Liquid Bomb Plotters Jailed For 108 Years

[kk.]

Also: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...n-1786630.html

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/off-...to-end-it.html

The death penalty, although may seem like a logical action, can also turn out to end an innocent persons life. At least, would you want to be put on death row and killed within weeks of the sentence without even having a chance to defend yourself again.

100+ years seems probably about right. Theyll be too old to do anything when they come out, just, theyll be richer than most people when out, better than most of the UK pensioners more than likely

[alexxxxx]

I couldn't agree more, its just some false screen put over by the criminal-loving elite to stop them being sent to where they belong - hell.



..even if it was more expensive, i'd still rather see them fry.

when you die, you don't go to hell, you just stop living. i love criminals, infact i wish there were more murderers. seriously, that's what liberals think, moreover we also hate white people and want to destroy britain. we love political correctness and we love giving single mums money for them and their 5 babies (don't forget the council house and free car). but i love immigrants the most, if it was up to me, i'd let the whole of africa come and live, there's plenty of space! we should have them all for diversity and just give them a red carpet welcome when they come and give them even more than the single mums. i'm even more happy cause that's exactly how it all works! :rolleyes:

criminals are less likely to be found guilty where there is a death penalty, it doesn't deter crime, it's more expensive as there's lengthy appeals processes, plus a million other things added in to make it more expensive to jump through legal safeguards and my number one reason against the death penalty: no one has the right to intentionally remove anyone's life for any reason.

plus, these people didn't kill anyone. you can't execute someone for conspiracy to commit murder because they didn't.

[UKIP]

Also: http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...n-1786630.html

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/off-...to-end-it.html

The death penalty, although may seem like a logical action, can also turn out to end an innocent persons life. At least, would you want to be put on death row and killed within weeks of the sentence without even having a chance to defend yourself again.

100+ years seems probably about right. Theyll be too old to do anything when they come out, just, theyll be richer than most people when out, better than most of the UK pensioners more than likely

The problem is, they dont get anywhere near 100+ years; its more around the two year mark.. or you could look at the Lockierbie bomber, who murdered hundreds and only got ten years.

when you die, you don't go to hell, you just stop living. i love criminals, infact i wish there were more murderers. seriously, that's what liberals think, moreover we also hate white people and want to destroy britain. we love political correctness and we love giving single mums money for them and their 5 babies (don't forget the council house and free car). but i love immigrants the most, if it was up to me, i'd let the whole of africa come and live, there's plenty of space! we should have them all for diversity and just give them a red carpet welcome when they come and give them even more than the single mums. i'm even more happy cause that's exactly how it all works! :rolleyes:

criminals are less likely to be found guilty where there is a death penalty, it doesn't deter crime, it's more expensive as there's lengthy appeals processes, plus a million other things added in to make it more expensive to jump through legal safeguards and my number one reason against the death penalty: no one has the right to intentionally remove anyone's life for any reason.

plus, these people didn't kill anyone. you can't execute someone for conspiracy to commit murder because they didn't.

You've never been so right, infact you've just surely written Labours' 2010 manifesto. I just find it strange how you knew when I said 'the elite', that I was referring to the liberal left wingers - finally accepting the truth?

..back onto crime; it does deter crime because if its the difference between being executed or a few years in a prison, along with a free Xbox and numerous activities provided at the taxpayers expense - the criminals will think twice. The criminals dont have the right to remove peoples' lives, especially when not allowed by the democratic and just state - therefore there is a difference between state execution and cold-blooded murder.

it's more expensive

..not justified, especially coming from someone who supports the EUSSR.

[alexxxxx]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2007

US States with death penalty average 5.1 murder rate, whilst those without, 3.1.

what a good deterrent. i can see why it's a good idea now.

and there isn't a difference between us a nation terminating someone's life and a murderer. someone died at the end of it. it doesn't put us on a high ground. plus, if we execute someone incorrectly, every single one of us has blood on our hands.

[UKIP]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2007

US States with death penalty average 5.1 murder rate, whilst those without, 3.1.

what a good deterrent. i can see why it's a good idea now.

and there isn't a difference between us a nation terminating someone's life and a murderer. someone died at the end of it. it doesn't put us on a high ground. plus, if we execute someone incorrectly, every single one of us has blood on our hands.

..so you're saying the dealth penalty encourages murders? - I very much doubt that.

There is a difference, the state has passed a democratic and just judgement on that person, they are being punished by the courts which have made a detailed and mostly correct assessment on these people. There a is a big difference between me running out and cutting people to pieces, and me being found guilty and executed because of the awful crime I committed.

[alexxxxx]

no, i'm saying that 'death penalty is a deterrent' just doesn't work, because if there were, surely the murder rate would be lower, not higher? it's right there before your eyes.

no, there is no difference..

i am not religious, though i have the feeling that no one has the right to kill anyone for any reason (apart from accidental killing in self-defense) Killing someone for killing someone doesn't make sense. Why is it up to you to judge that it's ok to kill this person? You just don't have the right to decide who lives and who dies... simple as.

[UKIP]

no, i'm saying that 'death penalty is a deterrent' just doesn't work, because if there were, surely the murder rate would be lower, not higher? it's right there before your eyes.

no, there is no difference..

i am not religious, though i have the feeling that no one has the right to kill anyone for any reason (apart from accidental killing in self-defense) Killing someone for killing someone doesn't make sense. Why is it up to you to judge that it's ok to kill this person? You just don't have the right to decide who lives and who dies... simple as.

..because the judge has the law behind him, and is making a fair and non-biased decision over a very important matter of which the defendant only got himself/herself into because they brutally murdered a person/s.

[alexxxxx]

..because the judge has the law behind him, and is making a fair and non-biased decision over a very important matter of which the defendant only got himself/herself into because they brutally murdered a person/s.

my point is, there is noone in a position, morally, that has given you a mandate to that. legally, yes, but there isn't someone superior to give you permission to destroy you. everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and everyone is born equal, therefore how can someone have the ability to decide who lives and dies?

[UKIP]

my point is, there is noone in a position, morally, that has given you a mandate to that. legally, yes, but there isn't someone superior to give you permission to destroy you. everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and everyone is born equal, therefore how can someone have the ability to decide who lives and dies?

They are superior, as they haven't committed a terrible and brutal crime which robbed someone/various people of their lives. In that case and the logic your using, you could say many things..

Who has the right to have more money than me?
Who has the right to send someone to prison for the rest of their life?

Indeed everyones born equal, and everyone has pretty much the same oppertunities in a capitalist country, therefore if you take the wrong steps then you will be punished for that.

[alexxxxx]

So therefore they become some supreme being?

You've missed my point. Noone has the right to play god, which is essentially what murderers and judges do (when sentencing someone to death). Late-term abortions is the same thing, as you are essentially taking a life, which could stand by itself. As a left winger I do have right wing views on abortion. If a baby can survive (albeit with help and only one baby, ever) after so many weeks, abortions should be made illegal after that point. It's the same principal. No one should have the right to kill. Just because someone else has killed someone doesn't give you a mandate to kill them.