Capital Punishment.

[mosssideblue]

If there’s no doubt, take them out.

 

[Palerider]

If the "state" takes action and you agree with that action then surely if the "state" got it wrong you should share that guilt? Or are we going to argue that we only support the right decision and when/if it goes wrong that it is someone elses fault?

 

[Blue Hefner]

Seems it is negotiable….

 

[Grassland Blue]

If the "state" takes action and you agree with that action then surely if the "state" got it wrong you should share that guilt? Or are we going to argue that we only support the right decision and when/if it goes wrong that it is someone elses fault?

There are some cases where the evidence is irrefutable.
The ones I mentioned previously just being a few of them.
In those straightforward cases the perpetrator(s) should be summarily despatched to meet their maker. Also, in such cases, mental health should not be a consideration.
This country is a shambles at the moment, ill discipline, no respect for the rule of law, half baked theories coming from intelligentsia, feeble government which 'goes with the flow' and agenda driven people disrupting daily life are just some issues facing us.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I lean towards no capital punishment because of the miscarriages of justice that happen. However in the cases where their guilt is 100% like the scum that butchered Lee Rigby i'd be happy for them to swing.

Which convictions do you think weren’t 100%?

 

[SamTheGuru]

There are some cases where the evidence is irrefutable.
The ones I mentioned previously just being a few of them.
In those straightforward cases the perpetrator(s) should be summarily despatched to meet their maker. Also, in such cases, mental health should not be a consideration.
This country is a shambles at the moment, ill discipline, no respect for the rule of law, half baked theories coming from intelligentsia, feeble government which 'goes with the flow' and agenda driven people disrupting daily life are just some issues facing us.

There is never a case where the evidence is irrefutable. There is never a case where it is straight forward either. What you are referring to is the balance of all probability.

 

[Grassland Blue]

There is never a case where the evidence is irrefutable. There is never a case where it is straight forward either. What you are referring to is the balance of all probability.

No.
There are cases where the evidence is irrefutable. For example where a soldier (off duty) is lying on the pavement with massive and bloody wounds whilst the perpetrator is stood, arms aloft holding a bloody weapon, I think that is clearly irrefutable.

 

[SamTheGuru]

No.
There are cases where the evidence is irrefutable. For example where a soldier (off duty) is lying on the pavement with massive and bloody wounds whilst the perpetrator is stood, arms aloft holding a bloody weapon, I think that is clearly irrefutable.

From what you have described, by definition it is not irrefutable.

 

[Grassland Blue]

From what you have described, by definition it is not irrefutable.

There was, I believe, film of him attacking the soldier.
So what would you describe the evidence as if not irrefutable?

 

[Ohrodneyrodney]

From what you have described, by definition it is not irrefutable.

I don’t know what your definition of irrefutable is. CCTV of them purchasing the knives that were used in the attack, multiple witnesses seeing them use the car in the attack, then get out and murder Lee Rigby with the knives they had bought, staying at the scene after to say why they did it, and at least one of them apologising for it later.
I’m willing to listen to arguments against capital punishment, but the one that says the evidence can never be irrefutable is completely false.