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 ?

Oh so only other people's families.

Toast 'em. They probably did something wrong, eh? As long as it doesn't affect you and yours.

Most Soviet closed cities were not penal in nature through, it was mainly concerned with security and preservation of State secrecy.

Oh ok, so let’s just do away with innocent until proven guilty altogether then. Anyone who is suspected of a crime is probably dodgy, and if some of them get executed for something they didn’t do, ah well, doesn’t matter.

you choose to discuss on my thread, we are a democracy are we not ? i never said you had to answer

No matter what your morals are about the death penalty, the simple fact is that it doesn't work as a deterrent. In fact it does the opposite. Why leave your robbery victim alive to identify you when there's capital punishment? Kill them so they can't testify.
I doesn't reduce the crime rate at all.

We do have the means. It's called prison.

Errors which would cause innocent people to be put to death. How many are acceptable?

thats very true, but the same principles could be adapted

Ok maybe I’m looking at it in simplistic terms, it’s clearly a very complicated process both morally, socially and practically. I just think there are some people who are never going to be rehabilitated. The Southport attacker (I wont use his actual name) has also attacked prison guards. He isn’t safe in society or even in prison so it seems. Keeping him alive causes further danger and pain to everyone in contact with him.

yes I think some people are beyond redemption and their crimes so heinous I would support the death penalty . I think with serial killers or mass murderers like terrorists where DNA is present at multiple sites the risks of miscarriage would be rare .

That's what whole.life terms and IPPs are for , also indefinite hospital orders

Should, but don't. Did the Post Office scandal pass you by? Ever heard of Andrew Malkinson or Peter Sullivan?

Never.

thats my point, of the thread for cases like these

I agree with this, is anyone wanting to argue his case?

You didn't answer my point about recidivism OP

andrew was 2004, id like to think tech has improved in 20 years

No, and not because of my morality. Some people should suffer for a long long time and not get an escape through death.

People always quote the Southport killer, forgetting that he was under 18 at the time of his offences and that under international law could not face the death penalty. Only these 4 countries execute people under 18 : Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, and South Sudan.

ill get back to you on that

Or Sally Clark
Angela Cannings
Donna Anthony

Read up about them and tell me they should have been killed by the state as collateral damage.

Nor my point about longer term cultural impact

Rare, but not eliminated. So how many innocent people executed is an acceptable number to you? 5, 10, 50? You've already agreed with a state system for murdering people, so you must be fine with some. Will you do it yourself, or is that too messy for you. You're going to outsource your murder of people who haven't committed a crime?

You advocate killing an autistic 17 year old with a history of serious difficulties?

but then if we learn from those cases ?