Death penalty!

[Apache]

I don't think it would be debated in Parliament without expert advice from the law fraternity, ethics experts etc.

Therefore, its MUCH better than letting an ill-informed or misinformed (both no doubt, as their so called 'facts' will be gleaned from the media) public decide.

We should not go down the path of allowing emotion drive our laws.The next step is lynch mobs and vigilantes.

[Bogus]

Well, some interesting points, and of course some predictable ones too. Some very thought provoking remarks as well. Sancho choosing death in preference to doing a year ??
Im personally against the death sentence. Its got nothing to do with punishment, its quite simply revenge, and makes the state (us) no better than the original murderer. I also do not trust the system to get it right. Pretty much everyone lies in court, except maybe the lawyers/barristers who tend to be "economical" with truth rather than outright lying. The Police lie, witnesses lie, defendants lie, and then a jury of your peers (all with their own axes to grind) and some doddery old git with little in the way of real life experience gets to decide which lies to believe.
Im also not sure that the death sentence is a deterrent. Look at the countries which have it. They still have murders. I dont believe you will ever stop people from killing other people, and I dont really believe that hanging or even tougher sentences are going to help. I reckon most murders are a moment of madness, where no thought is given to consequence, or its done in a calculating way in the belief that the perp will not get caught, because he/she is too clever or well protected. Its the crimes of violence further down the scale that need to be dealt with differently. There are countless people out there, otherwise rational, who are all too ready to address any perceived slight with their fists and feet and whatever else is to hand, with no thought about the consequences, either to themselves or the other parties involved. Every one of them is a potential killer and the chances of them ever being prosecuted, never mind punished is close to zero.

[Albannach]

Just in case my earlier post is misunderstood, I am 100% against a mandatory death sentance for any crime. Mistakes can be made, people have been and always will be 'fitted up', either by other criminals or the police.

I kind of agree with Sancho; have it available as a lifestyle choice for the criminal to chose, but only for some crimes.

[biosurf]

Thing is, if you have the lifestyle choice or indeed a mandatory death penalty surely that creates at least two potential scenarios.

a) nutter has severe depression, wants to end it all but cannot bring themselves to do the deed so commits one of the Death Penalty offences to affect 'suicide by proxy'

b) nutter with issues murders someone in the heat of the moment. Decides that they cannot get away and will definitely be put to death so thinks 'f**k it' and goes on a spree as their punishment can't get any worse.


All for having prisons being changed though. Get them doing something useful for the economy and producing something. 85,000 individuals is a significant 'workforce'

[ROMEROTECH]

Hang prisoner - Boil prisoner - Turn into Soylent Green - Give back to society - Job done

[leighh]

I kind of agree with Sancho; have it available as a lifestyle choice for the criminal to chose, but only for some crimes.

Heheh. Death... as a lifestyle choice .

[yoshie]

The only reason we have remission is economic expedience.
It can no longer be removed by prison Governors as a way of managing behaviour, yet it has remained since the law changed in 1996.

You can't afford "life means life" or 10yrs is 10yrs. We don't have enough prisons and at £30k per prisoner place per year where is the money coming from?

[soramad]

In a previous post it has been indicated that mistakes have been made using the death sentence, this argument is a little out of date these days as forensic methods and dna matching leaves no reasonable doubt of either guilt or innocence, the death sentence has not been implimented since the 60's and detection methods have moved on dramatically since then consiquently I now think it would be safe to reinstate the death penalty possibly using a different method than hanging. I also believe corpral punishment should be reinstated as there is little respect for persons and personal property due to the human rights lobby which seems to biased towards the perpetrator rather than the victim. With the reduction in policing on the streets I can see the day fast approaching when vigilante justice will begin to be dealt out.

[Albannach]

The problem with DNA is that it's easy to plank/hide/swap/fabricate, so it's really not as 100% certain Black-White as they make it out to be.

Up here, you only have to look at TC Campbell and Joe Steele (the so called Ice Cream Wars), they wouldn't have been able to protest their innocence had they been hanged. Or how about Paul Ferris and the amount of stuff they tried to pin on him, if the death penalty was in force, he'd be a goner if it weren't for his QC. And there are more, many more. Look at any major city, there are rogues, no doubting that, but is it right that they can be set up by the people paid to 'protect and serve' us all?

It's unusual for them to 'Hang' an innocent person, but it's also unusual for a dead person to lodge an appeal; think about that before you decide to kill.

[Apache]

We don't have enough prisons and at £30k per prisoner place per year where is the money coming from?

England?

[Apache]

it's also unusual for a dead person to lodge an appeal; think about that before you decide to kill.

That says all needs to be said really.

[Rustinho]

In a previous post it has been indicated that mistakes have been made using the death sentence, this argument is a little out of date these days as forensic methods and dna matching leaves no reasonable doubt of either guilt or innocence

Firstly, you are assuming that the crime scene sample is not contaminated or compramised (knowingly or unknowingly).

Secondly, you are also assuming that the DNA sample is of sufficient quality as to be truly unique upon processing. When you are amplifying something by a factor of several million there are possible errors that can occur. I wouldn't want a friend or family member to be falsley convicted of anything, but at least if they're still alive there is a chance they can regain their rightful freedom and begin to piece their life back together again.

Thirdly, just because DNA is found at a crime scene and the actual person it matches is correctly identified, it doesn't mean it belongs to a criminal. It is just as open to its presence being manipulated in court, even planted at the scene in the first place, as any other form of evidence.

Finally, there are groups of individuals that have similar enough DNA to be mis-matched to one another. Identical twins are the obvious candidates but there are others and the numbers of possible mismatches can also be influenced by my first two points.

"DNA profiling" isn't the be all and end all that you seem to believe it to be. Its just one more (albeit powerful) piece in the evidential puzzle.

[yoshie]

The problem with DNA is that it's easy to plank/hide/swap/fabricate, so it's really not as 100% certain Black-White as they make it out to be.

Up here, you only have to look at TC Campbell and Joe Steele (the so called Ice Cream Wars), they wouldn't have been able to protest their innocence had they been hanged. Or how about Paul Ferris and the amount of stuff they tried to pin on him, if the death penalty was in force, he'd be a goner if it weren't for his QC. And there are more, many more. Look at any major city, there are rogues, no doubting that, but is it right that they can be set up by the people paid to 'protect and serve' us all?

It's unusual for them to 'Hang' an innocent person, but it's also unusual for a dead person to lodge an appeal; think about that before you decide to kill.

Bad examples to illustrate your point Andy. Given that both Campbell and Ferris are guilty.

[leighh]

Even if you could be 100% sure of guilt, you still don't kill people. You've got to have the higher moral standard. Basing a criminal justice system on revenge is only good for wasting lives and money. Did any one see the Louis Theroux documentaries on U.S. prisons? Essential viewing for anyone clamouring for a return to the dark ages...

[yoshie]

England?

Ok England does not have enough prisons and you can't afford it.