COMMENTS:
ah fuck the death penalty. i want everyone dead. my doggies and i will get by. Everyone else hates WHY CAN'T I THEN?
The Death Penalty is fair tariff for Murder. If an individual is prepared to take life in a premeditated way and is proved to have done so beyond reasonable doubt then they should understand that their life WILL be forfeit. In Britain we have many murderers lounging in Gaols and Secure Hospitals enjoying the benefits of warmth, comfortable single rooms, no bills and three meals a day, all at public expense while law abiding citizens are taxed outrageously and our pensioners freeze to death in there un heated homes. If a reasonable deterant were re-introduced it may allow decent people to reclaim the streets.
The death penalty A. dont diswade crime
B. is realy screwed if the person convicted is inocent
C. many murders are crimes of the moment, say a wife caches her husband in bed with another woman and just looses it, most murders and other serios criminals can be rehabilitated, and are genuinly in moral pain for what theyve done. Also, it cost mor eto execute soemoen than it doase to keep em in prison, strange but true
Bloke-
By your reasoning, anyone who takes a life should have theirs taken from them. Who, then, will take the lives of the executioners? Of course, you can argue that they're only performing their duty, but it'slikeyou yourself said: an individual willing to take life in a premeditated way (I wonder, do executioners fit that description) and is proved to have done so, forfeits their life. Your argument states that murder is abhorred in any circumstances- except, of course, as punishment. Most murderers must feel their crime is a justified punishment, as well. I am not claiming they have a right to murder. But what backward logic to say murder "fixes" murder. As for murderers "enjoying" their free cell, thats an inevitable consequence of the establishment of prisons, and could be said for all inmates, not just murderers. Taking lives to save expense is no better than the logic of the killer in the first place.
Yep. It's like I always say. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If killing is illegal for citizens, it should be illegal for the government as well. The double-standard thing just doesn't do it for me.
Lazy N Crazy. Enough strange but true crap. A syringe full of 'GOODNIGHT' doesn't cost as much as an easy life in Stir. Crimes of the moment are judged on thier merit in court, If the murderer is proved to have planned then carried out the murder then bye bye. If, (as in your scenario) the wife is pissed off on the spur of the moment by hubbies affair and tops said hubby then that does not constitute pre-meditation. However if wife is so pissed off she subsequently plots and plans to execute terminal revenge then that does.
Bahayworth
If someone were to attack me in the street I am prepared to die resisting them. I will give them as good if not more than they attempt to deliver to me. I walk the street with the confidence that attitude provides. Unfortunately for our society, the pre meditators are not looking for people like me who can and will vigorously defend themselves. They are looking for weak people, frail people, old people, children. They are looking for easy targets. State implementation of the ultimate deterant empowers the decent people so that they may walk with a similar confidence to mine. The scum that commit the most despicable crimes are cowards. Their greatest fear is danger to themselves. Take Shipman and Huntley (British Murderers) as two recent examples. Shipman with a catalogue of murders spanning 30 years (250 to 400 as a broad estimate) NO remorse for his victims, he committed Suicide to obtain a NHS pension for his wife before this loophole was closed. I have no problem with paying her the money, in fact I applaud the man for doing the Nation a service. Huntley, a disgusting inadequate who took the lives of two children for whatever bizarre reason possessed him. NO remorse for his victims, just fear that he was in big trouble and the pretence of insanity to try to get off. Shipman is gone now. I am pleased about that. Huntley (unfortunately) is still living at our expense. These people are slime. If they and others like them considered that their own death was on the cards before they played their hand then perhaps they would think twice and perhaps some of the victims would be still with us. I am still to be convinced that Mira Hindley is dead. Following the statements that 'eye for an eye' justice would be exacted by people close to the children she helped to kill were she to be ever released. It would not surprise me to learn that 'The State' hadn't arranged her death and funeral to distract us from the fact she is out and about and living as Mrs ***** in Glasgow (or wherever) If that sounds too far fetched, where are the murderers of Jamie Bulger now. Locked up forever? or living out and about as 'reformed' citizens. Shame Jamie, the murdered 3 year old hasn't got a lasting career. If I had the choice I'd televise the executions to make sure everyone got the bloody message. Some people are tired of being victimised by both criminals AND State!
Sorry Bahayworth I just read that back and realised I didn't answer your question
'By your reasoning, anyone who takes a life should have theirs taken from them. Who, then, will take the lives of the executioners?'
Here lies the dilema, or does it? The executioners would be sanctioned by the State to exact justice against proven murderers in accordance with the mandate of the people. This effectively gets them off the hook because the 'victims' presented to them have been found guilty by their peers, sentenced in accordance with the law and delivered to the gallows by due process. I don't advocate the barbarism of the the electric chair or firing squad or the inhumanity of hanging or beheading. but a nice, quiet, lethal injection should do the trick. Bye Bye bad guy.
Bloke-
Here in america, murderers DO face the death penalty, and apparently, they haven't been deterred in the least. In fact, murder has been somewhat commercialized. (Seen any american movies lately?) So much for the Ultimate Deterrent. Correct me if I'm wrong, but British police don't even carry fire arms, do they?
So what exactly is America accomplishing by putting murderers to death? In reality, no one who commits murder would do it if they were sure they would be caught and killed. They fully intend to evade the law. The death penalty will not stop homicide- that much is clear at least. This would lead you to consider the real motivations behind the death penalty. If not to prevent future crime, then to punish?
But consider this- how exactly is the murderer being punished? They're not being taught a lesson. So as punishment, they're simply being sent to the Great Beyond? None of us here on earth know what will happen next. The DEATH of the murderer itself is enough. How can this be justice, just consider how some serial killers recieve life in jail, and other killers with far lesser body count will be sentenced to death? The Ultimate Deterrent, it would appear, is subjective, dependent on the amount of moral indignation. Killing the killer will not bring back the victims, who will never recieve justice. To them, it makes no difference if the murderer is set free or recieves lethal injection before a crowd of crying relatives. Truth be bold- it's simply a civilized, justified way of taking revenge, and NOT justice for the victims.
As for the executioners being absolved of the death, how fantasticly simple! And funny, this morally outrageous act of taking a life is miraculously all right, as long as everyone else thinks it is. Who knew conscience was such a fickle thing!
Eloquently put
I agree there are criminals and psychopaths who are prepared to commit murder in the pursuance of their crime and would never be deterred by the death penalty. This fact alone brings me to the conclusion that society is a safer place without them. We can lock them up for life (unfortunately in the UK this doesn't mean until they die) but no amount of rehabilitation or approaches to their better nature will ever mend these people. So to permenantly remove them protects people from the threat they pose. I also agree that the death penalty IS as much to do with society's revenge as it is to do with justice, but a society which sanctions laws, supposedly to represent the interests of its law abiding citizens must be seen to be in control. The killer sanctions his own demise by taking life from others. (Do, as you would be done by)
The British Police ARE armed, it's just that not all British Police are armed. If you pull out a gun in a Bank in this country you have just as much chance of being shot by the police as you do in most other countries. This however does not help the unarmed beat-bobby who confronts the armed drug dealer who carries a firearm to re-inforce his total disregard for the law. That said, I don't think there is much point in arming all our police as armed response units CAN be deployed to scenes of crimes as quickly as any other units. If all police were armed, the current soft approach of the powers that be would impose such restricting Rules of Engagement upon them that they would effectively be neutered anyway.
The situation regarding crime and punishment in UK is so out of control and the crimes carried out on the weak and vulnerable, so horrid that something must be done to regain the upper hand. Our prisons are bulging full and yet the situation is not improving. The ultimate deterrent is just one measure of punshment reforms we should consider. We should reform our prisons by removing the TV's, computer suites and luxurious accommodation and make prisons so terrible that offenders would be deterred from re offending by a burning desire never to go back there again. Active, visable policing is another measure. We manage it well at airports, why not in our towns and cities too. We need more Coppers on the ground who can carry out their duties without being tied to a desk in the station filling paperwork. That way our little old ladies would be able able to live without fear of being attacked, robbed or murdered. Our children would be able to play safely in the knowledge that theres a copper round the corner to keep the perverts at bay. You should come and visit us over here. It's not all leafy suburbia and tea and scones. Theres a war going on and the good guys are not winning.
Bloke,
Im not under the impression that its leafy suburbia and tea and scones at all. Humans are probably demonstrating the same amount of crime in the UK as they are in the US.
However, I think you have an exaggerated opinion of the ability of the police to curtail crime. American Suburbia is over-run with police, dutifully positioned behind the donut shop. Should a little old lady need help, a trigger-happy officer is never far away. You seem to think that violent opposition would squash the wills of the criminals. Unlikely. Prison, as it is, is already an awful place. Any sort of imprisonment, television or no, is not a welcome prospective for a potential law-offender. If they choose to run the risk anyway, you could probably model the cells after inquisition torture chambers, for all the good it would do. They understand that crime equals punishment, if caught. There will always be people willing to run the risk.
No doubt, society would be a safer place without them. Of course, youd probably have to take out half the population. (Then double check to see if anyone has any ideas..) Crime will always exist- its a consequence of life! There will always be the factors that create criminals (poverty, addiction, mental illness, boredom). Even if these miraculously were eliminated, it still couldnt be stopped. There will be law abiders, so there must be law breakers. And every law abider is a potential law breaker, when put in the proper circumstances and given the right opportunity. You say yourself, no amount of rehabilitation or approaches to their better nature will stop them- nor will any form of punishment.
A society which sanctions laws, supposedly to represent the interest of its law abiding citizens must be seen to be in control. Yes, but its the REAL interests of those law abiding citizens that worries me. You admitted they only want revenge. I dont understand why murder is sanctioned when standing on the right side of the fence, with the proper mix of grave solemnity and dutiful determination plastered on your face.
Why does it say 'nast master'if I wrote the comment above?
Only for those who ask that question.
totally yes, america is full of vicious motherfuckers that deserve to be killed for what they do, there's some sick freaks here and they need the harshest discipline. u dont keep mad dogs, u kill em
Life sentence without parole, TV, internet, books. BUT WITH a view of the outside world and a daily newspaper so the asshole knows what he/she is missing: freedom and being a part of life. The ultimate punishment is to know what your behavior has lost you. Ha!
by Hank on Fri Feb 06, 04 1:14pm
[+]
|
