Death penalty

[Movingo]

I don't want to be roasted. I do believe in it. For personal reasons it's definitely valid in my opinion.
I believe if you're so heinous in your behaviour to warrant that sentence then yes.
I'm all for it.
I'm aware it's an unpopular opinion. So I'm really only talking about people who confessed or where there was truly evidence they were guilty.
I'm asking as my mum is dead set against it. No matter what.
Whereas, my dad said he'd be the executioner if he believed their guilt for sex crimes etc.
So. Im just curious really.
I hope my thread is not deleted.... I know lots of people like to complain.

It’s barbaric.

No, one person killed via a miscarriage of justice (which happens even where many people are "sure" of guilt, or they've confessed), is one person too many.

I also don't believe in state sanctioned murder. You can't say that violence and murder are wrong and then do it yourself. It's barbaric.

There is something wrong with the system.
It starts with poverty and inequality.
We should be working hard to change the conditions kids grow up in.
And we should be working hard on rehabilitation. Therapeutic communities work but they are a soft target for populist politicians. Punishment grabs more headlines than rehabilitation.

No, one person killed via a miscarriage of justice (which happens even where many people are "sure" of guilt, or they've confessed), is one person too many.

Come now, I'm surely there is an acceptable margin of error. say 1% ?

Absolutely do not agree with the death penalty.
Old enough to remember last executions in UK which were not morally right.
Also if killing is wrong, what is the point of killing to punish. Totally uncivilised.

I think the point is killing is OK as long as the right people are doing it.

That's how Christians have managed for two thousand years. I am sure other hypocritical religions may be available.

If we did bring back the death penalty I think the penalty for executing an innocent person should also be death, including joint enterprise unlawful execution. In practise that means anyone who advocated for the death penalty has to register and take the risk that if an innocent person dies, so do they. I think that's fair.

Perhaps we could start by stopping using the USA, which has a completely corrupted, immoral "justice system" allowed by a large proportion of ignorant, perverted society, as a comparative state.

Let's use a civilised society like Singapore, for example, where the death penalty not only works well, but serves as a deterrent.

You think caning people is civilised? It's barbaric. Singapore proportionally, has one of the highest rates of execution in the world.

O the irony... caning was introduced to Singapore by... guess who... Tadaa! the British Empire. It has steadily declined in use, as you probably know too, but I guess in order to make Singapore appear more barbaric than any other country this is the only argument you could find. I recommend you to spend some time there and educate yourself.

This is where I am unsure. I'm really only talking about cases where there is no question of doubt

There was no question of doubt when Timothy Evans was executed for crime he didn't commit.

Theer was no question of doubt when the men accused of the Birmingham Bombings were imprisoned for years and tears.

I don't give a monkeys who introduced it. It's absolutely disgusting. It's in no way civilised to cane someone. Don't tell someone to 'educate' themselves when you recommend barbarity and medieval practices.

Good strawman fallacy there, congratulations. Now, will you actually address the way the death penalty works in Singapore compared to the US at all, or are you just planning to go on a tangent on anything I say simply because you're completely opposed to the death penalty, so no argument will do for you? Because if yo want I can describe in detail another 10 "barbaric" things that your own country is engaging in right now, which have nothing to do with the death penalty, but hey, let's bring them in too for the sake of being "right" (or feel righteous) without actually addressing the matter in discussion.

I agree with life in prison but not with a death penalty.

I think the death penalty is an easy get away after horrible crimes. There should be another person to execute it, meaning the person who's going to do it will automatically become a criminal too.

Also, I think there should be ongoing psychological and physiological research why some people do horrible crimes. The research can't be done on dead people, meaning criminals should be kept alive for it. I think is really important to do the research and to understand how they think, it could save a lot of lives in the future.

You called Singapore civilised. It's mandatory to cane people there for things like vandalism. It's considered a form of torture.

The government also made homosexually illegal, cracks down on freedom of expression, press freedom and freedom of assembly. The government also punishes human rights defenders and human rights lawyers representing those on death row.

Execution for drugs offences, such as marijuana are mandatory and there's often little notice given of executions. They kill people with learning difficulties and the government often obstructs inmates access to legal counsel and right to a fair trial.

40 prisoners on death row currently don't have legal representation.

It's very civilised.

Presumably we shouldn’t arm some police then and shouldn’t have shot the terrorist on London Bridge.

No. I think it's the easy way out.

I'd rather the perpetrators of horrific crimes be locked up for life, eating the most bland, basic food & water - just enough to sustain them. Cell with nothing in there for entertainment other then perhaps books or pen and paper, and minimal visitors. No comforts / just the bare minimum needed to survive.

Make it as uncomfortable and unpleasant as possible.

They also shot Jean Charles de Menendez.

If you look at all the British prisoners who got sent down for child murder or child rape (that dreaded polish couple who starved and poisoned their beautiful little boy with "the white stuff", or the baby P couple, or that paedophile who uploaded more than 300 videos of himself raping children in Malaysia.... And others...)
Virtually all of them have been killed in prison.
Our system has a sort of off the record death sentence for the most heinous people, unless the person is placed in high security.

Not saying that's good, but it's something.

Yes. A terrible thing. But that’s not the point. The pp took an absolutist position which is wrong.

I’m firmly, unshakeably against the death penalty. But arguments that it’s “state murder” or that the state can never sanction taking a life are misguided and counter-productive.

The death penalty is wrong because (i) guilt can never be guaranteed and (ii) it’s squalid.

Could you explain what you mean by "misguided" and "counterproductive"?

Quite apart from the sheer inhumanity of your proposal, what if they got it wrong, and they do.

Fuckit, the inhumanity is sufficient.

The father’s life won’t improve if he were to be executed.

He wouldn’t be a deterrent to arsehole drivers. The fundamental issue is that they believe the rules don’t apply to them as an individual- they see themselves as different to this guy.

Which is no way deflects from sharing your revulsion at what he has done.

The death penalty absolutely does not work well in Singapore, and it has exactly the same issues as in the USA. Specific case of a white child murderer who basically got off has already been mentioned.

Singapore just doesn’t report on loads of crimes that happen there.

As for defending caning- it’s indefensible.

As far as I'm aware none of those people have died in prison.

Can you provide any evidence that your assertion is true?