AIBU to ask whether the death penalty should apply for certain crimes in the UK?

[PenelopeJoanSterling]

Because the topics got mixed up on my previous thread i thought id ask here, for certain types of crime in the uk, would you be either for or against the death penalty for certain crimes and why ?

Yes I would support it for certain crimes, particularly against the most vulnerable, children and the elderly.

I think it would be a great idea to have capital punishment, but for men only, as women really only commit heinous crimes at the behest of evil men. Maybe it should be extended to many other crimes that men commit and thin out the number of males offenders a bit

What a stupid stupid question and topic to raise. No is your answer.

The military is no different. They are state sanctioned killings

but legally, they are allowed to kill under certain conditions, and they are overwhelmingly not in the uk, so they don’t apply to the discussion in hand

What stat?

What crimes? Murder?

What age is "elderly"? Because I can murder a person and not be killed, but as soon as they're elderly? That's a death sentence.

So what age is elderly?

Where's your line?

No.

Not only because of miscarriages of justice but also some people would never convict a person if they knew that they were sending a person to their death.

Yeah, I'd happily be the person to slip the noose on and pull the gallows handle on some of the animals in our society if needs be.

and that is all that needs to be said the rest is just pointless noise.

You’re not being unreasonable to ask but how it would be governed is another thing.

However today I watched an interview on YT with survivor Mary Vincent. She was 14 when a serial killer raped her, chopped off both arms and threw her down a steep hilltop.

She stuck her arms in mud to stem the bleeding, clawed her way back up the hill and walked for almost 4 miles, with multiple broken bones. The first people to see her were so scared they drove off. A couple then stopped for her.

Her attacker got out of prison in just a few years and killed a mother. They think he killed 14 women in total.

For him, yes, I’d happily do it with my bare hands.

I'm totally against it. While a knee jerk reaction to someone like Jamie Varley might make me think I wouldn't object to it, in a case like Lucy Letby, it terrifies me. Very unstable conviction accusing someone of appalling crimes without real evidence.

That was in America so the death penalty didn’t help after all

Japan and Singapore have the death penalty and they have very low crime.

I would be happy with either the death penalty or life sentences that mean life.

The current situation with killers receiving derisory sentences cannot be allowed to continue.

They don't have low crime because the death penalty exists. They have it because the society isn't deranged and vicious.

That’s all you’ve got to say? The point is that his first prison sentence was too lenient and he was able to go on to kill. He never should have been let out. He should have been locked up forever and/or electrocuted.

Or perhaps it’s because they have better local community policing.

Yes that’s the point isn’t it. He could’ve been.Having death penalty didn’t even help prevent this situation.

That’s a good idea. As long as the legal safeguards re capacity are watertight.

There are several problems with capital punishment but here are two:

1. Death is kind of irreversible- so if there is a miscarriage of justice it's a bit difficult to say sorry we got it wrong and you can go free now,
2. Due to the severity of the case a capital punishment crime case will inevitably involve a jury. Even if they are in favour of capital punishment, knowing that their decision is literally life or death, jurors will massively look for any hints of doubt in the trial. Thereby creating a strong risk that criminals (in this case murderers) that would otherwise been found guilty are instead found not guilty and set free to commit more crimes.

As well.

But the point is, it's not the death penalty that's the deterrent.

But that wouldn't have prevented the crime on the first place. Death just isn't a deterrent.

I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic and agreeing with me or not, however this is my point. thousands full of bravado. I’d be amazed if you got someone to actually do it; be trained to a level of ‘competence’ and carry that load for the rest of their life. Once the self righteous buzz has worn off, it’s a particularly disturbing ‘profession’. To bore the readers of the OP’s other thread, this is a tale as old as time: see the fable ‘ringing the cat’.

Sally Clark? Jailed for infanticide. Would you have executed her?

these days and depending on the method of execution you could have a computer do it, same with missiles etc computers can launch them

So naive. Executioner can take many guises. Someone still has to do it whether that is wielding an axe, setting a guillotine in motion, being part of a firing squad, setting up a fatal injection, pressing a button to release the gas…