have far less money made by their smaller economy every year, the money we'd save by leaving the European Union and slashing red tape would easily pay for referendums and many many other things. You are scratching at the walls now Jake.
UKIP would deal with the hard-hitting issues on a national level, such as the European Union and the death penalty. As I asked earlier on, since you said you were pretty sure when push comes to shove the death penalty would not pass here, do you accept the fact we should have a referendum on it then?