Capital Punishment.

For the most serious of crimes i feel there should be an option available. Im thinking of cunts like the one who murdered those kids in Southport, Sutcliffe, Huntley and Whiting.
Id go one step further and give the prisoner the option to end it as well. Never understood why we would keep someone like Brady alive when he didn't want to. Huge costs involved in keeping these locked up.
 
Blue Hefner said:
Maybe we are, maybe we aren’t. But the state has killed countless people who most definitely were not who they thought were

I don’t like the idea of the state’s level being that of the worst members of society. Also, if you give the state the permission to execute murders then after that it is simply a negotiation - people who commit manslaughter, how about them? Rapists, they didn’t kill anyone but society could do without them. Bank robbers maybe, again, didn’t kill anyone but certainly undesirable….
Click to expand...
In my view people who commit acts of terrorism such as the murder of Lee Rigby, the London and Arena bombings and the attack in Southport on the dance class deserve the ultimate penalty.
Also the people who rape and murder innocents need to be similarly dealt with.
I strongly disagree that the state is lowering itself to the level of people who have committed these types of crimes, it is merely enforcing and enabling the rights of the majority of us to live relatively safely and peacefully. Therefore it is holding society to a much higher moral standard.
 
domalino said:
Because we know for a fact the government gets it wrong.

Arguing for the death penalty after we all know about wrongful executions is arguing for innocent people to be murdered to satisfy your bloodlust.

Life in prison removes a murderer from society and doing any further harm, while having the generally popular result of the government not intermittently murdering innocent people.

This 2 minute video is literally all you need to end the debate, which is why there is essentially no public debate about this topic. It's settled, and like 90% of the civilised world we're not going back.

Click to expand...

These days the likelihood of a wrongful conviction is so small as to be almost nil due to advances in DNA testing etc. All of those convicted would have the right of appeal too
Also if there was some element of
doubt over the person/ people imprisoned, why were they imprisoned in rhe first place?
 
Grassland Blue said:
These days the likelihood of a wrongful conviction is so small as to be almost nil due to advances in DNA testing etc. All of those convicted would have the right of appeal too
Also if there was some element of
doubt over the person/ people imprisoned, why were they imprisoned in rhe first place?
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence to back up that statement that DNA evidence makes wrongful convictions “so small as to be almost nil”?

People are wrongfully executed in countries every year despite modern DNA evidence techniques so that’s not the trump card you think it is.

This guy was sentenced to death based on flawed dna evidence and only just avoided execution.

PRESS RELEASE: DNA expert evidence relied on by prosecution to convict a man of murder over 10 years ago was fundamentally flawed | The Death Penalty Project

Today, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council formally quashed Julian Washington’s conviction for murder and attempted murder, after he spent over 10 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
deathpenaltyproject.org deathpenaltyproject.org

In Texas, even the prosecutors admitting the DNA evidence was flawed and the crime lab processing it being shut down because of multiple errors isnt enough to overturn the death penalty.

www.nbcnews.com

Supreme Court rejects Texas death row inmate's appeal over DNA evidence

The case centers on Areli Escobar's claim that DNA analysis was carried out by a laboratory that was later closed down following a string of errors.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

Grassland Blue said:
Also if there was some element of
doubt over the person/ people imprisoned, why were they imprisoned in rhe first place?
Click to expand...

Every person ever wrongfully executed was convicted because they were found to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, so again this statement is meaningless. It’s a fact people do get wrongfully convicted when juries think there was no doubt to their guilt.
 
Last edited:
domalino said:
Do you have any evidence to back up that statement that DNA evidence makes wrongful convictions “so small as to be almost nil”?

People are wrongfully executed in countries every year despite modern DNA evidence techniques so that’s not the trump card you think it is.

This guy was sentenced to death based on flawed dna evidence and only just avoided execution.

PRESS RELEASE: DNA expert evidence relied on by prosecution to convict a man of murder over 10 years ago was fundamentally flawed | The Death Penalty Project

Today, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council formally quashed Julian Washington’s conviction for murder and attempted murder, after he spent over 10 years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
deathpenaltyproject.org deathpenaltyproject.org

In Texas, even the prosecutors admitting the DNA evidence was flawed and the crime lab processing it being shut down because of multiple errors isnt enough to overturn the death penalty.

www.nbcnews.com

Supreme Court rejects Texas death row inmate's appeal over DNA evidence

The case centers on Areli Escobar's claim that DNA analysis was carried out by a laboratory that was later closed down following a string of errors.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
Click to expand...
If you noticed I put an etc.after DNA. This means that advances in other tech could also help prove the guilt of the accused.
For example security cameras, mobile phone records ETC. can also be a part of bringing the correct person to justice.
Also I am not that concerned with what takes place in other countries and most certainly not the twitchy, trigger happy residents of certain states of the USA.
 
Grassland Blue said:
If you noticed I put an etc.after DNA. This means that advances in other tech could also help prove the guilt of the accused.
For example security cameras, mobile phone records ETC. can also be a part of bringing the correct person to justice.
Click to expand...

Again, you seem completely unable to grasp the fact that every person ever wrongfully executed was already found guilty behind a reasonable doubt.
 
domalino said:
Again, you seem completely unable to grasp the fact that every person ever wrongfully executed was already found guilty behind a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...
Oh, I do understand.
You do not appear to understand the fact that tech has improved immeasurably since those unfortunate events.
 
Grassland Blue said:
In my view people who commit acts of terrorism such as the murder of Lee Rigby, the London and Arena bombings and the attack in Southport on the dance class deserve the ultimate penalty.
Also the people who rape and murder innocents need to be similarly dealt with.
I strongly disagree that the state is lowering itself to the level of people who have committed these types of crimes, it is merely enforcing and enabling the rights of the majority of us to live relatively safely and peacefully. Therefore it is holding society to a much higher moral standard.
Click to expand...



There's nothing like a martyr to rally some religions into further acts of terrorism.
 
Grassland Blue said:
In my view people who commit acts of terrorism such as the murder of Lee Rigby, the London and Arena bombings and the attack in Southport on the dance class deserve the ultimate penalty.
Also the people who rape and murder innocents need to be similarly dealt with.
I strongly disagree that the state is lowering itself to the level of people who have committed these types of crimes, it is merely enforcing and enabling the rights of the majority of us to live relatively safely and peacefully. Therefore it is holding society to a much higher moral standard.
Click to expand...

So, like I said earlier, it becomes a negotiation.
We start with ‘the worst’ murderers then move on to rapists

What next, drug dealers? Drug users(essentially extermination of the homeless) etc. you see where this goes…
 
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.
 
Blue Hefner said:
So, like I said earlier, it becomes a negotiation.
We start with ‘the worst’ murderers then move on to rapists

What next, drug dealers? Drug users(essentially extermination of the homeless) etc. you see where this goes…
Click to expand...
No the death penalty does not have to move onto less serious crimes.
Only the ones I stated.
Justify keeping the monsters incarcerated for however many years rather than put to death.
The crimes I highlighted are only a few of many and the perpetrators do not deserve a life, any life.
Get rid and feed them to the pigs.
 
abu13 said:
For the most serious of crimes i feel there should be an option available. Im thinking of cunts like the one who murdered those kids in Southport, Sutcliffe, Huntley and Whiting.
Id go one step further and give the prisoner the option to end it as well. Never understood why we would keep someone like Brady alive when he didn't want to. Huge costs involved in keeping these locked up.
Click to expand...
Keeping that twat alive was his punishment.
Don't be pandering to what murders want.
 
Grassland Blue said:
No the death penalty does not have to move onto less serious crimes.
Only the ones I stated.
Justify keeping the monsters incarcerated for however many years rather than put to death.
The crimes I highlighted are only a few of many and the perpetrators do not deserve a life, any life.
Get rid and feed them to the pigs.
Click to expand...

Because they might not be monsters. Some thought the bloke who was found guilty of murdering Jill Dando was a monster or Colin Stagg etc

Some would argue child rapists are monsters, but they are not murderers. A murderer might kill one person or 5, a drug dealer can effect 100 lives. Why not get rid of the drug dealer, it would be a net benefit to society?

Also, the public would be a baying mob, I’m old enough to remember people wanted the *children* that murdered Jamie Buldger to be executed. Total madness - so the politicians would get carried away and like everything, it would creep
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top