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

State sanctioned killings are never a good idea.

I think traditionally executioners were usually men.

Big consolation when your DS or DD is hanged for a crime they didn't commit, to know that the risks of this happening were 'min.' All human systems are vulnerable to error. If we had capital punishemnt, there would be errors.

Anyway, it dehumanises society and appeals to the very worst in people. There are some people I wouldn't mourn for a second, but condoning state murder is a complete 'no.'

I live in Ireland and am strongly in favour of the death penalty.

small matter of an executioner too

Nah, there are plenty of raging facebook mums on here who never hesitate to pipe up that they'd gladly wield the axe themselves.

The OP knows all about this as I told them
in the thread she already has. This and the need for medics, engineers, supply chain for imports… small matter of an executioner too. Many talk the talk but they would not walk the walk. All this and reluctance from
juries to convict and judges to take part in a judicial system where this is an outcome.

No. One person wrongly executed is one person too many. The inventor of DNA fingerprinting has only ever advocated for it to be used as supporting evidence and nobody should build a case around it. Too many ways for DNA to be found at a scene. Not to mention, we’re supposed to better than the people who commit the crimes.

I can understand the practical reasoning in regards to rape, but as I said, it's a bitter pill to swallow. You're essentially compromising with rapists, in order to reduce the rate at which they murder as well.

Personally, I agree with you on point (i), but disagree on all other points. Miscarriages of justice would probably kill fewer people than dogs do every year, it only leads to higher costs if you allow appeals to drag on for years, and killing people is something that both soldiers, and those who perform assisted suicide, do all the time. It'd probably have higher job satisfaction and be less traumatising than working in a job where you had to kill (innocent, healthy) animals constantly.

Revenge? Possibly sometimes, but it's also just about getting rid of people who have proven themselves to be an incredibly harmful, net negative to society, rather than keeping them alive for no real reason whatsoever. I don't see any moral reason to keep a sadistic paedophile alive for 30+ years in prison, for instance. It's arguably more moral, imo, to just cleanly kill a person who is not suitable to be in society, and go on with life, rather than keeping them in a box until they die.

In the past we would've probably just exiled people, evicting them from the tribe, which was most likely a near certain death sentence - but unfortunately that's not an option anymore.

Of course it should. It's 2026, we have the benefit of DNA, along with other means, to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt whether a person was involved in a violent crime. It's the duty of a civilised society to remove those who choose to commit evil against innocent people for the greater good.

If the UK ever had a referendum on the death penalty, I would vote for without any hesitation.

This is true but if you did only implement the death penalty where you were absolutely certain of guilt, you would have a situation where, the sentence depended on the strength of the evidence. So for a serial killer who targeted strangers and covered up his tracks well, there might often be some doubt as to guilt which would prevent the death penalty applying. Whereas you could apply it for someone like the Southport killer. I don’t think that particularly serves justice.

It’s not all about tech, plenty of the American miscarriages of justice are just plain old police corruption. And I don’t think you could look at the Met for instance and say that its recent record is reliable enough to be murdering people on its evidence.

@OtterlyAstounding - I don't think opposing the death penalty for rape constitutes acceptance that men will continue to rape women. Rape should still be penalised. In any case, there is a practical reality: if you try to implement the death sentence for a non-homicide crime, then you give the criminal an incentive to murder their victim - the penalty is the same and you remove the witness, thereby reducing the chances of getting caught. That said, I don't think homicide should carry the death penalty either. I am opposed to the death penalty in all cases anyway, for the reasons I gave upthread including that, for me, (i) giving the state the power to kill as a form of punishment is a terrifying thing and inevitably there are cases where it is gets misused (even if sanctioned); (ii) miscarriages of justice cannot be undone; (iii) it leads to higher legal costs and uses up more public resources because of all the stages which need to be gone through to get to the implementation of the death penalty - so the cost to the public purse is higher; and (iv) it turns other people into murderers (i.e. those who deliver the death penalty). The death penalty is really about revenge, not punishment - I don't think we are supposed to use death as a punishment.

It's incredibly bleak to be essentially negotiating with rapists. The acceptance that obviously men will continue to rape women, and we'd better let them live because otherwise they'll murder their victims as well... It's a bitter pill to swallow. It feels like losing.

And while I can understand in some situations, the death penalty might discourage reporting, it might encourage others. It certainly wouldn't have stopped me. Anyway, it would be very simple to have the victim's wishes carry weight as to whether it's death or a life sentence, if that was a serious barrier to reporting.

Someone I knew well was murdered. I still don't want the Death Penalty for rhe murderer. He may never get out of prison due to circumstances of his crime. Happy for him to suffer in there. The family of the victim feel the same.
Certainly doesn't make the state any better than the guy in jail if death penalty brought back.

I never understand why people talk about these punishments as a deterrant. Aside from the fact that statistically we know the death penalty absolutely does not work as a deterrant, it also suggests that people only don't commit awful crimes for fear of the punishment. I don't know about others, but the reason I don't go around killing people is because it is against my morals and values, not because I'm worried about going to prison etc. Even if there was no punishment for doing so, I still wouldn't do it. And therefore also won't support state santioned killing.

I would hope that most people feel similarly - that with or without the 'deterrant', you would have no desire to take another human's life. And the people that don't feel like that will not be deterred by any punishment they're threatened with (because they still continue to commit these crimes, even in countries where the death penalty is used).

Are you not aware of what a prison is??

Thanks, @Backedoffhackedoff - that's interesting.

A uk comparator is armed robbery. The sentences for taking a gun to a robbery are very very high- as high as murder- whether or not you use it. The sentences for taking a replica gun are very very high also.

for this reason armed robbery is rare in the uk. It’s not worth getting a gun and risking 10
extra years inside vs taking a knife or baseball bat, when effectively all you wanted to do was rob anyway.

There is no evidence that it has any additional deterrent effect beyond the general threat of imprisonment: https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/act500062008en.pdf When people are committing a crime, they're not usually imagining they will get caught. And the US has a much higher murder rate than other western countries, despite having the death penalty.

And it's a huge mistake to give the death penalty to non-homicide crimes; it's just an invitation to the criminal to kill their victim. When South Africa implemented the death penalty for rape - rapists took to murdering their victims. It was decades ago but my DH has a South African friend who was kidnapped, raped and held prisoner and only managed to escape being murdered because one of the gang took pity on her and released her. It also discourages the reporting of the rape if the sentence might be death: https://worldcoalition.org/why-is-the-death-penalty-not-the-answer-to-rape/

Well do all death penalty countries have lower crime than non-death penalty countries? There seems to be no correlation.

On principle, I wouldn't be against some rapes and child sexual exploitation crimes getting the death penalty, and quite frequently those convictions can earn a slap on the wrist.

No. It doesn't matter if the evidence is perfect. This is not just about miscarriages of justice - though obviously they're a big reason against. Taking life is never an acceptable punishment. It's a terrifying thing to give a state the power to kill as a form of punishment - you only have to look at countries which use the death penalty to see that. We got rid of it here because of miscarriages of justice and the entirely inappropriate use of the death penalty (Derek Bentley, Ruth Ellis). Being wrongfully incarcerated is extremely traumatic but the death penalty cannot be undone. It has no deterrent effect - you just need to look at the States to see that. It also encourages societal thinking that means that killing is more likely to occur - again, look at the US. And, whether they see it that way or not, applying the death penalty turns other people (the executioners) into murderers. It's also an extremely expensive system and more expensive than locking up prisoners - again look at the US: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/what-to-know-costs-and-the-death-penalty The death penalty is a terrible thing and detrimental to society.

Yes, actual life sentences are a good compromise. Although purely on principle, I'm not against the death penalty. It's just that giving governments that much power seems unwise.

But that doesn’t happen on cases that would attract the death penalty.

john Childs/ Jeremy bamber/ Arthur Hutchinson types aren’t returning home after a slap on the wrist. You’re conflating the crimes you’re saying should attract the death penalty with all crimes

I'm sure that knowing that your abuser will likely just get a slap on the wrist if they're even convicted, and potentially not even get a prison sentence, before being sent back into the community where they can get revenge on you for reporting, is a pretty big deterrent too, to be fair.