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

The other way is what we currently do- keep people in prison for long sentences, subject to parole for release, or for their whole lives in the case of the worst cases. Which means you don’t have to worry about ok it them reoffending.

my freinds brother was in prison for murder. after 13 years of campaiging he was exhonerated and released . he died a few years after as the trauma turned him to alochol. So no no no to death penalty. ever.

Time consuming? No. It's not the time that bothers me.

I'm thinking about the potential for re-offending, and the harm to victims who may see their abusers - especially if they see them thrive and succeed, while they themselves have been too damaged by the abuse to live full and happy lives themselves. Or families of victims who have no life at all, in the case of murder.

And who are you to decide that execution is 'opting out' of dealing with human crime? That doesn't make any sense at all. Execution is one way of dealing with (specific) crimes. Attempting rehabilitation is another way.

There are a huge amount of problems with the concept of re-introducing the death penalty, not least it being morally indefensible. But for the sake of information, here are two of the reasons I’ve seen discussed time and time again on this topic:

— It can actually deter people from reporting crime, especially victims of rape and child sexual abuse. So many of those cases are perpetrated by family or people known to the victim, and knowing that the death penalty is a potential outcome can make victims reluctant to report their crimes.

— PPs have suggested a three-tier justice system, which presents issues in and of itself. Do you see the problems that could arise from having three potential verdicts; not guilty, guilty, and super definitely no-doubt guilty? Those judged as “regular” guilty then have significantly more reason to appeal their verdicts, as you’ve introduced the idea that our currently accepted proof of a crime isn’t actually proof enough for a harsh sentence.

Human kind is what it is. Who are you to decide it’s just too time consuming to see it through?

humans committing crime is an unavoidable part of life. We’re made that way. We don’t get to opt out of it.

Most crimes in SA don’t attract the death penalty though. I don’t think it’s cited in an evidence based way?

Are we so horrendously short of humans that we have to potentially (hopefully) reform criminals that have chosen, of their own free will, to rape and torture innocent people, and send them back into the same community that their victims reside in, where they may well come into contact with them?

I mean, I know state sanctioned execution is dangerous because it's not good to give the state that power, and I'm still not in favour of it because of that, but setting that aside - on a practical, social level, 'potential' reformation of sadistic abusers just doesn't seem sensible or necessary.

Well obviously you can’t ’prove’ it, but it’s commonly cited as one of the main deterrents to crime. Seems highly unlikely that it has no impact.

No

I will never support state sanctioned murder

the only exceptions are political assassinations where there is a very high risk of civil unrest

The Southport attacker very clearly had extremely serious mental problems. That he was able to be free to commit these crimes is also very clearly due to failures in our sadly flawed systems.
So even if we executed such people a/what does it say about us? and b/where would it end? Schizophrenics or other seriously mentally ill people to be executed ‘just in case?’

how have you decided that their death penalty is the reason behind that though? Correlation v causation

That’s not true. Saudi Arabia has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

Because you’re killing someone who was groomed. They’re not psychopathic, they’re not without redemption, they have potential to be reformed.

sympathy is a bit of a nothing human emotion. I couldn’t care less if you or anyone else has sympathy for groomed gang members. It’s totally meaningless and doesn’t impact anything to do with the way the justice system treats them.

No.

1. Because it's barbaric, and I do not want to live in a country where the state has the power to kill its own citizens.

1. Because there is no credible evidence that it works as a deterrent.

1. Because there is credible evidence that it might actually delay the healing process for victims and their families, thus extending their trauma.

1. Because there will always be miscarriages of justice.

It wasn't a gotcha. It was a question.

I'm not sure why you brought up the fact that these gang rapists and abusers were groomed into gangs, unless you were trying to elicit some degree of sympathy, though? Because otherwise, how is it relevant that they were 'groomed' into committing violent acts of sadism against others?

Gangs are formed by grooming.

i can’t say I feel sympathy particularly, but this is a fact and our justice system should work on facts not our sympathies

your question isn’t the gotcha you think

No, not necessarily. People shirk their responsibilities all the time. And feeling responsible isn't the same thing as being responsible. Additionally, regardless of responsibility, breaking the law is best not done.

Do you feel sympathy for boys and men who choose to gang rape girls?

If it’s your responsibility you’d have to, wouldn’t you?

I didn't say I'd want to. Or that I would do it.

I said I'd feel it was my responsibility, as I'd brought them into the world.

“Pakistani rape gang participants”

even though they are also grooming victims?

Yes saying you’d want to kill your son for being a murderer or rapist is really strange (and if you actually did this, everyone would be saying “well that’s why her son is a murderer then”)

Personally I would favour it for murderers and paedophimes but it is not the mark of a civilised society and the risk is you get the wrong person. Although that is less likely given the strength and accuracy of forensic evidence these days.

I feel that the Pakistani rape gang participants, the killers of baby Preston, the Nottinghamshire killer, the father of Sara Sharif really don’t deserve anything but to die and I would happily be the executioner as it would make our society so much better. Until there was a case where the wrong person was killed.

Why is it bizarre? As a parent, would you not feel responsible in a way, for the deaths your child caused? That you brought that harm into the world? That potentially, it was your failure in parenting somewhere that made them turn out that way? If they were a serial rapist, or a serial killer, or a mass murderer, would you not rather blot them out, than have them live some twisted, embittered life in prison, believing that they were justified in their actions?

Personally, I would still love my child, but I would prefer that they died than that they continued to exist as some hate-filled rapist/murderer, locked away for decades and decades. Either way, it would be devastating, though, and difficult to live with.

But then I'm autistic, and I'm often told my takes on things are 'strange'.

Did that poster say it should be done for the families? Or just add that their thoughts were with the families?