To wonder if those in favour of the death penalty would be able to pass the sentence themselves?

[couldyoudoit]

Inspired by recent threads about people wanting the death penalty reintroduced, I was wondering - if there was an option for the family member of a murdered person to execute the person who did it, would you do it?

I am very fundamentally opposed to any kind of death penalty but I’m curious to know if those who do agree with it could do the deed themselves, and if so, where would you draw the line regarding method? I suspect a lot of people in favour would be ok pressing a button to administer lethal injection/pulling a lever to drop a trapdoor but would be less keen to (for example) chop someone’s head off with an axe or set them on fire?

Not really an AIBU but I’m really interested in the responses. Not looking to judge anyone for their stance either way, just curious about the thought processes.

NB* Not a journalist or writing any sort of article!

Yep i could pull the trigger, push the button, flip the switch and or operate the guillotine. I wouldn't use an axe to behead someone because my vision issues would make it likely that I'd miss.

Having capital punishment costs more than life imprisonment due to the cost of death row litigation. So you spend more money, not less.

How would they kill them if they are in custody though? if you know thats the person that definitely murdered your child its likely due to them being found guilty in court which means they'd be sentenced and locked away already so how would they get to them?

Also, if you are not a soldier then murder is an unknown and unfamiliar thing to do, most people wouldnt know how to go about it, they'd also be exhausted with grief.

I am betting though if parents were put in a room and told they could flick a switch and their child's murderer in the next room would be killed dead a lot would do it.

See Stanley Milgram's famous obedience study!

I was on a recent thread about the death penalty, and explained that I’ve come to the conclusion now that it should be available for those extreme criminals, serial child rapists and murderers for instance, where it is very very clear who’s done what.

In those circumstances, faced with an irredeemable piece of scum who’s raped and murdered the helpless with not an ounce of care or remorse: do you know what, I think I could.

Because you’re saying that people on this thread are happy with murder.

And those victim’s families who support the execution are then also happy with murder, no?

I am only in favour of the death penalty in the most extreme cases, judged on a case by case basis. Eg Fred and Rose West. And yes, I would happily electrocute, inject or shoot those sub humans.

The burden of proof for a criminal conviction is something like beyond reasonable doubt. I’d raise it if the death penalty was on the table - to something like beyond virtually any doubt at all. So that would separate people like Axel Rudakubana (where doubt it was him = zero, so gets death penalty) from cases like Lucy Letby (where some people do have some doubt and it’s not as certain so she gets life in prison, to actually mean life).

Bottom line - yes I’d do it in the extreme cases.

I don’t know where you go that from. I’m not saying they’re happy with the general idea of murder as a concept.

I am saying I am surprised they are telling us they wish to be murderers themselves.

Why would we be boiling people or burning them to death?
Boiling people to death was a Chinese practice and a sentence that was reserved for those who told outsiders how to produce silk and was last used in the 1500s.
Burning people alive was a sentence for heretics and the worst types of witches and tbh most were strangled to death before the pire was literally because they repented. Also this practice ended in the 1600s and the 1700s.
The death penalty as in hanging, shooting, lethal injection, gas chambers, electric chair and guillotine are far more efficient in terms of cost, time and speed and all of which are still practised daily around the world so why would we bring back inefficient medical torturous forms of state sanctioned death penalty?

I have met a couple of people who were very pro death penalty and yes, they would have been perfectly prepared to carry out the sentence. They were both ex servicemen though.

The film about Albert Pierrepoint, Britain's last executioner, was morbidly interesting as he was ver concerned about being as humane as possible. Timothy Spall was the lead role.

I don't think anyone is saying "easily". The question is not could you walk into the street, pick a stranger at random and bludgen them to death.

It's an emotional reaction to grief and rage. We are all capable of losing ourselves to that, given the right set of circumstances. I think anyone who thinks there is no circumstance that could ever exist where they would be capable of doing that is fooling themselves.

You should read the book about Albert Peirpoint(sp) the last UK hangman if you want a 1st person account of how an executioner feels about the job

i think perpetrators of horrible crimes should be given the option of life in prison (truly life zero parole) or assisted death.
i would think some would choose the assisted death, even if it's a small percentage it should be an option.

So do you believe that soldiers who kill enemy combatants in war are murders too?

I do not support the death penalty. The state should never lower itself to the killers’ sewer-level standards.

However, I am not the state and if offered the opportunity to snuff out Sidney Cook, the killers of Sara Sharif or some of our other more disgusting child killers, I might just be tempted. Sick animals, they aren’t worth the air they breathe.

And if someone posed a serious and immediate risk to my child, I’d do whatever was necessary to remove that risk without a single qualm.

@HoardasurassHenry the Eighth implemented boiling as capital punishment as part of the 1530/1531 ‘Poisoning act’ as he was really afraid of being poisoned and wanted a very harsh punishment for poisoning to deter future acts. It has been used in many countries although it’s not particularly common.

Anyways, we are talking hypotheticals so in theory if the death penalty was back on the table (which a lot of people think is archaic and inhumane full stop), where would you draw the line? What kind of death is considered too cruel? For some ending the life is the important part even if the manner is as ‘humane’ and peaceful as possible, for others they actively want the criminal to suffer.

Yes I do

I’m not sure about the death penalty.
But I work with some troubled kids, and what I would do all day long is sterilise those women whose children are in care. It is utter madness that they are allowed to drag up more.

I'm opposed to the death penalty but have always liked the idea that if a person is guilty of a violent crime, that for the term of their sentence the victim or victim's family should have the option to access the perpetrator at any time day or night, to do whatever they want to them.

If that ends in the death of the perpetrator in brutal and imaginative ways, fine.

If it ends in hours and hours of them simply sitting in silence with the victim/family, fine.

The point is that they'll never know what will happen and they'll never know when it's coming, just like their victim.

Edit: obviously this would hinge on the perpetrator being absolutely, truly, guilty of the crime. Just the same difficulty that the death penalty presents, wrongful conviction.

IF the death penalty was restored, and I don’t think it should, or will be, the purpose would simply be to remove a dangerous killer and protect future innocent lives. No desire to inflict pain or seek revenge.

Well arent you glad others dont otherwise we'd all be speaking German and living under the NAZIS?
BTW I think you are on a windup so I wont be responding to you anymore

so you are not asking if people would be ok to administer the capital punishment themselves,

but if they would torture people? Being happy to set someone on fire goes beyond an execution, surely?

Set an angry mob on a suspect, and suspects don't last long. If people manage to stone an innocent woman without batting an eyelid, I can't see why they wouldn't be able to press a lever and chop someone's head with a guillotine when that someone has been proven guilty.

The humanity is in the way death is given, clean and as painless as possible, not in the death itself.

I think a lifetime in prison is worse than death penalty!

so care to tell us what your solution is?

People on actual death row might have a different opinion on that one 😂

Possibly depends on the prison too, there's a range around the world.

I couldn’t swing an axe but would have no qualms whatsoever in giving a lethal injection or similar.