Bring back the death penalty - yay or nay?

76
Found 16th Sep 2017
A fair few comments in some other threads about capital punishment.
How would you vote if you had the choice, preferably stating a reason why.
Community Updates
Misc
Top comments
YES if there was 99.9 % evidence that said person did it.

ie people who are now using acid attacks within the uk but are only given a 5 year sentence when the person that they have attacked have been left blinded and scarred for the rest of their lives
No. Innocent people have been killed thanks to the death penalty, and once they're dead they're dead and it's not fair on them.
If prison/incarceration was a punishment (forced hard labour (no work = no food) etc) for serious crimes more than not just a break from all your family & friends

and

If we had more prisons and actual sentencing was used as a deterrent rather than a slap on the wrist (eg repeat TWOCer/shoplifter)

Then no - we wouldn't need the death penalty

But law abiding citizens aren't getting protected, law abiding citizens are suffering, law abiding citizens aren't getting their human rights and therefore some law abiding citizens will go as far as wanting the death penalty because everything has failed them(us).
Nope, absolutely not. Nobody has the right to end the life of another.
76 Comments
I'm in favour, so long as the evidence is overwhelming, or there is a confession.
ALso, so long as the process can be over and done with in a year or so; don't want a 20 year death-row like in the US.
YES if there was 99.9 % evidence that said person did it.

ie people who are now using acid attacks within the uk but are only given a 5 year sentence when the person that they have attacked have been left blinded and scarred for the rest of their lives
Nay from me. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Nay
An eye for eye makes the whole world blind

This is a slippery slope who next ?
Edited by: "Wongy110" 16th Sep 2017
No. Innocent people have been killed thanks to the death penalty, and once they're dead they're dead and it's not fair on them.
snort-drugs-daily17 m ago

YES if there was 99.9 % evidence that said person did it.ie people who are …YES if there was 99.9 % evidence that said person did it.ie people who are now using acid attacks within the uk but are only given a 5 year sentence when the person that they have attacked have been left blinded and scarred for the rest of their lives


so the other 0.1%, (thats one in a thousand), where the evidence is incorrect and someone gets executed wrongly is ok then? collateral damage?
Edited by: "sparxuk" 16th Sep 2017
If prison/incarceration was a punishment (forced hard labour (no work = no food) etc) for serious crimes more than not just a break from all your family & friends

and

If we had more prisons and actual sentencing was used as a deterrent rather than a slap on the wrist (eg repeat TWOCer/shoplifter)

Then no - we wouldn't need the death penalty

But law abiding citizens aren't getting protected, law abiding citizens are suffering, law abiding citizens aren't getting their human rights and therefore some law abiding citizens will go as far as wanting the death penalty because everything has failed them(us).
Nope, absolutely not. Nobody has the right to end the life of another.
sparxuk13 m ago

so the other 0.1%, (thats one in a thousand), where the evidence is …so the other 0.1%, (thats one in a thousand), where the evidence is incorrect and someone gets executed wrongly is ok then? collateral damage?

I have to add to this too. Some victims of acid attacks have made miraculous recoveries not trying to make it any less of a crime, just trying to suggest it's not always a death-sentence for the victims
I do believe life should mean life. If you take a life you should rot in prison for the rest of your days, not just five or ten years then you come out and get a new identity and a whole new life.
philphil6111 m ago

If prison/incarceration was a punishment (forced hard labour (no work = no …If prison/incarceration was a punishment (forced hard labour (no work = no food) etc) for serious crimes more than not just a break from all your family & friendsand If we had more prisons and actual sentencing was used as a deterrent rather than a slap on the wrist (eg repeat TWOCer/shoplifter)Then no - we wouldn't need the death penaltyBut law abiding citizens aren't getting protected, law abiding citizens are suffering, law abiding citizens aren't getting their human rights and therefore some law abiding citizens will go as far as wanting the death penalty because everything has failed them(us).


You OK tonight, phil'?
Dolphinzz35 m ago

I have to add to this too. Some victims of acid attacks have made …I have to add to this too. Some victims of acid attacks have made miraculous recoveries not trying to make it any less of a crime, just trying to suggest it's not always a death-sentence for the victims


like who ?
psychobitchfromhell37 m ago

I do believe life should mean life. If you take a life you should rot in …I do believe life should mean life. If you take a life you should rot in prison for the rest of your days, not just five or ten years then you come out and get a new identity and a whole new life.


Hmm well it does take some imagination to take in what it means to a human being
to be locked up for the rest of your days ?

I for one am for people being given a second chance

'take a life' is by no means the same between one case and another
Edited by: "Wongy110" 16th Sep 2017
No, whatever crime has been committed , I do not want to stoop to the same low level, also mistakes can and have been made in the past.However in serious cases life sentences should be just that. I retain the right to change my mind if anyone was to hurt my nearest and dearest though .
What's the point its not a deterrent anyway
Wongy1109 m ago

Hmm well it does take some imagination to take in what it means to a human …Hmm well it does take some imagination to take in what it means to a human being to be locked up for the rest of your days ?I for one am for people being given a second chance 'take a life' is by no means the same beteen one case and another


Ok, I'll be more specific. Murder. If you deliberately kill someone with malice aforethought as the Victorians said, life without chance of parole.
Segata-Sanshiro4 m ago

What's the point its not a deterrent anyway

You wouldn't do it again though..
Yes from me..

I'd suggest a very thorough understanding of the case and if certain criteria met then the death sentence should be on the table..
Examples.

Lee Rigbys killers.
Ian Huntley.
Ian Brady and Myra Hindley.

As for being the executioner.. I'm sure you would have alot of applicants and I'm also sure many people would sleep better knowing that these sub humans were not on this earth.
psychobitchfromhell9 m ago

Ok, I'll be more specific. Murder. If you deliberately kill someone with …Ok, I'll be more specific. Murder. If you deliberately kill someone with malice aforethought as the Victorians said, life without chance of parole.


Like I said an eye for an eye ?
nobody is worthless in my opinion nobody should be in that position without very very good reason
Edited by: "Wongy110" 16th Sep 2017
Sure, why not.
If it could be made into a game show on Saturday night, I'd watch it.
A member of the public wins a cash prize and neutralisers some inmates.
A true ratings winner


Edit: I don't watch ITV, so if it's on there, I'll pass
Edited by: "Derek_Horatio_Shatwell" 16th Sep 2017
NO!!!!
Look at America, does it work in the states that have it? No.
I rest my case
Wongy11027 m ago

Like I said an eye for an eye ?nobody is worthless in my opinion nobody …Like I said an eye for an eye ?nobody is worthless in my opinion nobody should be in that position without very very good reason


Which is why I don't believe in the death penalty.
Dawsy32 m ago

Yes from me..I'd suggest a very thorough understanding of the case and if …Yes from me..I'd suggest a very thorough understanding of the case and if certain criteria met then the death sentence should be on the table.. Examples.Lee Rigbys killers.Ian Huntley.Ian Brady and Myra Hindley.As for being the executioner.. I'm sure you would have alot of applicants and I'm also sure many people would sleep better knowing that these sub humans were not on this earth.


Just some of the people we could have got rid of,
en.m.wikipedia.org/wik…ers
there was one in the news just the other day sentenced to 30 years for rape & murder of a teenage girl, ambushed her at random.
pleaded guilty so may as well use him as an organ donor then switch off his machine.
things will be different when I'm in charge, you'll see
The cost of keeping someone in prison for 25 years can cost around 1 million pounds, I would rather that money went to the NHS or pensioners, if there is no doubt they are guilty then yes, but I still think even though they may have committed serious crimes it should be done humanly and within 28 days of being found guilty.
themachman2 h, 15 m ago

NO!!!! Look at America, does it work in the states that have it? No. I …NO!!!! Look at America, does it work in the states that have it? No. I rest my case



They don't reoffend.
No because mistakes are always made and that is unforgivable.
Yes - if the person is caught in the act of the crime so there can be no doubt.
Corporal punishment at school should be brought back too. I get so annoyed by people saying " Nobody hits my son / daughter " . well , if the brats bad mouth or even worse strike a teacher at school they should be given the cane. This country changed for the worse the day corporal punishment was banned.
POWYSWALES6 h, 6 m ago

The cost of keeping someone in prison for 25 years can cost around 1 …The cost of keeping someone in prison for 25 years can cost around 1 million pounds, I would rather that money went to the NHS or pensioners, if there is no doubt they are guilty then yes, but I still think even though they may have committed serious crimes it should be done humanly and within 28 days of being found guilty.


No point appealing then, as that takes a lot longer than 28 days.
What about the people convicted of murder that are later found to be innocent, how would you bring those back to life?
There should be no doubt anyone is guilty if they are convicted anyway. If there is doubt then they should be found not guilty.
darren90305 h, 18 m ago

Yes - if the person is caught in the act of the crime so there can be no …Yes - if the person is caught in the act of the crime so there can be no doubt.


So someone could rape and murder 20 children, and as long as he wasn't caught in the act he would get life. Yet someone could find out his child had been abused, plan to kill the abuser, but happens to get caught on cctv when doing it, and he gets executed?

You can't have the death penalty for only the 'really guilty' people. Someone is either legally guilty or not guilty. If they don't get the death penalty as you aren't sure they are guilty, then they shouldn't have been found guilty.
Nay - As someone who doesn't believe in any kind of afterlife I don't see death as a punishment to the person who dies, only to their family who are probably innocent.
In certain cases yes, 100%. Lee Rigby's killers, Ian Huntley, Justin Bieber etc.. etc..
.MUFC.3 m ago

In certain cases yes, 100%. Lee Rigby's killers, Ian Huntley, Justin …In certain cases yes, 100%. Lee Rigby's killers, Ian Huntley, Justin Bieber etc.. etc..

Ooh, great news someone's killed Justin Bieber?
I'm not a football fan. And yes, they do get paid way too much. But this is a bit harsh for just missing a goal!
Yes. If a case was 100% proven and there couldn't possibly be any doubt then string em up.
For oneself, death penalty has virtaully to absolutely no impact, this is because each of the perpetrator's serious deed/crime is an independent statistical event.

Just like rolling a die(dice) the chance of a six is always one sixth. Just means a nasty one is executed does not reduce one's probability to any significant extent of not having a serious deed/crime done to oneself in the future.

However I am open to reading any statistical evidence of impact of death penalty.
splender6 m ago

For oneself, death penalty has virtaully to absolutely no impact, this is …For oneself, death penalty has virtaully to absolutely no impact, this is because each of the perpetrator's serious deed/crime is an independent statistical event.Just like rolling a die(dice) the chance of a six is always one sixth. Just means a nasty one is executed does not reduce one's probability to any significant extent of not having a serious deed/crime done to oneself in the future. However I am open to reading any statistical evidence of impact of death penalty.


I'm really not sure what you are saying.
All it takes to be a cold-blooded murderer is the desire and the willingness to do it - chilling to see a lot of cold-blooded desire and willingness in this thread.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions

    Top Discussions

    Top Merchants