[Archived] Hang Em High

[Mike E]

People still killed each other when there was a death penalty. And people still kill each other in parts of the USA etc. where they have it now. So where is this deterrent factor?

As for innocent people being executed as unimportant, well it is easy to say such things when you are not accused of something you did not do.

If it was brought in and ONLY allowed as a sentence when there is simply no defence to a murder (ie: where evidence isn't just circumstantial), including DNA, weapon on person, cctv etc, then I see little argument.

As Drog said, more people have been killed by previous offenders than innocents have been executed.

Although I do agree that 'deterrent' isn't a valid argument either. It'd make normal people think twice, but not a killer.

[jim mk2]

You are conveniently forgetting a number of issues.

1. The deterrent effect. Many would think twice if the rope was in store. Also people would be less likely to carry and commit crimes involving firearms if the death penalty were in existence.

2. There is far less potential for mistakes by the police now that there is all manner of electronic surveillance from street camera's to cash points to simple mobile phones. Plus we now have virtually infallible DNA evidence.

3. You mention the tired old woolly liberal argument of executing 'innocent' people. Well what about the rights of the INNOCENT people who have been murdered by convicted murderers who served their 6/9/12 years or whatever and had been subsequently released? I'd wager there are many many times more of those than there are innocent people executed in the past 100 years.

Not only that but you referred to 'life' imprisonment. What a hoot! There really is no such thing except in cases which would cause public outrage. Life only means life in the most severe of cases e.g Ian Brady but that doesn't stop a proper 'life' sentence being reviewed by some limp wristed individuals in Brussels and being overturned does it?

Now tell me how you think there is any doubt that Brady and West are guilty? How about Huntley, Cregan etc? How about Adebolajo and Adebowale the killers of Lee Rigby? A crime which was not only filmed but played out in front of numerous witnesses in broad daylight. There is no justification on this earth for them ever seeing another day dawn.

Capital punishment won't be reinstated so you're wasting your time. The world is moving forward, this is not the Middle Ages or even the 1950s.

I don't agree with what you are saying but I'm not calling for you to "wind your neck in". Or is it because you know it is a lost argument ?

[Stuart]

This country is civilised, not upside down. If capital punishment turns you on here's the list of countries that still do state executions, some right charmers among them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_country

Off you go.

Read my post again. Where in that post did it say ANYTHING about capital punishment? I said turn off the heat and light a bit and save some cash. Maybe even use the savings to subsides those people who can't afford to turn their heating on.

But don't let me keep you from your soapbox.

[Amo]

You are conveniently forgetting a number of issues.

1. The deterrent effect. Many would think twice if the rope was in store. Also people would be less likely to carry and commit crimes involving firearms if the death penalty were in existence.

Like it is in Amurrica, ya mean?

[ultrablue]

How about Adebolajo and Adebowale the killers of Lee Rigby? A crime which was not only filmed but played out in front of numerous witnesses in broad daylight. There is no justification on this earth for them ever seeing another day dawn.

Funny, that is exactly what they were thinking when they attacked Lee Rigby. That is not a frame of mind I would want society associated with.

[DE.]

As Drog said, more people have been killed by previous offenders than innocents have been executed.

You are aware this argument basically agrees it's okay to kill innocent people if the ends justify the means? Bit of a slippery slope there. More fool you if you believe the current Government are in any way responsible enough to handle something like the death penalty.

As I said previously, I'd be out of this country ASAP if death sentences were ever reinstated - not because I'd fear the sentence, but because I wouldn't trust those handling them in the first place. And this is without even considering the ethics behind it.

[Amo]

What do people think of Peter Hitchens' argument on capital punishment? (From 2:00ish onwards)

[Paul]

Peter Hitchens mixes up two differing arguments because he doesn't have an answer to the question "how many innocents are to be executed to ensure the guilty are punished?" I must say I love the guy next to him quoting Noah from Genesis as a justification for the death penalty - so it's only Islam that has fundamentalists who quote a holy text to justify execution?

I only listened to a little of this but suggest the Donovan couple gave a very powerful argument against the death penalty. They are victims and feel the lack of the death penalty helped them.

Who on here supports the death penalty and will state he/she is prepared to accept the execution of innocent people and would not complain if a close family member / friend was executed mistakenly. This is what you have to to accept - your brother / sister could be executed and later found innocent. OK with that?

[thenodrog]

People still killed each other when there was a death penalty. And people still kill each other in parts of the USA etc. where they have it now. So where is this deterrent factor?

As for innocent people being executed as unimportant, well it is easy to say such things when you are not accused of something you did not do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley_case

Not missed him have we? When the trapdoor fell I doubt the world even wobbled on it's axis a millimetre. BUT I'd wager it scared a lot of criminals from committing future crimes either with a gun or with a partner who carried a gun.

[thenodrog]

Who on here supports the death penalty and will state he/she is prepared to accept the execution of innocent people and would not complain if a close family member / friend was executed mistakenly. This is what you have to to accept - your brother / sister could be executed and later found innocent. OK with that?

Or as I said earlier would you be OK with the same friend /relative etc being murdered by somebody who had served a life term for murder and been released. The stats will be stacked well in favour of my point. Are you OK with that?

[jim mk2]

Or as I said earlier would you be OK with the same friend /relative etc being murdered by somebody who had served a life term for murder and been released. The stats will be stacked well in favour of my point. Are you OK with that?

Gordon, bringing back the rope ain't going to happen. So you just have to live with that.

You are aware this argument basically agrees it's okay to kill innocent people if the ends justify the means? Bit of a slippery slope there. More fool you if you believe the current Government are in any way responsible enough to handle something like the death penalty.

As I said previously, I'd be out of this country ASAP if death sentences were ever reinstated - not because I'd fear the sentence, but because I wouldn't trust those handling them in the first place. And this is without even considering the ethics behind it.

Me too. Just about the only reason I would leave these blessed isles.

[Proudtobeblue&white]

You are conveniently forgetting a number of issues.

1. The deterrent effect. Many would think twice if the rope was in store. Also people would be less likely to carry and commit crimes involving firearms if the death penalty were in existence.

2. There is far less potential for mistakes by the police now that there is all manner of electronic surveillance from street camera's to cash points to simple mobile phones. Plus we now have virtually infallible DNA evidence.

3. You mention the tired old woolly liberal argument of executing 'innocent' people. Well what about the rights of the INNOCENT people who have been murdered by convicted murderers who served their 6/9/12 years or whatever and had been subsequently released? I'd wager there are many many times more of those than there are innocent people executed in the past 100 years.

Not only that but you referred to 'life' imprisonment. What a hoot! There really is no such thing except in cases which would cause public outrage. Life only means life in the most severe of cases e.g Ian Brady but that doesn't stop a proper 'life' sentence being reviewed by some limp wristed individuals in Brussels and being overturned does it?

Now tell me how you think there is any doubt that Brady and West are guilty? How about Huntley, Cregan etc? How about Adebolajo and Adebowale the killers of Lee Rigby? A crime which was not only filmed but played out in front of numerous witnesses in broad daylight. There is no justification on this earth for them ever seeing another day dawn.

The deterrence argument is flawed, doesn't work, and has never stopped killers. Drugged up robbers/drunken idiots don't give a flying fig to the argument just before they shoot/stab/hit their victims....you can never eradicate evil deeds.

Far less potential for mistakes? Sorry, but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the police are any better/more accountable than their 70's counterparts. The police are now more under funded, less well staffed than they have ever been. They cut corners!

As for a selected death penalty, where do you draw the line......oh we can prove beyond reasonable doubt x killed y......do you think anyone would ever plead guilty with the DP hanging (no pun intended) over them. Do you think the Guildford or Birmingham IRA bombers weren't convicted beyond reasonable doubt? 10 people who were quite innocent and stitched up by bullying in the police station/unreliable confessions! You really are in the dark ages. I have every sympathy for victims, I really do, but there are a significant number of the most very dangerous who will NEVER see the light of day. So I take it you also don't believe in any form of rehabilitation either?

You actually need certainty in the law. No-one deserves to have a loved one taken away unlawfully, but I'm afraid your arguments were left behind years ago.......I'd rather be a woolly liberal than read the Daily Mail.

[Stuart]

Gordon, bringing back the rope ain't going to happen. So you just have to live with that.

What a 'nothing' response.

[jim mk2]

What a 'nothing' response.

Whoosh, over the head it goes. Better luck next time.

[DE.]

It's incredible that anybody would want the current idiots in charge to actually have the power to legally murder citizens. The majority wouldn't trust them to handle the economy but would be happy to let them play god with people's lives.

Perhaps not a surprise considering the generally held view that it's alright to kill sentient beings for our own pleasure, mind, but still ridiculous to me.

[Mike E]

It's incredible that anybody would want the current idiots in charge to actually have the power to legally murder citizens. The majority wouldn't trust them to handle the economy but would be happy to let them play god with people's lives.

Perhaps not a surprise considering the generally held view that it's alright to kill sentient beings for our own pleasure, mind, but still ridiculous to me.

But it would be in the hands of juries wouldn't it? As I said I'd be all for it in very specific cases. Not even so much murderers but proper freak shows like paedos.

I even had it suggested to me last week that paedophilia could be a sexuality. 'Why not if it's ok for gays?' I nearly lamped the bugger!

[DE.]

But it would be in the hands of juries wouldn't it? As I said I'd be all for it in very specific cases. Not even so much murderers but proper freak shows like paedos.

I even had it suggested to me last week that paedophilia could be a sexuality. 'Why not if it's ok for gays?' I nearly lamped the bugger!

I'm fairly sure the death penalty would not solely be in the hands of the jurors.

But even if it was, it wouldn't be hard for a Goverment and/or police to manipulate evidence, would it?

[jim mk2]

According to Amnesty International, the top five executing countries in the world in 2012, as determined by the human rights organisation, were China, Iran (at least 314), Iraq (at least 129), Saudi Arabia (at least 79) and the USA (43). While the US executed the same number of people as in 2011, these were carried out by fewer states, down from 13 to nine. In addition, Connecticut became the 17th state to abolish the death penalty. In Europe, Latvia became the 97th country in the world to abolish the death penalty for all crimes. The trend worldwide over the past 20 years is for the death penalty to be abolished. Over the next 20 years or so apart from a few rogue nations it is likely to have been abolished altogther. The notion that it would be reinstated here is quite frankly ridiculous. Close the thread.

[broadsword]

It's incredible that anybody would want the current idiots in charge to actually have the power to legally murder citizens. .

I now have a surreal image of a simpering pale-lipped George Osbourne wielding and axe.

[thenodrog]

The deterrence argument is flawed, doesn't work, and has never stopped killers. Drugged up robbers/drunken idiots don't give a flying fig to the argument just before they shoot/stab/hit their victims....you can never eradicate evil deeds.

Far less potential for mistakes? Sorry, but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think the police are any better/more accountable than their 70's counterparts. The police are now more under funded, less well staffed than they have ever been. They cut corners!

As for a selected death penalty, where do you draw the line......oh we can prove beyond reasonable doubt x killed y......do you think anyone would ever plead guilty with the DP hanging (no pun intended) over them. Do you think the Guildford or Birmingham IRA bombers weren't convicted beyond reasonable doubt? 10 people who were quite innocent and stitched up by bullying in the police station/unreliable confessions! You really are in the dark ages. I have every sympathy for victims, I really do, but there are a significant number of the most very dangerous who will NEVER see the light of day. So I take it you also don't believe in any form of rehabilitation either?

You actually need certainty in the law. No-one deserves to have a loved one taken away unlawfully, but I'm afraid your arguments were left behind years ago.......I'd rather be a woolly liberal than read the Daily Mail.

err I don't read The Daily Mail.

However you are obviously against the death penalty (and at this point I'll refrain from further comment about vested interests and gravy trains) so what are your feelings regarding exporting long term lags and lifers? It costs a fortune to keep prisoners in this country so how about exporting them to a purpose built facility or even prison ships anchored off some 3rd world African country for example which would cost a fraction of the price? Maybe we could even offer convicted murderers the option of execution or the rest of their lives incarcerated in the above or similar.

[Amo]

I even had it suggested to me last week that paedophilia could be a sexuality. 'Why not if it's ok for gays?' I nearly lamped the bugger!

In a manner of speaking, it could well be. I'd say it's a sexual orientation AND a mental disorder. Sexual attraction is a biological process that we have little control over. I don't think someone wakes up one day and decides they're turned on by little kids. They don't have any control over that, no more than the awful things I want to do to Lorna Morgan, but some can resist those urges. Doesn't make it any less sickening, of course. We also need to define what one means by 'paedophile'. A paedo is someone attracted to prepubescent children, whereas an ephebophile is attracted to someone who is physically but not emotionally/mentally mature. The two seem to get lumped together, but not in Watkins' case, however.

[Proudtobeblue&white]

err I don't read The Daily Mail.

However you are obviously against the death penalty (and at this point I'll refrain from further comment about vested interests and gravy trains) so what are your feelings regarding exporting long term lags and lifers? It costs a fortune to keep prisoners in this country so how about exporting them to a purpose built facility or even prison ships anchored off some 3rd world African country for example which would cost a fraction of the price? Maybe we could even offer convicted murderers the option of execution or the rest of their lives incarcerated in the above or similar.

Gordon, I didn't say you did read the Mail. It's just your views are probably akin with those of Paul Dacre, and undoubtedly are populist.

Vested interest.......don't take your point. Putting to death a client so I can never represent him again....ok, but representing a client who gets life, with a tariff of 20 years, so that when he kills again, presupposing the parole board allow his release in 20 years, he remembers me as a solicitor that represented him 20 odd years earlier, when he was convicted......no thanks I'll try another lawyer who might get me off this time.

Oh yeah the gravy train, fat cat lawyer kean. Yeh, trot out the facts.......

Legal aid rates reduced systematically over the last 20 years, average annual income of a criminal lawyer approx 25,000, after 6 years getting there, average age of a duty solicitor, over 50, as no new lawyer unless mad, wants to do criminal law. This Government about to decimate the number of firms that do criminal law, so there will be advice deserts. Just the sort of thing you need when one of your nearest & dearest gets picked up, charged with something they didn't do (wow, yes it really does happen in the real world) and you can't find a lawyer doing legal aid.

Yes, I'm passionate about what I do......not ashamed of that.

As for Tasmania, it's quite civilized now, Australia abolished the DP in 1967.

[Paul]

Or as I said earlier would you be OK with the same friend /relative etc being murdered by somebody who had served a life term for murder and been released. The stats will be stacked well in favour of my point. Are you OK with that?

No obviously I'm not OK with the idea of anyone I know being murdered. However I'm not arguing for the death penalty and so it's a risk I'm able to live with.

What I'm asking for is a proponent of the death penalty to "yes I am happy for potentially innocent people to be executed." I've yet to meet anyone who is prepared to say this despite it being an inescapable consequence.

Given your remark about Bentley I take it you don't have a problem with this provided the innocent person looks unlikely, in your view, to contribute meaningfully to society?

[Paul]

But it would be in the hands of juries wouldn't it? As I said I'd be all for it in very specific cases. Not even so much murderers but proper freak shows like paedos.

The question of juries is a very important one. I've been a juror and I can promise you it's very, very difficult to find someone guilty. The consequences for the individual's future weigh heavily in the mind. Ask ordinary people to give a guilty verdict which could lead to the death penalty and it will push the need for beyond reasonable doubt even further. The result would probably be less likelihood of conviction if juries knew guilty could lead to execution.

As for pedophiles what is your view on this case? The 11 year old girl was stabbed to death and her attacker ejaculated on her underwear. I'm not sure if you would classify this as pedophilia but it is certainly sexual assault of a minor.

Stefan Kiszko was shown innocent after serving 16 years. Executing him would have removed that possibility. So where is 100%, beyond reasonable doubt certainty that we can execute this particular person?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

[Stuart]

Whoosh, over the head it goes. Better luck next time.

What a 'nothing' response.