AIBU to ask whether the death penalty should apply for certain crimes in the UK?

That says more about you, than anybody else. It makes you seem lacking in awareness and ready to stereotype people you don’t know.

Knowing the context to an action helps in getting clarity on why that action happened. It's about facts rather than emotions.

On an individual level, it might or might not be taken into consideration in a trial and sentencing that a person who raped/abused another was themself groomed. On a wider social policy level, it's extremely relevant as a basis for devising policies and protocols that aim to prevent the same things (the abuse, and the grooming) happening again.

Yes for certain crimes if it was proven that they did it. I know there have been huge miscarriages of justice but in this day and age I think it’s less likely especially with certain crimes.

ie the men that abused that little boy recently…they obviously abused him there’s no question. they deserve the death penalty IMO. They deserve waiting for their death in a horrible prison anticipating their death date

Unless you plan on executing people by experimental unmanned drones, which would absolutely draw the attention of the UN and Amnesty International and have us facing financial penalties, you need to explain how a computer can bring someone out of their cell, strap them to a table, set up the hypodermic needles etc if you want anyone to take your claim of "computers will do it" seriously.

Not specifically saying anyone on this thread is per se, but usually when I hear people speaking in favour of capital punishment, my immediate thought is that they're probably a bit dim.

Ah yes, computers are well known for making autonomous decisions and actioning them. Mine regularly washes the pots while we're all in bed. I really wish it would stop. We can never find the colander once it's done. Windows 10 was much better at putting things back in the right place.

The former.

See the latest "I'd do it with my bare hands".

Cool, lock the pair of you in a room and let you go at it. My money's on the convicted murderer

“but if taking life is unnatural to humans men then why are humans men so willing to fight each other to prove a point or to begin wars etc human history proves that”

Fixed that for you.

Sally Clark is a good example that could be used to create a decent law. Was there reason to believe that public safety was at risk?

It may rule out the death penalty for some, but keep it open to other specific cases.

Whoever it was upthread who said that murderers and rapists would never be living next to ‘you or me’ so we could ignore that … erm no, I find that rather a silly thing to say. If they get released they have to live next door to somebody. Do you think everyone who gets released is housed in a safe place in the middle of nowhere? They go back home. Maybe with legal restraining orders that matter nothing to anyone with a cause.

So naive. Executioner can take many guises. Someone still has to do it whether that is wielding an axe, setting a guillotine in motion, being part of a firing squad, setting up a fatal injection, pressing a button to release the gas…

Sally Clark? Jailed for infanticide. Would you have executed her?

I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic and agreeing with me or not, however this is my point. thousands full of bravado. I’d be amazed if you got someone to actually do it; be trained to a level of ‘competence’ and carry that load for the rest of their life. Once the self righteous buzz has worn off, it’s a particularly disturbing ‘profession’. To bore the readers of the OP’s other thread, this is a tale as old as time: see the fable ‘ringing the cat’.

But that wouldn't have prevented the crime on the first place. Death just isn't a deterrent.

As well.

But the point is, it's not the death penalty that's the deterrent.

There are several problems with capital punishment but here are two:

1. Death is kind of irreversible- so if there is a miscarriage of justice it's a bit difficult to say sorry we got it wrong and you can go free now,
2. Due to the severity of the case a capital punishment crime case will inevitably involve a jury. Even if they are in favour of capital punishment, knowing that their decision is literally life or death, jurors will massively look for any hints of doubt in the trial. Thereby creating a strong risk that criminals (in this case murderers) that would otherwise been found guilty are instead found not guilty and set free to commit more crimes.

That’s a good idea. As long as the legal safeguards re capacity are watertight.

Yes that’s the point isn’t it. He could’ve been.Having death penalty didn’t even help prevent this situation.

Or perhaps it’s because they have better local community policing.

That’s all you’ve got to say? The point is that his first prison sentence was too lenient and he was able to go on to kill. He never should have been let out. He should have been locked up forever and/or electrocuted.