Death penalty

[birthdayboo]

I don't quite understand the logic of people who want to murder people who have committed awful crimes.

I do understand saying you wish you could, verbalising the anger felt and not literally meaning you would actually carry out a killing yourself.

I don't understand when people swear they would actually kill

One horrific crime doesn't go away because you commit another horrific crime such as murder on the guilty?

I don't understand the death penalty either - I totally agree that life seems too good for some people, however it's still legalising murdering a human being to have the state kill them - so I just can't get my head around murdering someone because they murdered someone. Perhaps some form of voluntary self administered euthanasia being available by prescription to individuals who will never leave prison in their lifetime would be a solution to how much money it costs to house prisoners however it's not even like people get death penalty and it happens soon, they spend ages and have money spent on holding them prior to execution

Very erudite post, bumblingbovine49.

The main arguments in favour of the death penalty are as follows:
1. Cost effectiveness. Cheaper to kill them than keep them in jail for decades
2. Deterrence. Capital punishment is a better detterant than life in prison.
3. Justice. An eye for an eye. Like for like. Life in prison is not a just punishment for taking a life.

My two penneth FWIW

1. Seriously? I'm an accountant. It's my job to maximise revenue and minimise costs but ..... no. Just NO!

1. I've yet to see any evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent. The murder rate in the UK is lower than that in many countries which apply the death penalty. I'm prepared to do more research and will change my mind on this point if the evidence substantiates a change of thought.

1. Just leaves the world blind

I do not support the death penalty but my heartfelt thoughts do go to anyone who has lost someone dear in this most horrendous way.

I wouldn't euthanise via injection. I'd have them shot. One bullet per person, we have many thousands of sound marksmen around.

Only once convicted. It would be a punishment handed down by a judge.

Great post, BumblingBovine.

In particular, this:

"Human beings are naturally violent, even those who have a veneer of civilisation .This is evidenced by the number of people who believe they could easily kill (with no remorse) anyone who hurt a member of their family, particularly a child. Our court and justice systems are the way that as a society we have chosen to manage that natural inclination."

This thread is ample evidence of what you have said above.

It doesn’t act as an effective deterrent, you only have to look at the US as a fine example. Innocent people die as a result of it over there too. So really, what is the point in state funded murder exactly? Because that is all it is.

Criminal insanity has always been an excuse from a legal point of view. Those classed criminally insane weren't executed in the days when hanging was the penalty for murder, they were institutionalised.

The criminally insane are deemed 'unfit to plead'.

Prison certainly isn't a deterrant. And is expensive.

I think my hero Gandalf says it best...

@birthdayboo
I couldn't agree more with the death penalty thing. For a lot of prisoners it is worse to spend the rest of you life in jail anyway.

I think we also need to remember that anyone is capable of killing in the right circumstances.

But they've still committed a crime. It might be the reason why they murdered ten people, but not an excuse

Of course it (insanity) is an excuse. If you have no idea what you are doing, it excuses you. Self defence is an excuse: if you kill someone who, due to your delusions, you genuinely believe is about to kill you, that is an excuse.

But, in a way, that is a red herring. The point is that insanity prevents people from forming the intention to kill, therefore they are not guilty of murder and have no need of an "excuse". They absolutely should not be killed for being mentally ill.

I disagree that criminally insane folk should be put to death. Insanity is something out of a person's control, there is no will or desire to have a mental illness. If uncontrolled - and let's face it, it is difficult to get good MH help currently - it can create an environment in a person's head that causes all sorts of responses.
That said I do think there should be no scope for unsupervised community access for someone who is criminally insane. It is top easy for management of the condition to lapse, meds to be forgotten or 'no longer needed' which can then lead to repeat actions. The risk by far outweighs everything there imo

@Gersemi Precisely, that's why the 'criminally insane' are by definition unfit to plead. They can't legally be judged to be responsible for their actions.

Still, the evidence shows that if juries know that the death penalty is a possibility they are less willing to convict. So there is a greater possibility that, rather than suffering the death penalty or imprisonment, the person walks free.

Interesting - not something I'd thought about. I live in the US, and if I had to be on a jury trying someone who was potentially going to receive the death penalty I would be unlikely to convict them. I would struggle to send someone to their death, knowing that juries often do not see all the evidence, and knowing what shockingly poor legal representation people in the US often receive, not to mention police corruption, especially when it comes to black defendants.

Fortunately I live in a state that got rid of the death penalty over a century ago so it's not likely to be a problem I face.

Sadly I know of a family whose daughter was killed by someone deemed 'criminally insane'. One the one hand a girl's life was taken away, on the other the perpetrator had walked into a&e pleading for help the day before. MH services are failing everyone. It's a tragic case all round with the responsibility falling to many people. We can't go around putting people down like dogs who are incapable of rational thought.

Every life is important. How can one person's loss of life merit a death sentence and another a paltry jail sentence followed by MAPPA overseeing or suchlike? Who can decide who plays God?

I don't believe a civilised society is one which votes in state sanctioned murder. If god forbid anything happened to a loved one and they weren't given life, then I probably would go vigilante. But then I'd be prepared to face the consequences through the criminal justice system myself. My problem is not with the human desire for revenge, but the idea of living in a culture which would permit that.
Thankfully it would never ever happen in the UK anyway.

I was certainly not advocating putting anyone to death, including the criminally insane. But a crime is still a crime. There should be no notion of a Road to Damascus moment of contrition/I didn't have access to mental health services/now I'm on the right medication/it was only temporary insanity etc etc which would allow a murderer preferential access to freedom.

You keep saying 'you don't understand' and 'i can't get my head around it' but you do. We all do. Hate and anger causes people to think like this. Obviously.

And what happens if that person is innocent

I don't think legalised state killing is right. Although I dislike the idea of the state having to pay to keep some of these people.

However, it's easy to say that when you've not been a victim of such a horrific crime (or a relative of one).

I think I would have happily seen Myra Hindley, Ian Brady or Roger Black hang for what they did.

But Ruth Ellis is a reason why we don't have the death penalty in the UK anymore. And there have been enough miscarriages of justice. It's not that easy to compensate someone for being locked up when they should not have been - but you can't bring someone back to life.

So you would get some else to do your dirty work.

I was once very anti capital punishment, morally so. Then I went to Auschwitz - Birkenau. I felt within every cell that I would, without hesitation put to death myself, anyone who committed such atrocities. I believe the Japanese allow a few deaths a year by the state to satisfy the ' mob ' mentality or to collude in the idea that bad things happen to bad people.

I was once very anti capital punishment, morally so. Then I went to Auschwitz - Birkenau. I felt within every cell that I would, without hesitation put to death myself, anyone who committed such atrocities

Yes nobody has mentioned the Nuremberg trials. Do we think they were right and the sentences were just? Is there a point at which the crime becomes so heinous that actually a state or inter-government body can and should execute people?

The death penalty is not legalised murder though. Murder is, by definition, illegal.

If you don't agree with the state killing people because murder is wrong, why is it okay for the state to imprison people? Presumably you don't think it would be right for an individual citizen to lock someone up in their basement for 10 years.

A criminal act is not comparable to punishment handed down following a proper legal process.

Legitimate use of violence is what defines a state. The question is what level of violence is appropriate for a particular crime.

I'd make the same argument against the miscarriage of justice point. Why are you okay with locking potentially innocent people up for their entire life? Yes, if any additional evidence comes to light, they could be acquitted but what if it doesn't? Chances are if it was not pick up when everyone was investigating, it won't be the future.

Unfortunately, the downside of giving any punishment is that sometimes it will be given out when it should not have been but that is the price we pay for order in society and it is the job of the jury to decide what level of certainty is reasonable.

I do get that killing someone feels barbaric but I that it is just easier to not face up to the reality of other punishments. With prison there is not a definite point in time that the punishment is administered which is reported in the news and forces us, as a society, to face up to what we are doing. The punishment is administered over decades so no day is that bad but the cumulative effect is. We can kid ourselves by thinking that the truth will come out if people are innocent but that is not true.

This "civilized" nonsense is something we tell ourselves to make us feel better but I don't see the difference. Apparently punishment comes from the Latin for pain. Like it or not, prison is not all about rehabilitation is designed to make inmates lives worse than they would be on the outside. It is just a different type of pain which is easier for citizens to put out of their mind and label "humane".

I would bet hundreds of innocent people will serve life sentences in America compared to the one or two who get the death penalty. That is a bigger problem as far as I am concerned but nobody is against prison.

Some of the perpetrators were hung there and then by UK and USA soldiers who liberated the camps. Though of course, morally killing one person is no more heinous than killing 1 million. Feelings over ride morality. If I am capable of killing someone for a crime (I know now I am ) then I can no longer claim to be anti death penalty. Another issue on these lines is age, people often claim that criminals can reach an age where they deserve a second chance, think elderly men being tried for war crimes.And who decides, killing a child is different to a moment's rage with a spouse, for example. Its complex!

I think Nuremberg is an interesting one because it is more comparable to murder.

They were show trials. Political decisions were taken and then they made up their own law to get the outcomes they wanted. There was no prospect of the likes of Goring walking free from court. It would have been more honest to have summary executions as the British and Russians originally wanted.

I suppose you could say those acts were equally as criminal as the Nazis, they are just on the right side of history.

We will never bring back the death penalty in this country, so any discussion about the rights and wrongs are pointless.