To reconsider my feelings re. Death penalty.

[FoxgloveFairy]

Just read a story about a young guy in the US who broke into a house and, not finding anything to steal, decided to rape the female occupant. A 101 year old woman. Not a string-em-up advocate, but just looking at the arrogant grin on this young man's face in court, I feel right now I could be persuaded.

I can never agree to the death penalty I just do not believe it achieves anything and also their is always the risk of the wrong person being found guilty

of course the death penalty does not deter people

I do not steal from others because I do not want to not because I fear the law

so why would the death penalty stop someone killing another person I am not sure someone is so intent on hurting others stops and thinks oh hang on better not do this I might face the electric chair

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

Ok, so that was Gandalf, but it's still a brilliant quote and I agree with it wholeheartedly. I just think it's fundamentally wrong to kill someone on purpose no matter how sure you are they did it.

Nope wouldn't bring the death penalty back but I wouldn't mind harsh and humiliating corporal punishments

To agree with the death penalty you have to accept that sentence for yourself and your loved ones.

No use saying "He is a good boy and the wrong person to make an example of" or "I didn't mean it" if you or your family member commits murder.

Every murderer/rapist was once someone's baby.

“Stand up,” he says firmly. The two officers who have spent the last hour with him take up position on either side of the condemned man. Allen looks Pascoe in the eye. “Do exactly as I say, son, and it will all be very quick and easy.” While Allen speaks his assistant goes behind Pascoe and, with a leather belt, secures his arms behind his back. The prison’s clock strikes the first of eight chimes.

“Right, straight through,” says Allen. The officers take an arm each and march him the 12ft from the condemned cell to the execution chamber. They stand on beams either side of the trap doors and hold on to braided ropes. The moment that Pascoe stops on the trapdoors, Allen’s assistant squats behind him and fastens a leather strap around his ankles. Allen puts a white hood and rope together over the condemned man’s head. He turns the rope so the knot is at the side of Pascoe’s neck, then takes up the slack. Wordlessly the hangman steps back, places a hand on the lever which operates the trap, and gives a signal to the officers, who release Pascoe’s arms.

For barely a second he stands on the trapdoors, bound, blindfolded, isolated. Inside the silent darkness of the hood, Pascoe knows it is about to happen. As the prison clock strikes its fifth chime, Allen pulls the lever. Without a sound Pascoe plummets 5ft and dies instantly as his neck is broken and the nerves from his spinal column to his brain are severed by the weight of his body. He is already dead as the prison clock strikes the three remaining chimes. From leaving the cell to dropping through the doors, 14 seconds have passed.

www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/03/britains-last-hangman-harry-allen

I think I'm on the fence
but really this debate has been done to death, is there anything new to bring to it?

but really this debate has been done to death, is there anything new to bring to it?

What a depressing comment. That goodness for the internet and the ability to keep this debate free flow g

Detractors say that about the Holocaust but thankfully freedom of speech allows us to stick 2 fingers up.

I've learned a lot from this thought provoking thread thanks. The thought that a person, a fellow human being would be doing it as their day job, really hits home.

?
I'm not saying that there is nothing to be learned on the thread if you are not familiar with the argument but the points made are the same that would be put forward in a standard 'entry level debate on the death penalty.

I'm going to cite Godwins Law, you mentioned the holocaust already
big fail

*I'm not saying that there is nothing to be learned on the thread if you are not familiar with the argument but the points made are the same that would be put forward in a standard 'entry level debate on the death penalty.

I'm going to cite Godwins Law, you mentioned the holocaust already
big fail*

Wow. You're rude. And condescending.

but the points made are the same that would be put forward in a standard entry level debate on the death penalty.
Makes them no less valid.

Does anyone else feel that prisoners could be allowed to request humane euthanasia, should they choose it?

In general I am strongly opposed to the death penalty, for all the reasons people have listed above. However, there may be a few occasions when convicted criminals present an ongoing threat to those who care for them, and perhaps have demonstrated a level of deceptiveness that makes it likely that they cannot be safely contained, and in those cases I feel perhaps there might be an argument that it is unfair to inflict that risk on others.

If people are comparing Arab countries' rape rates with democracies' their figures aren't public. So, what are we comparing?

I am against the death penalty for the same reasons as others above have given.

OP, have you read "A Pin to see the Peepshow" by F.Tennyson Jesse? It might give you more food for thought on the subject. It`s fiction, but based on a real life case. I believe the author was related to the poet Tennyson. It left me stunned.

Granted that it is only a minority of soldiers that were tasked with facilitating the entertainment of the Afgan governing classes and their traditions, and I guess mentioning such acts is TOO dangerous for MN, but it is a proven fact that it has happened on many occasions.

But the OP is about a single case of a rapist of an extremely elderly woman, and no-one is arguing that really it is not fair to talk about him or judge his actions because it really is rare and not the common act of burglars in general.

We are talking about extremes of behaviour here, and the general question of whether or not the Government should have a death penalty.

Some posters have pretended they live in countries where 'state sponsored murder' does not exist, clearly a lie, self-dilution, or ignorance, as no country in history, and no country today has a policy that they will not kill for the betterment of their own interests or that of their people.

My contention remains, if you live in a country where the state elect to kill those that threaten their interest, or those of their people, is it not better to deal with real and present danger to the elderly, the infirm, the young and the vulnerable, that arbitrarily deciding it better to kill those in foreign countries?

Incidentally, my father did 27 years in the forces, and both my grandfathers were detained as POWs in WWII, one in Germany, one in Aden. I spent my whole life moving around bases across Europe and the UK. I am not some Forces hating hippy.

If not death, then what? Sentencing in this country cannot be relied upon to provide the level of punishment that some crimes demand. This..
crime will probably attract several years in jail with monitoring upon release. Not enough.

In the UK we wouldn't be allowed to remove his dignity or his human rights. That's against the law. And God forbid we ask him to work, or deprive him of television or entertainments, or risk his health by exposing him to other inmates who may harm him. What he needs is a cuddle and someone to explain to him why it's wrong to rape old ladies. Not some archaic barbarous form of punishment, and could you imagine the outcry from the fluffy bunny brigade if we ever suggested that a victim should be allowed entitled to justice in this country!?

Given the freedom to choose, standing face to face with the rapist in a court room, and having it explained to you exactly what he did, I wonder how many people would actually NOT consider death, if it were their mother who had been raped? I guess it is wrong to expect justice for the victim, because the victim is emotionally involved, and therefor unable to think straight when considering suitable punishment of a crime.

But the OP is about a single case of a rapist of an extremely elderly woman, and no-one is arguing that really it is not fair to talk about him or judge his actions because it really is rare and not the common act of burglars in general.

I am sure no one is arguing that. we can judge him and call for maximum time. others are saying the death penalty is wrong.

But the OP is about a single case of a rapist of an extremely elderly woman, and no-one is arguing that really it is not fair to talk about him or judge his actions because it really is rare and not the common act of burglars in general.

there is a distinction between murdering someone who can't defend himself and war. that doesn't and shouldn't excuse war for those against the death penalty. What's worse, a warmongering state that has the death penalty or one without the death penalty?

My contention remains, if you live in a country where the state elect to kill those that threaten their interest, or those of their people, is it not better to deal with real and present danger to the elderly, the infirm, the young and the vulnerable, that arbitrarily deciding it better to kill those in foreign countries?

of course. but there is no evidence that the death penalty addresses that. simply having the death penalty won't cure us of murder or rape.

If not death, then what? Sentencing in this country cannot be relied upon to provide the level of punishment that some crimes demand.

life in prison?

You continue to demonstrate major misconceptions about what happens in prison, elephantspoo. We obviously remove several of the human rights of people in prison, e.g. their right to liberty, right to family life, right to privacy. They are indeed made to work, they don't have any unfettered right to watch TV and certainly get very little else by way of entertainment. And we certainly don't cuddle prisoners.

But yes, we do take steps to stop violent prisoners from harming the others. What exactly is your problem with that? If someone you loved went to prison, would you actually think it OK for the prison thugs to use him as a football any time they felt like it?

YABU. Human rights need to be upheld. Yes what he did was horrendous and he should be locked up, but, everyone has a right to life.

elephantspoo

"Given the freedom to choose, standing face to face with the rapist in a court room, and having it explained to you exactly what he did, I wonder how many people would actually NOT consider death, if it were their mother who had been raped?"

Loads.

I can't support the death penalty even if there was some way of finding out with 100% certainty if someone was guilty.

It's just wrong.

written

Yes, life in prison, I agree. But not 7 years served then out on licence - I'd like to see the whole life tariff applied more often. It's harsh but surely in serious cases it is appropriate.

I have a question for the supporters of the reintroduction of the death penalty:

If the death penalty for murder hadn't been abolished, Stefan Kiszko would have been hung for a child rape and murder he did not commit.

Evidence that would have proved his innocence was deliberately withheld by the police.
Should those same police officers who knowingly contributed to a terrible miscarriage of justice be hung too?