Bring back the death penalty?

Malced said:
With respect I don't agree with the characterisation of mob justice. This would be an investigation and prosecution through the courts done over time in a very carefully controlled and invigilated way.

Yes there would be a public wanting justice. But they wouldn’t be a baying mob. Rather it would be justice for the bereaved and society as a whole. We’re not talking about hunting someone down and dragging them to the gallows.
Click to expand...
But it doesn't save innocent lives, it's just 'revenge'.

I think the death penalty is too easy for some of them anyway, we can come up with better than that, some of these 'people' need to suffer long term.
 
seasideone said:
Somebody at some point would be executed who was innocent.

As already mentioned on here you can’t have two levels of burden of proof.

If you did and there was any doubt on the higher burden, it brings into question everything.

You are either guilty or not beyond reasonable doubt and that is about the right level for me.
Click to expand...
Spot on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ste
I think also, everyone who is saying that we will never execute anyone innocent does not understand the laws of probability.

The best description which explains why you will execute someone innocent is simple monkey theorem.

Put simply it states, if the probability of something happening is above zero then at some point, if you wait long enough - it will happen.
 
Shandypants said:
The ian Hislop/Patel exchange is a classic. Its a deterrent shouts Patel (another slogan moron)
Click to expand...

That’s a good clip.
It finishes which someone quoting Archbishop Desmond tutu who said if you kill someone, for taking the life of another, it’s revenge not justice.

I don’t quite agree with that viewpoint. I’d say it’s revenge AND justice.
All punishment is a form of revenge. It’s society showing its displeasure that they’ve been wronged by a criminal. So that leads to punishment as a consequence or revenge.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Deary me, you are really scraping the barrel to justify your argument.

Im sure Lee Rigby's family would really appreciate your logic on this.
Click to expand...
I am being as petulant as you to make a point- you cannot use a single case to justify the death penalty.

The reality is you would execute someone innocent at some point and that is fundamentally unacceptable to me under ANY circumstances.
 
Sounds as though they have the bastard who shot the little girl in Liverpool. Numbers of people gave the Police his name and he's now back in prison. Says it all!!!
 
seasideone said:
I am being as petulant as you to make a point- you cannot use a single case to justify the death penalty.

The reality is you would execute someone innocent at some point and that is fundamentally unacceptable to me under ANY circumstances.
Click to expand...
petulant..moi?

So I give you a scenario of something which could easily happen, and just because it negates your way of thinking, I'm petulant.Wow

I could give numerous instances, not just one, but I cannot disclose info due to OSA and DP restrictions, but trust me there are plenty.Ive been involved with several.

I do however whole heartedly agree with you that to execute someone who is innocent is totally unacceptable.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
petulant..moi?

So I give you a scenario of something which could easily happen, and just because it negates your way of thinking, I'm petulant.Wow

I could give numerous instances, not just one, but I cannot disclose info due to OSA and DP restrictions, but trust me there are plenty.Ive been involved with several.

I do however whole heartedly agree with you that to execute someone who is innocent is totally unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Don’t get me wrong I would happily burn all the bastards at the stake if it was 100% categorical ALL the time.

The problem is nobody can guarantee that it is 100% categorical forever - therefore I am against the death penalty.

Life should mean life though.
 
I thought the measure of a civilised society is the criminal justice system and the principle of redemption. That's a Christian viewpoint as well, that said i don't think paedophilia is a crime I could ever see being redeemed or the hospital electrician who had sex with hundreds of dead bodies. I'd happily put a bullet in their heads, ditto animal cruelty.
 
seasideone said:
I think also, everyone who is saying that we will never execute anyone innocent does not understand the laws of probability.

The best description which explains why you will execute someone innocent is simple monkey theorem.

Put simply it states, if the probability of something happening is above zero then at some point, if you wait long enough - it will happen.
Click to expand...
Exactly correct. If you are for capital punishment but will not accept that at some point an inoccent person will be killed by the state, you are not worth listening to. Unless you accept that and incorporate it into your belief somehow, you are living in a self-deluded fantasy I have no respect for.
 
todayistheday said:
Would rather see better sentencing across the board and an overhaul of our prison service. Too soft in this country
Click to expand...
In order to achieve better sentencing we need a justice service and a prison service that are fit for purpose. That must go hand in hand with proper investment in public infrastructure, in education, in good jobs to show that there are sustainable pathways away from crime and towards a worthwhile career and personal development. So long as we have Governments that portray peoples' societal failings solely as a matter for the individual to correct, and which continue to denude social infrastructure of adequate investment, these problems will continue to be a stain on this country.
 
Last edited:
When it is beyond any doubt that someone has killed. The victims family should decide what happens. That can be killing them. Kicking them. Starving em. Whatever. Crimes like this make me think this is the real hell. Should not be happening.
 
seasideone said:
Don’t get me wrong I would happily burn all the bastards at the stake if it was 100% categorical ALL the time.

The problem is nobody can guarantee that it is 100% categorical forever - therefore I am against the death penalty.

Life should mean life though.
Click to expand...
To your second to last line, I respect your opinion on it.

To your last line, I totally agree
 
Malced said:
With respect I don't agree with the characterisation of mob justice. This would be an investigation and prosecution through the courts done over time in a very carefully controlled and invigilated way.

Yes there would be a public wanting justice. But they wouldn’t be a baying mob. Rather it would be justice for the bereaved and society as a whole. We’re not talking about hunting someone down and dragging them to the gallows.
Click to expand...
Endless appeals and cases dragging on for years and years.
More publicity for the convicted murderers, some of whom would enjoy the notoriety that it brings
A media circus on the day of execution
And the eventual inevitable state killing of an innocent person

No for all of these reasons
 
Until we have a more balanced society, rather than the take take take one we have now, crimes will continue to happen. If someone genuinely has something to lose, then that’s the best deterrent of the lot.
 
I met the official hangman of Nigeria many years ago - said he loved his job....
Could I pull the lever? Yep.
Would it save the country millions of pounds - yes.
Would it have to be an indisputable case of guilt - yes.
Shipman + West are not the best of examples as they both killed themselves in prison but think of the cost that Brady, Hindley, Sutcliffe cost the tax payer over the years.
Poor Winnie Johnson strung along for years by Brady until her death, him being hung years earlier would have brought some sense of justice / closure to her.
 
Mcewans Mullet said:
I met the official hangman of Nigeria many years ago - said he loved his job....
Could I pull the lever? Yep.
Would it save the country millions of pounds - yes.
Would it have to be an indisputable case of guilt - yes.
Shipman + West are not the best of examples as they both killed themselves in prison but think of the cost that Brady, Hindley, Sutcliffe cost the tax payer over the years.
Poor Winnie Johnson strung along for years by Brady until her death, him being hung years earlier would have brought some sense of justice / closure to her.
Click to expand...
Which bit of probability do you not get - at some point the state would execute an innocent person???
 
There
Malced said:
I would. For the most heinous crimes we need to be much tougher.

I’m sickened at the shooting of a little 9 year old girl. It’s on the back of other gun killings in Liverpool in the last few weeks.

Quite simply, in my opinion, the shooter of this girl no longer deserves to walk this planet. Recklessly shooting a gun indiscriminately in a strangers home is one of the most uncivilised criminal acts imaginable.

The public has to be protected. We have become a soft touch on crime and criminals.

So I’d welcome a debate on reintroducing the death penalty. Why should some evil criminal be allowed to live when they’ve taken the life of a little girl? I’d gladly buy a ticket to watch whoever did this be exterminated. Anyone aiding and abetting this offender as they try to evade justice should have all assets stripped off them and be incarcerated for a decade at least.

It’s time to get tough on these so called humans. I’d vote for the return of the death penalty and personally rejoice when these evil pondlife are extinguished. Good riddance to those who waste the privilege of life and use it to take another’s.
Click to expand...
There is an old adage in the legal world that tough cases make bad law. We were all sickened by that murder but I doubt anyone thinks the death penalty would have prevented it. There is precisely zero evidence for a legal system based on revenge. Harsh sentences offer zero comfort for victims and their loved ones and sometimes make things worse. So that's a no from me FWIW.
 
Shandypants said:
It's all very convenient DNA and finger print evidence. I watched a documentary where someone was convicted on fingerprints which subsequently was overuled as the fingerprint "experts" were completely wrong. I was shocked at how vague fingerprints can be, it's nothing like an exact science but juries love that kind of stuff as it gives them "certainty".
Click to expand...
Most cases in our days would need more then just fingerprints as evidence . I can't know all the cock ups that courts have made ,but they would not make a documentary about it if it was a regular occurrence of fingerprint experts cocking up.
 
WIZARD OF TANGERINE said:
Most cases in our days would need more then just fingerprints as evidence . I can't know all the cock ups that courts have made ,but they would not make a documentary about it if it was a regular occurrence of fingerprint experts cocking up.
Click to expand...
Are you happy for the state to execute one innocent person??
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
Shandy

Nothing to with capital punishment but I was going to put that clip up just to show how stupid Priti Patel is.

How the feck is she the Home Secretary ?
Click to expand...
I don't know about stupid. She's a nasty bastard though. As are all this wing of the Tory Party.
 
Last edited:
I lived in Liverpool for a couple of years about 10 years ago near Sefton Park, and at the weekend I used to travel the short distance with my girlfriend by car into the city at the weekend. It soon became very apparent passing through Toxeteth that shootings were rampant in the city by the police activity and CSI teams at work and that there were at least a couple of serious incidents every weekend, with drug-related gang crime. Most of these crimes were not reported on the national news because they involved attacks on gang members.

Fast forward ten years and this is an outcry to bring back the death penalty for the shooting of an innocent girl as it will deter the crime from happening again. In my opinion, crime has been left to escalate out of control, especially in the cities where a lot of areas there is little police presence. I can guarantee that when the police catch the person that carried out the crime they will have previous convictions and cautions,
and they will be connected with drug crime and the enormous amount of money that can be made from selling it. Youngsters often enter into drug crime at an early age for easy money and the severity of the crimes they commit escalates over time.

There are two choices, we approach a Singapore approach with tough punishment but more importantly lots of police and resources to deal with it, and more importantly no tolerance for small crimes. This doesn't have to mean the death penalty it can just mean being sentenced for the duration of your life if you commit murder. But small crimes are punished strongly.

The second approach is to make drugs readily available at low cost at supermarkets, chemists, etc, and take the financial incentives away from dealing drugs illegally. Use the profits generated to provide rehab centers, youth centres etc.

At the moment the police haven't got the power or the resources, and do not have the respect of youngsters, something has to change
as the system isn't working.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I don't know about stupid. She's a nasty bastard though. As are all this wing of the Tory Party.
Click to expand...

66

If I'm going to keep lobbying them up, your going to smash them away.

She's fecking stupid.

Far brighter than both Rayner and Abbott but still fecking stupid.

AVFTT caveat - I'm sure there are also some stupid male politicians.
 
Seaside,fair post.

However Im VERY well acquainted with Mr Downing, having been a bobby at Bakewell not long after the event. I also know the full transcript of the case, and its definitely not a good example to quote. Naturally because of certain legal restrictions I can't elaborate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bend it like Suddick said:
Seaside,fair post.

However Im VERY well acquainted with Mr Downing, having been a bobby at Bakewell not long after the event. I also know the full transcript of the case, and its definitely not a good example to quote. Naturally because of certain legal restrictions I can't elaborate.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough Bendit.

I certainly don't know too much about the Downing case.

All I know is that he was convicted after confessing and subsequently acquitted, I also thought he was half backward.

Sorry if I wasn't right, I appreciate that you will know far more than me but can't say anything.
 
Danny Ocean said:
I lived in Liverpool for a couple of years about 10 years ago near Sefton Park, and at the weekend I used to travel the short distance with my girlfriend by car into the city at the weekend. It soon became very apparent passing through Toxeteth that shootings were rampant in the city by the police activity and CSI teams at work and that there were at least a couple of serious incidents every weekend, with drug-related gang crime. Most of these crimes were not reported on the national news because they involved attacks on gang members.

Fast forward ten years and this is an outcry to bring back the death penalty for the shooting of an innocent girl as it will deter the crime from happening again. In my opinion, crime has been left to escalate out of control, especially in the cities where a lot of areas there is little police presence. I can guarantee that when the police catch the person that carried out the crime they will have previous convictions and cautions,
and they will be connected with drug crime and the enormous amount of money that can be made from selling it. Youngsters often enter into drug crime at an early age for easy money and the severity of the crimes they commit escalates over time.

There are two choices, we approach a Singapore approach with tough punishment but more importantly lots of police and resources to deal with it, and more importantly no tolerance for small crimes. This doesn't have to mean the death penalty it can just mean being sentenced for the duration of your life if you commit murder. But small crimes are punished strongly.

The second approach is to make drugs readily available at low cost at supermarkets, chemists, etc, and take the financial incentives away from dealing drugs illegally. Use the profits generated to provide rehab centers, youth centres etc.

At the moment the police haven't got the power or the resources, and do not have the respect of youngsters, something has to change
as the system isn't working.
Click to expand...
All reasonable, not sure about buying class A drugs with your daily bread though.
 
Bend it like Suddick said:
Seaside,fair post.

However Im VERY well acquainted with Mr Downing, having been a bobby at Bakewell not long after the event. I also know the full transcript of the case, and its definitely not a good example to quote. Naturally because of certain legal restrictions I can't elaborate.
Click to expand...

I'm OK Bendit, I can say what I like.

I hear what you say, a quick google re Mr Downing makes very interesting reading.

Still not sure we can electrocute the fecker mind !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
That's fair enough Bendit.

I certainly don't know too much about the Downing case.

All I know is that he was convicted after confessing and subsequently acquitted, I also thought he was half backward.

Sorry if I wasn't right, I appreciate that you will know far more than me but can't say anything.
Click to expand...
All I can say which is in the public domain is that at the Court of Appeal, it wasn't considered if he was innocent, only if it was a safe conviction. Certain procedures and considerations were not met, so he won the appeal.
 
seasideone said:
Are you happy for the state to execute one innocent person??
Click to expand...
If it stopped children being shot dead in the future then yes . Life is full of unfairness from road accidents to diseases and if you ask some prisoners who are serving life if they would have preferred the death penalty some may say yes looking at the number of suicides there is in prison.
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
66

If I'm going to keep lobbying them up, your going to smash them away.

She's fecking stupid.

Far brighter than both Rayner and Abbott but still fecking stupid.

AVFTT caveat - I'm sure there are also some stupid male politicians.
Click to expand...
2020, it's easy in politics to feel insulted on behalf of those who would be cursed by those who oppose them. I obviously support different politicians to you but we're both tangerine so at least we can insult each other from the same page.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
2020, it's easy in politics to feel insulted on behalf of those who would be cursed by those who oppose them. I obviously support different politicians to you but we're both tangerine so at least we can insult each other from the same page.
Click to expand...

66

I know you come in peace and no problem but I don't support any politicians.

I like some more than I like others and I just happen to think that Patel, Rayner and Abbott are all as think as mince.
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
66

I know you come in peace and no problem but I don't support any politicians.

I like some more than I like others and I just happen to think that Patel, Rayner and Abbott are all as think as mince.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I happen to think all three are intelligent. Abbott is not quick enough to bat away opposition; Patel as I've said, is nasty. Rayner is the coming woman. What she has done to raise herself up is immense. It's about time the House of Commons front benches were about more than Oxford PPE degrees, and included some working class women.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Thanks. I happen to think all three are intelligent. Abbott is not quick enough to bat away opposition; Patel as I've said, is nasty. Rayner is the coming woman. What she has done to raise herself up is immense. It's about time the House of Commons front benches were about more than Oxford PPE degrees, and included some working class women.
Click to expand...

Just on Rayner, what she has done to raise herself may be immense but there is a difference between that and intelligence.

There is no reason why working class women shouldn't be on the front benches as you suggest but I don't think they should be there just because they happen to be female and working class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top