What do you think the sentence should be for murder?

[Dumbo18]

Obviously there are many different circumstances but after today’s sentencing for the awful crime committed I couldn’t help but feel anger when I seen the sentence - I feel this with most murder sentences. I’m going to get flamed on here but here it goes… I just don’t agree with rehabilitation for these sort of crimes, main reason being why the hell should they get that opportunity? Child murderers, multiple murderers, serial rapists - you’ve ruined countless lives so why should you get another chance at life? I know that’s a view most people don’t have but I feel strongly about it and don’t get me started about what sentence these monsters should be handed!

OpalOrchid · Yesterday 21:38

''Are you prepared to give that lethal injection then?''

I would have no ethical issues with doing it.

Do you think child killers, serial killers for example deserve to keep breathing?

I don't. There is no redemption for this type of people.

Of course you also need a robust justice system because it is understandable that a woman who ends up killing her abusive partner is very different from an individual who just sees killing as a sport...

No. DNA was going to be the absolute proof, until you realise that as with anything else it can be manipulated, planted, etc. DNA doesn't prove anything other than that there is DNA.

And we have regular miscarriages of justice that decent people would be unhappy to be complicit in.

We're always told the death penalty isn't a deterrent and I don't believe that at all, see crimes rates in countries with a very harsh punishment regime.

America?

I was at university with a mature student who had murdered his mother, turned himself in, was found guilty and served 10 odd years before release. We weren't aware of his background until it got into the local press, towards the end of his degree course.
He was accepted as a Church of Scotland candidate and after his training got his own church. While there are still questions about whether he was really repentant, he did (apparently) provide a useful role in society for the rest of his life.

I'd prefer to live in a society where we believe people can be reformed, rather than one which endorses state murder.

If you can't do something with someone in 20 years, which is longer than most people spend in education, then you're either not trying hard enough or they're one of the few that are genuinely fucked and nobodies really gonna care if you keep them locked up forever

Which does not mean life does it?

Rightly or wringky, I don't believe those who commit the most serious of crimes can be rehabilitated.

I think all of the following should result in mandatory life in prison.

Murder
Failed Attempted Murder
Child Abuse
Rape
Acid Attacks
Terrorism

If someone is a threat to others in society, why ever gamble on them never reoffending?

Most of us couldn't even contemplate any of the above crimes. We deserve to be safe from those who have proven they are a risk.

Again.
No I don't mean 'America'. The USA do not have harsh punishment regime, it's a country where the death penalty exists in some States, but the Federal Laws are no harsher than those of many EU countries.
Shockingly there are other countries in the world besides the UK and the US and in some countries harsh laws and punishments are enforced and their crime rates are very low.

I don't believe in the death penalty. There is literally zero benefit other then vengeance for the family of the victim.

It isn't cheaper then life in prison
It isn't a deterrent
Too many innocent people have been wrongly put to death. It's subject to the same biases as the rest of the justice system (racism, sexism etc)

A family member worked in America for a charity that acted on behalf of death row inmates, appealing their death sentence so a first hand view of photos of victims, horrific crimes that she has trauma from but she has also seen the complexity and flaws of the system and is a staunch anti-death penalty advocate. This in the face of the utter despair and heartbreak of the victims family.

I do think that there should be a tiered system here.

Accidental death - (eg allergic reaction out of genuine ignorance) no sentence.

Careless death (parent not watching child and they get hit by car, careless driving) up to 10 years.

Defensive murder (killing an abusive partner) 0-10 years depending on circumstances.

Unpremeditated murder (murdered a spouse when finding them cheating, heat of the moment) up to 20 years

Premeditated murder (poisoning, any planned murder. These are the people you really have to worry about) 20 years absolute minimum custodial sentence.

Murder or premeditated murder with additional brutality. Any torture/rape before the murder, any tampering with the body. 30 years minimum. With an unwritten rule that they never get out. These are the broken phycho serial killers

And where are you planning to build all these prisons to hold all of the people convicted of these crimes for the rest of their lives? Where are you getting all the prison wardens and other staff from?

I agree in a theoretical way that yes, some people deserve the death penalty.

I also believe that, even ignoring miscarriages of justice and misuse by the state, the death penalty is unjustified in a civilised society.

It needs to be looked at as part of an overall strategy of reform.

But at a minimum,

the percentage of time taken with repeat offenders would dramatically increase if they were locked up - saving in police staffing requirements over time

less staffing so end on the legal system on the prosecution side

less demand for social workers, trauma counsellors etc

Government spending on capital projects during recessionary times is actually used to reduce unemployment also.

I'm not talking about throwing up a few new buildings to house prisoners. I'm taking about the need for full judical and policing reform.

If you take a life it should cost you your life. Life should mean 'for the rest of your life'.

It's a life sentence for the families. They don't get out of jail 15 years later.

and in cases where it can be 100% proved that murder was committed, without being provoked like DV (and I do mean 100% - no element of doubt AT ALL) they should be put to death.

Between 2000 and 2010, 30 people were released from prison after serving a sentence for murder and went on to kill again.
Imagine if you were a relative of one of those people, do you think you would believe in the death penalty?

Take the murderous, evil bastards out of society full stop - then you create some space.

Would I administer the lethal injection myself? Absolutely. I am from a family where a family member was raped and killed as a child - then offered as a sacrifice. She was 9. No - he wasn’t mentally unstable - he just wanted to murder her. I say again - would I administer it? Absolutely.

What about people who confess to murder? Should they receive the death penalty? There's a wealth of scientific literature regarding false confessions which suggests not.

Failed Attempt murder? How do you prove that? Attempt murder is hardest of all crimes to prove really.

My knee jerk reaction would be a life for a life, but there are too many factors to have a blanket, one size fits all sentence.
What if a woman, had been getting beaten up by her husband for years and one day she killed him while he slept?
Or somebodies child had been sexually abused and their parent flipped and murdered the perpetrator?
Should they get the same sentence as a child killer?

when they got rid of the death penalty, people were supposed to go to prison for life but not many do.

I guess there wouldnt be enough prison places to keep everyone locked up forever and it would cost so much money.

@Fionaville I think you are right. Context is totally relevant.

If you're prepared to stab someone 16 times, you need putting down.

Pre meditated or terrorism - life without parole.

Other types need more factors taken into account and blanket sentences don't do that.

You've only got to see on this thread how many posters are fantasising - in cold blood and not under duress - about torturing or killing people to understand that all of us are capable of doing truly horrible things. Which is why it's in our interests to have a fair justice system which doesn't apply extreme penalties like the death penalty, and where whole life tariffs are only applied in very rare circumstances.

As to those who don't understand how sentencing works - life always means life. Unless you have the conviction quashed, you will carry that sentence for the rest of your life. You don't have to be in prison to serve a sentence.