To ask what you think of the death penalty? (Don’t open if you don’t like talking about death and crime)

[Chancewouldbeafinethlng]

I listened to Adam Buxtons newest podcast episode and found it very interesting.
I’m not sure how I feel about it. On the one hand there are some criminals who I would not piss on if they were on fire, I think they really deserve to die. But then there is always going to be a person who’s job it is to kill that person.
Also there is the risk that someone has been falsely accused and maybe not had a fair trial. How would you ever know?

The episode touched on the method used currently for the death penalty. The woman who was talking was saying how unreliable it is and is basically torture if it doesn’t work. What other methods could be used though?

Sorry I know it’s a very morbid subject but I would be interested in hearing other people’s opinions.

Er...it's okay to speculate, isn't it? You say it's 'paper thin' - I'd say it's a large step nearer.
Concentration camps was illustrative, on how things develop, not appear on the public radar with no preping.

Mr Pan - you have no basis for your speculation and as for your invocation of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law Godwin's]] - that is predictable but not in any way valid.

The death penalty is not state sanctioned murder, any more than a prison sentence is state sanction illegal detention.

There are too many liberal softies in the UK, and too many liberal softie judges. There are too many crimes BECAUSE the sentencing is soft. The woman the other day who stole 25K from a 90 year old, got 1 year, out in 3 months, and no restitution. Perhaps the death penalty would be a bit harsh, but 10-15 years no remission might be closer.

We regularly fail to deport and extradite criminals because of some soft concerns about their well-being, which they never show to their victims. We won't even extradite them to some other EU countries now. How on earth is it even legally possible to regard a member of the EU club as not a "safe" country for an extradition.

We regularly reward our own citizens who are convicted abroad. We bring them back and put them on breakfast TV.

So build more prisons, stuff them full of criminals for longer, and we will all sleep safer. Anyone found with a knife or firearm. 5 years, no remission. Instantly. At the top of the tree needs to be life without parole, or execution. Execution is cheaper. Once you decide that someone is serving life without parole, what's the point of not executing them.

You will all change your minds when your family is on the receiving end of lawless violence.

It is paper thin.

Brexit - a manifesto pledge to hold a referendum was honoured. No major party had a fully Leave or Remain stance. The outcome is uncertain due to the incompatibility of referenda with our representative democracy and the fact that Cameron et all thought we'd vote the way they wanted.

Death Penalty - no party pledges, no referendum, no party lines and has always been a free vote in Parliament.

It's just ridiculous scaremongering to start going on about Hitler because an ill-advised referendum didn't turn out how you expected.

So build more prisons, stuff them full of criminals for longer, and we will all sleep safer
How's that working out for the USA do you think?

Gth1234 - a fine example of the post-fact world, wishing the death penalty re-introduction, and iirc a keen brexiter.

I didn't say brexit = cap punishment - I'd said the concept brings in a lot nearer than it has been, probably since the IRA campaign.

I'd said the concept brings in a lot nearer than it has been, probably since the IRA campaign.
Well I suppose in a post-facts world where you don't need evidence this sort of unfounded speculation in place of facts and evidence will occur. Where are your facts and evidence? Or is is just "because Brexit"?

There are too many crimes BECAUSE the sentencing is soft.
Do you have any actual evidence for this?

You will all change your minds when your family is on the receiving end of lawless violence.

The problem is "justice" is supposed to be applied to all with dispassion and equality. It's why Lady Justice is shown with scales and a blindfold. If we allow individual cases to be judged individually, we're just back to the idea of buying justice and the idea of a blood feud and judging how much the victim was worth for the murdered to just pay up and move on.

If the death penalty were to be bought back, it'll be the poor, the vulnerable and the odd murders that get executed. The rich, the well connected, and the poster people will just hire better lawyers and wangle a reprieve or a few years jail. That's before we start imagining how our still racist legal system would deliver countless young black men to the gallows.

It's hard not to characterise the death penalty as lazy justice. Far easier to kill someone and put them in a hole than put a single pounds sterling into maybe addressing the inequalities in the justice system. The appalling recidivism inherent in a profit-seeking system that has vested interest in keeping jails full. (Anyone suggested that maybe G4S should lose money every time an offender reoffends ? If not, why not ?)

Would be curious - with the new AIBU voting feature - to see how many people would side with me and refuse to convict if the penalty was execution ?

We need to focus much more on why people commit crimes, for instance the relationship between high levels of inequality and high levels of crime

I didn't say brexit = cap punishment - I'd said the concept brings in a lot nearer than it has been, probably since the IRA campaign

Can you please expand on this theory please, MrPan

medium.com/@RossUlbricht/who-deserves-this-6cff48f62b6f
Vengeance and cruelty are not aspects of our nature to be honored and institutionalized. They are base and destructive. They hurt all parties. Our families and communities are hurting. Humanity is hurting. The pain of your fellow human being is your pain too, even though it is locked away in remote prisons.

You will all change your minds when your family is on the receiving end of lawless violence.
No I won't.

“You will all change your minds when your family is on the receiving end of lawless violence“

Yes. I might. Which is why it’s a good thing it’s not up to me.

@Gth1234 "Execution is cheaper" - No, it's actually not. In California for example (largest capital punishment system in the US) it costs 18 times more to execute someone than giving them life without parole. The greatest costs occur prior to and during trial, so its not even the appeals process alone that makes it so expensive (source, Amnesty International, but you might find that too "liberal and softie" a source for you to accept)

Don't agree with the death penalty but a sentence of life should mean life.

A life sentence should be a punishment and not an opportunity for rehabilitation.

If you have received a life sentence then you are beyond any rehabilitation.

It's worth mentioning that there is a caveat for state-sanctioned lethal force and that is in the event of insurrection.

So the British state cannot legally put someone to death for committing a crime and being found guilty in court, but it can legally kill British nationals on British streets if they are involved in an uprising against the state.

Likewise, there seems to be a convenient blind spot when it comes to "military intervention" in foreign sovereign states. The British state couldn't kill Ian Brady, but could kill Talib fighters in Kandahar, despite Afghanistan never declaring war on Britain, essentially involving itself in a foreign civil war under manufactured pretences.

You will all change your minds when your family is on the receiving end of lawless violence.

My family has been on the receiving end of a violent crime. Not once did I wish the perpetrator dead, punished for certain and the words "throw away the fucking key" may have been used, but never dead.

stillstrawberrywater - nope, simply couldn't be bothered.

Interesting notes re killing in UK re insurrection and killing people abroad.

And of course there are a number of offences where you can still be done for treason - defacing Portsmouth dock, assaulting a Chelsea pensioner, supporting Arsenal.

There are too many crimes BECAUSE the sentencing is soft.
Do you have any actual evidence for this?

I don't need evidence. De facto, you lock up convicted felons, they don't commit crimes while they are inside,

If you want to talk about evidence, what about the evidence of "reformed" felons who are let out by leftie parole boards only to re-offend immediately. What SHOULD happen is the parole boards who sanctioned the release should stand in lieu and receive the same penalty. I am pretty sure that would make them think more carefully.

It's a shame Frank Pakenham didn't spend more time helping victims, instead of Ian Brady, but that's the liberal way.

How on earth does this get conflated with Brexit?

Yes let's kill people to prove a point that killing people is wrong...

I think if you look at some of the worst crimes and what the consequences of a death penalty would be you would have to comedown on the side of no death penalty. Or at least I do.

Eg Myra Hindley, had she been hanged Pauline Reade Would still be in a shallow grave on Saddleworth moor.

Jon Venables and Robert Thompson - would anyone really be OK with killing a coupleof 10 year olds.

The minute your argument in support of the death penalty becomes about the financial benefits of having someone executed as opposed to life in prison, you've lost all respect in my eyes.

I am firmly against capital punishment in any circumstance. That is not synonymous with thinking that victims of crimes don't deserve justice. State sanctioned murder will never be ok.

Can't expand on his theory, and won't expand on his theory = MrPan

the MN poster that just keeps on giving

How on earth does this get conflated with Brexit?
I dunno - I didn't start that, that was couple of posters you'd probably call lefties. I am a leftie who voted for Brexit - go figure.

Anyhoo, of course you are 100% correct - anyone locked in prison cannot commit crimes outside. That is not what you said though - you said There are too many crimes BECAUSE the sentencing is soft.. Did you mean everyone convicted should be imprisoned for the remainder of their life? How will that stop new offenders?