View Full Version : Capital Punishment
I have been asked by my son to put the following to you all. He would appreciate your views and comments for a report he is doing ( he is 15 so please no heavy duty views) I think he just wants as wide a number of opinions as possible
My thanks
i agree with capital punishment for crimes thet are beyond belief, if there is no other way of "rehabilitating" the criminals of heinous crimes. Mass murders, child murders the likes of Myra hindley, Ian brady, Fred west desreved no right to live for what they did...All humas have a right to life, but if you takes lives then i do believe that you should be punshed for the crime...Those that commit a crime, do the time and then insist on commiting the same offence again. Rapists, kidnappers and the sick people who do it for there own pleasure..
This is such a debatable subject. I hope he gets a lot of views....
Boozeburglar
09-Jan-08, 16:24
I think everyone who moans about not having enough supermarkets in such a small community should be sent to live in Edinburgh.
I think everyone who moans about not having enough supermarkets in such a small community should be sent to live in Edinburgh. and maybe those that insist on using mobile phones whilst pushing a supermarket trolley around the isles....:lol:
I think everyone who moans about not having enough supermarkets in such a small community should be sent to live in Edinburgh.
I love my supermarkets in Edi, so many to choose from [lol] bargains galore.
But not to detract from the thread.
I believe in Capital Punishment, if a weapon of any kind has been used to kill, and I also believe in Corporal Punishment, bring back the Birch, and a lot of these misunderstood hooligans, would think twice before getting up to their tricks again.
And what if the person convicted, and killed, was innocent? How many people have spent years in jail and then been released - too late if you have capital punishment. That Scotsman just returned from the US - only released by the persistence of others or I'm sure he would have been dead long since.
I do believe some people should never be released but our prison system at present is counter-productive. Put violent offenders in prison, rehabilitate where possible, train those without skills and look after them on release. Punish non-violent offenders in other ways. Capital punishment in my opinion is barbaric and I'm glad we don't have it.
NickInTheNorth
09-Jan-08, 17:03
I would be happy to see capital punishment when and only when it can be proved beyond any doubt that it is 100% certain that the accused committed the crime.
I should add that I do not believe that we can ever prove a case to the level I would be happy with.
And certainly Fred West is a very poor example. As he has never been tried and convicted he must be presumed innocent!
I'm sitting on the fence on this one - part of me agrees that if you take a life, you should lose a life, but the rest of me is with badger - too many innocent people have been convicted for it to be the right thing.
Like NickInTheNorth, I would have no problem with capital punishment where there is 100% certainty, as with
Dennis Nilsen etc........but with the present tendency to treat circumstantial evidence as gospel truth, which has led to many mistakes, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution.
Justice nowadays seems to be more interested in a conviction than in the proveable facts.
As NITN(excuse abbreviation) has amended his post to postulate the possible innocence of Fred West because he never came to trial, I have amended my post.
I do not, however, think for a second that Fred West was innocent.
It's all very well agreeing with capital punishment but who throws the switch? I know I couldn't; not if me or mine was not involved in the crime in the first place.
But let anyone hurt my daughter......[evil]
veekay
I have been asked by my son to put the following to you all. He would appreciate your views and comments for a report he is doing ( he is 15 so please no heavy duty views) I think he just wants as wide a number of opinions as possible
My thanksTell him to research the case of Derek Bentley.
I would be happy to see capital punishment when and only when it can be proved beyond any doubt that it is 100% certain that the accused committed the crime.
I agree with your statment NickInTheNorth, would have to be proved beyond any doubt 100%, then hang em !:eek: jan x
Royster1911
09-Jan-08, 17:23
I wonder how many families in UK alone have had to say, after an innocent person had been put to death, "We told you so"?
It's all very well agreeing with capital punishment but who throws the switch? I know I couldn't; not if me or mine was not involved in the crime in the first place.
But let anyone hurt my daughter......[evil]The famous hangman, Albert Pierrepoint, resigned after the hanging of Ruth Ellis stating that capital punishment did not deter murder and achieved nothing other than revenge.
I'm not in favour of capital punishment, certainly not unless and until convictions can be 100% safe....even though there's a small part of me that might like to see it for the most heinous murders.
ciderally
09-Jan-08, 18:01
no im going against C.P. but i do think the U.K. prison system is too soft, more hard labour put the chain gang back even just to clean up the roads/beaches ect ..
NickInTheNorth
09-Jan-08, 18:07
As NITN(excuse abbreviation) has amended his post to postulate the possible innocence of Fred West because he never came to trial, I have amended my post.
I do not, however, think for a second that Fred West was innocent.
I haven't stated whether I believe him to be innocent or not. Simply reminded people that he was never tried for those crimes and therefore IS as a matter of fact presumed innocent!
Isn't the law wonderful!
I agree with your statment NickInTheNorth, would have to be proved beyond any doubt 100%, then hang em !:eek: jan x
I think capital punishment should be reinstated, not necessarily to be used, but as a deterent that it could be used. Mind you, a few names spring to mind that they could practice on, namely, Rose West, Peter Tobin, Ian Brady and any pedophile languishing in prison at the moment, especially if they have taken the life of a child. [evil]
NickInTheNorth
09-Jan-08, 18:11
I think capital punishment should be reinstated, not necessarily to be used, but as a deterent that it could be used. Mind you, a few names spring to mind that they could practice on, namely, Rose West, Peter Tobin, Ian Brady and any pedophile languishing in prison at the moment, especially if they have taken the life of a child. [evil]
If it isn't going to be used than it will not be much deterrent :confused
Also if we look to the USA where many states have the death penalty the deterrence provided by that would appear to be minimal!
In russia where it is still in they take the convicted and tried prisoner down the stairs and into a cell where they are shot in the back of the head. There is no waiting period for appeals, it is done there and then..Obviously it will never be a deterrent as poeple are still being put to death in alot of countries....
As for Fred west, he is as guilty as his wife...If any have caught the programme "The one that got away" and hear the terrifiing account from the one survivor then he should have had the death sentence....
Your son could find articles about ED Gein...He was proven insane and ended up in a santiorium....His crimes were horrendous...But for his mental state i believe he would have been perfect candidate for the firing squad....
An eye for an eye, Someone who has killed purposely and has been found guilty without a shadow of a doubt aught to be executed. Why should the state have to fund these people for 15 or 20 year,s cause thats the max they seem to be getting for a life. The person that they killed is & always will be dead forever, The laws are to lenient. the gt train robber.s served more time for stealing money than any murderer ever served.[disgust]
Metalattakk
09-Jan-08, 18:38
Billy Austin
(Steve Earle)
My name is Billy Austin
I'm Twenty-Nine years old
I was born in Oklahoma
Quarter Cherokee I'm told
Don't remember Oklahoma
Been so long since I left home
Seems like I've always been in prison
Like I've always been alone
Didn't mean to hurt nobody
Never thought I'd cross that line
I held up a filling station
Like I'd done a hundred times
The kid done like I told him
He lay face down on the floor
guess I'll never know what made me
Turn and walk back through that door
The shot rang out like thunder
My ears rang like a bell
No one came runnin'
So I called the cops myself
Took their time to get there
And I guess I could'a run
I knew I should be feeling something
But I never shed tear one
I didn't even make the papers
'Cause I only killed one man
but my trial was over quickly
And then the long hard wait began
Court appointed lawyer
Couldn't look me in the eye
He just stood up and closed his briefcase
When they sentenced me to die
Now my waitin's over
As the final hour drags by
I ain't about to tell you
That I don't deserve to die
But there's twenty-seven men here
Mostly black, brown and poor
Most of em are guilty
Who are you to say for sure?
So when the preacher comes to get me
And they shave off all my hair
Could you take that long walk with me
Knowing hell is waitin' there
Could you pull that switch yourself sir
With a sure and steady hand
Could you still tell yourself sir
That you're better than I am
My name is Billy Austin
I'm twenty-nine years old
I was born in Oklahoma
Quarter Cherokee I'm told
Tell him to research the case of Derek Bentley.
This case was first on my list for him to read up on. We obviously think along the same lines.
And Justine Russia still has the death penalty but says that no-one has been executed since 1996. Well perhaps not officially eh!
Thanks for all the views any more please
I believe that less people would be in favour of CP if our justice system was more effective and the sentences given reflected the crimes.
I do not agree with CP, it isn't an effective deterrant in stopping crime as figures from those states still using it prove. But I do feel our sentencing is laughable.
Life should mean life.
I also have very little faith in our police to present evidence. There have been to many incidents in the past where they have been shown to be dishonest.
I think capital punishment should be reinstated, not necessarily to be used, but as a deterent that it could be used. Mind you, a few names spring to mind that they could practice on, namely, Rose West, Peter Tobin, Ian Brady and any pedophile languishing in prison at the moment, especially if they have taken the life of a child. [evil]
Pedophiles.......[evil] dont get me started on that one,im liable to explode. jan x
Margaret M.
09-Jan-08, 18:54
Also if we look to the USA where many states have the death penalty the deterrence provided by that would appear to be minimal!
There really is no way to know whether or not it is a deterrent.
I am with those who would vote for it only if there is 100% certainty that the offender committed the crime. Circumstantial evidence is not enough to warrant a death sentence, in my opinion. Some crimes are so horrific that the offender needs to be dispatched from the planet as quickly as possible. Child killers, serial killers, and those who have tortured their victims before killing them are just some of those whom I don't think should be kept at taxpayers' expense.
This case was first on my list for him to read up on. We obviously think along the same lines.
And Justine Russia still has the death penalty but says that no-one has been executed since 1996. Well perhaps not officially eh!
Thanks for all the views any more please
Could you enlighten me with a name..I am obviously getting it wrong. I was under the impression that a certain russian was executed not long back maybe 2-3 yrs...I will have to go to do my homework.
Metalattack, that's a great song I can only play the chords for it but I know that song so weel!;)
I dont believe in capital punishment because im some cases there is people that are wrongly convicted at least if they get a life sentence they have a chance to appeal there case.And second reason i think rather than give a convicted criminal the death penalty give them a life sentence meaning life and thats more of a punishment than capital punishment.
Pretty shocking to read but ref Murder rates; Scotland has the second highest murder rate in western Europe and Scots are more than three times more likely to be murdered than people in England and Wales, according to a study by the World Health Organisation. http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1578388,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,2763,1578388,00.html)
The study, based on the latest crime figures from 21 western European countries, finds that only Finland has a higher murder rate than Scotland.
Scotland's homicide rate is 2.33 deaths for every 100,000 people each year, compared with 0.7 in England and Wales. In Spain it is 1.02, and in Italy 0.96. Germany has western Europe's lowest murder rate: 0.68 per 100,000 people.
Scotland's second city Glasgow is in fact the murder capital of Europe, with about 70 killings each year.
The WHO report follows a United Nations report last week which said Scotland was the most violent country in the developed world: more than 2,000 people were subject to a violent attack each week, more than 10 times official police figures. However, the report's claim was disputed by politicians and senior police officers.
Another study from the University of California, to be published later this year, will claim Scotland has a higher homicide rate than America, Israel, Uzbekistan, Chile and Uruguay.
Now there's a thought!
CP? well myself I'd rather see more jails built and these folk put away for life and I mean 'Life'.. not the fiddly 11 years or so they serve for taking a life and then back out into the normal world - A friend at my old school was savagely murdered, the bloke did 14 years; he's been out for over 30 years, got a family of his own and lives quite happily, can't see how being locked up (with the knowledge he'd be out sooner or later) would be any 'punishment'..
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 19:47
If you commit murder, attempted murder, rape or a serious sexual assault, against either an adult or a child then I believe the death penalty should be mandatory. The convicted should be hung in a room adjoining the court so we dont have to spend any money feeding, clothing and housing them.
The only Human Rights I would consider would be those of the Victim and their Family.
If you read Michael Moore's 'dude where's my country' theres a piece about American Law students examining 10 death row cases. They managed to prove 3 out of 10 were innocent - the point is that access to good law is access to cash - most murder cases don't generate mass media coverage and the defendents are represented by state appointed (here as well as US) lawyers on a budget and timescale who haven't a chance of defending you properly.
Billy Austin
(Steve Earle)
My name is Billy Austin
I'm Twenty-Nine years old
I was born in Oklahoma
Quarter Cherokee I'm told
Don't remember Oklahoma
Been so long since I left home
Seems like I've always been in prison
Like I've always been alone
Didn't mean to hurt nobody
Never thought I'd cross that line
I held up a filling station
Like I'd done a hundred times
The kid done like I told him
He lay face down on the floor
guess I'll never know what made me
Turn and walk back through that door
The shot rang out like thunder
My ears rang like a bell
No one came runnin'
So I called the cops myself
Took their time to get there
And I guess I could'a run
I knew I should be feeling something
But I never shed tear one
I didn't even make the papers
'Cause I only killed one man
but my trial was over quickly
And then the long hard wait began
Court appointed lawyer
Couldn't look me in the eye
He just stood up and closed his briefcase
When they sentenced me to die
Now my waitin's over
As the final hour drags by
I ain't about to tell you
That I don't deserve to die
But there's twenty-seven men here
Mostly black, brown and poor
Most of em are guilty
Who are you to say for sure?
So when the preacher comes to get me
And they shave off all my hair
Could you take that long walk with me
Knowing hell is waitin' there
Could you pull that switch yourself sir
With a sure and steady hand
Could you still tell yourself sir
That you're better than I am
My name is Billy Austin
I'm twenty-nine years old
I was born in Oklahoma
Quarter Cherokee I'm told
Reminds me of "The Green Mile " jan x
northener
09-Jan-08, 20:05
Kill 'em all - let God sort 'em out.
.
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 20:10
If you read Michael Moore's 'dude where's my country' theres a piece about American Law students examining 10 death row cases. They managed to prove 3 out of 10 were innocent - the point is that access to good law is access to cash - most murder cases don't generate mass media coverage and the defendents are represented by state appointed (here as well as US) lawyers on a budget and timescale who haven't a chance of defending you properly.
3 out of every 10 ? .. thats a bit precise.
Prisons are full of Innocent men didnt you know ??
Take your point - in the book they looked at 10 cases only - of course you can't apply this over the tens of thousands of cases. The only sure fire way to prove guilt is the distance between one eye to the other anyway.
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 20:21
Its Michael Moore though isnt it ??, I certainly take the point you made as well as no system is perfect and the American system certainly gets you "more bang for your buck" .. look at OJ Simpson.
Its just my politics are to the the right of Genghis Khan !! .. :lol:
Valerie Campbell
09-Jan-08, 20:23
The book Crime and Punishment should be read. Although writtten in the 19th century, it makes it clear that guilt will win in the end. It's overwhelming and will eventually catch up, driving the person mad as he/she tries to come to terms with what tehy've done. Killing someone guilty will not serve a purpose, but hard labour for 20 years just might make him/her re-think their actions.
rockchick
09-Jan-08, 20:27
Where there is no possibility of doubt of a heinous crime - such as premediated murder or rape or child predation - and there is 100% certainty of the guilt of the offender, then I would support the death penalty.
If there is even 1% possibility of doubt, then no. It's not worth the chance of being wrong. Better the taxpayers support an innocent person for 40 years in jail than end the life of the wrong person.
gillian17
09-Jan-08, 20:30
As someone who has a little bit of experience in this department I would like to say a few words.
I should have been a prime suspect in the murder of two women.
I was in the vicinity around two o'clock in the morning, I had no alibi and I knew of them.
I never made a statement because the policeman, who's name I cannot remember, who was dealing with the case, "had just gone off duty", every time I rang.
Eventually, the police arrested someone with 'below average' intelligenge, (I used to work with him). His parents' lives and house were trashed.
He, and his family were relocated, after the real perpetrator raped a taxi driver and he confessed to the two previous murders.
Ps DNA testing works on redundant DNA and on strings of it and any competent statitician should rip it to pieces.
I could have been hanged twenty years ago
Aaldtimer
09-Jan-08, 20:43
Could you enlighten me with a name..I am obviously getting it wrong. I was under the impression that a certain russian was executed not long back maybe 2-3 yrs...I will have to go to do my homework.
From Wikipaedia:-
Andrei Romanovich Chikatilo nicknamed the Butcher of Rostov and 'The Red Ripper.' He was convicted of the murder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder) of 52 women and children in the Russian Soviet Republic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_SFSR) between 1978 and 1990.
He was executed by a single shot in the back of the head on February 14 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/February_14), 1994 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994) after Russian president Boris Yeltsin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin) refused a last ditch appeal by Chikatilo for clemency.
The book Crime and Punishment should be read. Although writtten in the 19th century, it makes it clear that guilt will win in the end. It's overwhelming and will eventually catch up, driving the person mad as he/she tries to come to terms with what tehy've done. Killing someone guilty will not serve a purpose, but hard labour for 20 years just might make him/her re-think their actions.
Totally agree with you Valerie,
Also those who are without the capacity for guilt or remorse are mentally ill and we would surely not wish to inflict death upon them in any fair minded society.
In respect of the 'eye for an eye' argument..if someone commits the evil act of murder..do we really want to respond to that by sinking to the same depths?
Sure you can argue that it is 'legally sanctioned murder'....does that really make it any better?
If anything, it is more considered and cold blooded.
I wonder what Kenny Ritchie would have to add to this debate tonight!
gillian17
09-Jan-08, 21:19
You like seeing people killed?
Unless you have come up with a better solution?
rockchick
09-Jan-08, 21:25
As someone who has a little bit of experience in this department I would like to say a few words.
I should have been a prime suspect in the murder of two women.
I was in the vicinity around two o'clock in the morning, I had no alibi and I knew of them.
I never made a statement because the policeman, who's name I cannot remember, who was dealing with the case, "had just gone off duty", every time I rang.
Eventually, the police arrested someone with 'below average' intelligenge, (I used to work with him). His parents' lives and house were trashed.
He, and his family were relocated, after the real perpetrator raped a taxi driver and he confessed to the two previous murders.
Ps DNA testing works on redundant DNA and on strings of it and any competent statitician should rip it to pieces.
I could have been hanged twenty years ago
I understand what you are saying. However, for MY criteria (see previous message) just being in the area isn't considered to be 100% proof. But, just try to convince a jury of that under the cross-examination of a really good lawyer.
If you could be hanged just for going for a walk at 2am, then there would definitely be something wrong with the system!
You like seeing people killed?
Unless you have come up with a better solution?
A)What?
B)Solution to what?
Confused as to what you mean.
I could have been hanged twenty years ago
Not in this country gillian17 -capital punishment was abolished in 1965! :confused
gillian17
09-Jan-08, 21:42
There is something wrong with the system when I cannot make a statement as to where I was.
How many times do you hear the police say "If you know anything please contact us."
I possibly could have saved that lad, and his parent's lives from being hell.
They had to go under the Police Protection Scheme and moved to a different country.
We are going off the subject here.
I do not want to start a fresh subject about police targets etc. However, Judicary, Executive and Legaslature is the foundation of any democracy and its been sadly undermined lately.
northener
09-Jan-08, 21:54
[quote=karia;321047]
Also those who are without the capacity for guilt or remorse are mentally ill and we would surely not wish to inflict death upon them in any fair minded society.
quote]
Sorry Karia, have to disagree with you there.
I know more than a couple of extremely ruthless people who have never shown any remorse for their actions, it doesn't make them mentally ill - just very good at detaching themselves from what they are doing.
.
[quote=karia;321047]
Also those who are without the capacity for guilt or remorse are mentally ill and we would surely not wish to inflict death upon them in any fair minded society.
quote]
Sorry Karia, have to disagree with you there.
I know more than a couple of extremely ruthless people who have never shown any remorse for their actions, it doesn't make them mentally ill - just very good at detaching themselves from what they are doing.
.
Agreed my friend...that was why I added the words 'capacity for'...perhaps I should have prefaced with 'innate'.
Anyone can decline to be humane...you've read the threads!:D
The book Crime and Punishment should be read. Although writtten in the 19th century, it makes it clear that guilt will win in the end. It's overwhelming and will eventually catch up, driving the person mad as he/she tries to come to terms with what tehy've done. Killing someone guilty will not serve a purpose, but hard labour for 20 years just might make him/her re-think their actions.
and where doe,s that leave the person that,s been murdered.
just how would you feel if it were your husband/wife /child.
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 22:37
and where doe,s that leave the person that,s been murdered.
just how would you feel if it were your husband/wife /child.
Spot on.
If more hand wringing do gooders spent their time considering the victims and their families instead of those who commit crimes then maybe we wouldnt have the PC wet sop excuse for a society we have today in which those who commit the crimes are portrayed as the victims themselves !!
If someone close to me had been murdered I wouldnt only want them to hang I would want to watch them breath their last.
Spot on.
If more hand wringing do gooders spent their time considering the victims and their families instead of those who commit crimes then maybe we wouldnt have the PC wet sop excuse for a society we have today in which those who commit the crimes are portrayed as the victims themselves !!
If someone close to me had been murdered I wouldnt only want them to hang I would want to watch them breath their last.
Which brings you down to the same level as the murderer. Thankfully that's why we no longer have lynch mobs.
I'm not making any excuses for people who commit crime, but there would be far fewer of them if children were brought up in loving families, taught respect and educated properly. As it is we have a fractured society which produces messed up children and then wonder why crime is on the increase.
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 23:07
Which brings you down to the same level as the murderer. Thankfully that's why we no longer have lynch mobs.
I'm not making any excuses for people who commit crime, but there would be far fewer of them if children were brought up in loving families, taught respect and educated properly. As it is we have a fractured society which produces messed up children and then wonder why crime is on the increase.
If someone killed a loved one of mine then me wanting to watch them die for it puts me on the same level as the Murderer ??
So being a Killer and wanting Vengeance is the same thing now .. :roll:
Ridiculous.
If someone killed a loved one of mine then me wanting to watch them die for it puts me on the same level as the Murderer ??
So being a Killer and wanting Vengeance is the same thing now .. :roll:
Ridiculous.
How come?
If you seek death as an end argument then how do you differ?
If someone killed a loved one of mine then me wanting to watch them die for it puts me on the same level as the Murderer ??
So being a Killer and wanting Vengeance is the same thing now .. :roll:
Ridiculous.
Im with you CS, if one of mine were killed by someone, I would want to see them executed. How many convicted Killers recently have been let out early for Good Behaviour and with in a few week reoffend and kill some poor innocent victim, the risk that an innocent person is executed, is far out weighed now a days
Camel Spider
09-Jan-08, 23:37
How come?
If you seek death as an end argument then how do you differ?
Because Murder is the physical act of unlawfully killing someone.
If I want to watch someone who killed a relative of mine swing on the end of a rope for it, and that was the law of the land at the time then apart from the fact that I have not commited a crime that is my point of view which is not illegal.
Clear enough for you ??
Or look at it this way .. according to you Killing someone and wanting to see a Killer hang are the same thing ??
I have only two final comments on that point of view .. 1: Its ridiculous .. 2: Read number one again please.
Yoda the flump
09-Jan-08, 23:42
Which brings you down to the same level as the murderer. Thankfully that's why we no longer have lynch mobs.
I'm not making any excuses for people who commit crime, but there would be far fewer of them if children were brought up in loving families, taught respect and educated properly. As it is we have a fractured society which produces messed up children and then wonder why crime is on the increase.
Absolute rubbish, are you telling me that the young people of today do not know that mugging someone, killing somebody or robbery is wrong because of the way they were raised?
They do it because they know they will get away with it, because they will not be punished. We have taken away the responsibility for ones own actions, if a crime is committed it is because of 'society' and not because somebody willfully carried out the crime.
Highland Laddie
09-Jan-08, 23:46
How come?
If you seek death as an end argument then how do you differ?
If it was proven 100% that someone had killed one of my family
could i pull the trigger/switch
You better believe it.
od Behaviour[/B] and with in a few week reoffend and kill some poor innocent victim, the risk that an innocent person is executed, is far out weighed now a days convicted Killers recently have been let out early for Go
Indeed..how many?
You seem to know...please enlighten!:D
Yoda the flump
09-Jan-08, 23:59
Surely if one person is killed by a reoffender it is one too many.
Why do we defend the criminals rights? What about the victims rights, the families rights?
What about my rights? I have to pay for the likes of Sutcliffe, Brady and Huntley to stay at her majesties pleasure. A waste of my taxpayers money.
Rather than lock these people up hang them, they are never going to be released and are never going to be anything to society other than a burden.
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 00:23
Anyone who supports a death penalty yet is willing to accept that innocent people could be executed by mistake, is condoning murder themselves.
Killing people is wrong. If one of my loved ones was murdered, I would want the perpetrator to die too. But I'd still be wrong to want that.
[quote=Metalattakk;321201]Anyone who supports a death penalty yet is willing to accept that innocent people could be executed by mistake, is condoning murder themselves.
Killing people is wrong. If one of my loved ones was murdered, I would want the perpetrator to die too. But I'd still be wrong to want It.
Interesting views..and that shows that the issue is far from resolved....even here!
Karia
Which brings you down to the same level as the murderer. Thankfully that's why we no longer have lynch mobs.
That is an oft used statement. However, a murderer has killed an innocent victim and that could not really be compared to carrying out what would be the set punishment for the crime committed after having carried out the appropriate procedures to establish guilt.
If we set out laws and rules in our society and people choose to break them, knowing the punishment they will face, then why should we feel sorry for them?
IF we give offenders a fair and thorough trial, and can establish beyond doubt their guilt, then it hardly compares to Lynch Mob mentality.
It is a tremendously difficult subject to broach and I have never really fully committed myself to a definite opinion. I do, however, look at some of the most heinous crimes committed, particularly against defenceless children, and wonder whether the offenders are borderline sub-human. If an animal committed the offence, death would be the certain punishment. Are some of these criminals any better than animals when you get right down to it?
The one sure thing about the death penalty is that murderers never re-offend and I am sure many poor families would have been spared the ultimate grief had it been available and been commuted.
Highland Laddie
10-Jan-08, 10:33
The one sure thing about the death penalty is that murderers never re-offend and I am sure many poor families would have been spared the ultimate grief had it been available and been commuted.
Well said, agree 100%
The death penalty does not reduce crime - if it did American jails would not be so full of convicted murderers. It may briefly satisfy the desire for revenge but that desire, if carried to the lengths of wanting someone killed, is never going to be satisfied. Some say killing is not good enough, they want the criminal to suffer as the victim suffered. There would be no end to it.
Those who want CP have still not said how they can reconcile this with the number who are convicted yet later found to be innocent. The argument that if a member of your family was murdered you would want to see the killer executed can be turned around - suppose a member of your family was wrongly convicted and executed, what then? Who do you kill in revenge? It's bad enough that some people spend years in prison for crimes they did not commit.
My comment about the way children are brought up was prefaced by saying I wasn't excusing crime but it must be obvious that if children are reared without love or any moral standards, with no education or ambition so no chance of working, the chances of them turning to crime must be increased. Saddham Hussein had the most appalling childhood - unbelievable cruelty and no experience of love from anyone. That is not an excuse for his crimes but it is a possible reason.
There is also the aspect that many criminals, even murderers, do genuinely repent of what they have done, turn their lives around and are able to influence others for good.
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 11:45
A wonderfully well thought out post, Badger. If only the "hang 'em and flog 'em" brigade could explain their reasoning in such rounded terms.
Of course, the base instinct is for revenge, but surely we as a civilisation, have risen above mere base instincts? A death penalty can do no good whatsoever except satisfy, however briefly, that base instinct for vengeance.
A wonderfully well thought out post, Badger. If only the "hang 'em and flog 'em" brigade could explain their reasoning in such rounded terms.
Of course, the base instinct is for revenge, but surely we as a civilisation, have risen above mere base instincts? A death penalty can do no good whatsoever except satisfy, however briefly, that base instinct for vengeance.
I agree. Badger, you've posted what my brain was struggling -and failing -to put together!
It's impossible for most for us to have any understanding of what a person feels when a loved one -especially a child -has been murdered. We block these thoughts out because they are so unbearably painful.
I imagine that my first wish might be for revenge too, and I do think virtually everyone must feel that way - but revenge isn't necessarily justice. You often hear people say "I only want justice for X", but sometimes I think they really mean they want revenge, for themselves. It's a natural feeling, but does it make good law?
There are high profile cases where someone seems so "evil" for want for a better word, that it's easy to think they simply shouldn't be allowed to live. (That they should never, ever be freed, I would certainly agree.) At the other end of the spectrum -and these are the cases that trouble me - we see women who have been wrongly convicted and imprisoned for killing their own babies.
I truly cannot begin to imagine how they must feel -having to live with their grief for their children and the knowledge that people believe them guilty -in prison. I find that quite dreadful enough - a living hell - but how much worse if these innocent women had been executed.
I can't agree with anyone who thinks that these womens' lives - and the lives of other innocent people -would be a small price to pay for the execution of the guilty.
You're absolutely right, Angela, about the mothers and I hadn't thought of that aspect. Sadly one mother did pay with her life as an indirect result of the way she was treated. What must her husband and children feel about the man most responsible?
The famous hangman, Albert Pierrepoint, resigned after the hanging of Ruth Ellis stating that capital punishment did not deter murder and achieved nothing other than revenge.
The execution of Ruth Ellis had nothing to do with Pierrepoint’s resignation as Official Executioner, it was for no other reason than a dispute over travelling expenses.
He attended Strangeways Prison to carry out an execution and just prior to it being carried out the murderer was reprieved.
When Pierrepoint applied for his travelling expenses, which he would obviously be entitled to, he was refused them. It was because of that incident that he resigned.
Had his resignation had anything to do with Ruth Ellis being hanged I doubt he would have been at Strangeways to carry out a further execution.
Neither had his belief that hanging was not a deterrent have any bearing on it, it seems he had always believed that, but it didn't stop him carrying out over 400 executions, many of them as a result of the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi War Criminals.
At least those he hanged got a trial, which is more than can be said for any of their victims!
Of course, the base instinct is for revenge, but surely we as a civilisation, have risen above mere base instincts?
I love the use of the term "mere base instinct" to indicate that such things were totally unacceptable in a civilisation.
Love and care are also two very “base instincts” so perhaps as civilised societies we should rise above those also. It would never do for “civilised people” to want to pander to their “base instincts”, now would it!
Highland Laddie
10-Jan-08, 12:38
The death penalty does not reduce crime - if it did American jails would not be so full of convicted murderers. It may briefly satisfy the desire for revenge but that desire, if carried to the lengths of wanting someone killed, is never going to be satisfied. Some say killing is not good enough, they want the criminal to suffer as the victim suffered. There would be no end to it.
Those who want CP have still not said how they can reconcile this with the number who are convicted yet later found to be innocent. The argument that if a member of your family was murdered you would want to see the killer executed can be turned around - suppose a member of your family was wrongly convicted and executed, what then? Who do you kill in revenge? It's bad enough that some people spend years in prison for crimes they did not commit.
My comment about the way children are brought up was prefaced by saying I wasn't excusing crime but it must be obvious that if children are reared without love or any moral standards, with no education or ambition so no chance of working, the chances of them turning to crime must be increased. Saddham Hussein had the most appalling childhood - unbelievable cruelty and no experience of love from anyone. That is not an excuse for his crimes but it is a possible reason.
There is also the aspect that many criminals, even murderers, do genuinely repent of what they have done, turn their lives around and are able to influence others for good.
I said, if i saw a member of my family killed, could i pull the trigger/switch.
it's a no brainer, you bet your bottom dollar i would.
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 13:03
I love the use of the term "mere base instinct" to indicate that such things were totally unacceptable in a civilisation.
Love and care are also two very “base instincts” so perhaps as civilised societies we should rise above those also. It would never do for “civilised people” to want to pander to their “base instincts”, now would it!
I love the way you can lump "love" and "care" in alongside "murderous revenge", and consider them as equals.
Camel Spider
10-Jan-08, 14:22
I am amused at how some posters are quite happy to maintain that people who advocate the Death Penalty are somehow the same as those who kill. Would I want revenge on someone who had taken something irreplacable and valauble to me ?? .. darn tooting I would. Why would I want that ?? .. purely so that they could no longer enjoy the things they denied to someone else, such as breathing and the possibilities of the future. Those who kill take all that a person has or will ever have and taking the same from them seems a fair trade from me.
I would suggest reading a couple of books by John Douglas the man who pioneered pyscholigical profiling and was the inspiration for the Jack Crawford character in the Silence of the Lambs. He knows a lot more about murderers than any of us. "Journey into Darkness" would be a good start, I used to feel the Death Penalty was unnecessary but after reading what exposure to these people has done to him and more importantly the effect to the family of the deceased certainly changed my mind.
In society today it seems that wanting someone to be punished and/or suffer for what they have done makes you a bad person. You cant possibly want revenge for a wrong done to you as that makes us somehow less human. Sorry but thats utter twaddle and I for one make no apologies for wanting to see people punished for their actions. How many murderers have recently been released and killed again ??
As for wanting Revenge against those who wrong you .. nothing wrong with that as I find nothing inspires Forgiveness like it.
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 16:17
While I understand fully your viewpoint, Camel Spider, can you counter Badger's argument below?
The argument that if a member of your family was murdered you would want to see the killer executed can be turned around - suppose a member of your family was wrongly convicted and executed, what then? Who do you kill in revenge? It's bad enough that some people spend years in prison for crimes they did not commit.
Camel Spider
10-Jan-08, 17:04
While I understand fully your viewpoint, Camel Spider, can you counter Badger's argument below?
Yup.
If someone murdered a relative then like I say .. Hang em and let me watch. They have deliberatly gone out and killed, been caught, tried by a jury of their peers and executed under the law of the land. They had no right to do so and no authority.
Why would I go out and want to kill somone who in the course of their duties had either physically executed or passed a conviction on someone who based on the evidence presented executed at trial under the law of the land ?? .. No. Would I be upset and angry ?? .. of course. Would I go looking for the Executor and Jury who had passed the sentence ?? .. No.
The difference is that the first killed because they wanted to or by course of their actions, the second is that the Hangman and Jury are only doing their civic duty and passing a sentence that had been reached on the evidence presented. Badgers post seems to assume that anyone with my point of view is somehow bloodthirsty and out for revenge no matter what the situation.
Killing someone of your own back and at your own will is a completely different thing to passing or carrying out a sentence reached under the law.
Surely if one person is killed by a reoffender it is one too many.
Why do we defend the criminals rights? What about the victims rights, the families rights?
What about my rights? I have to pay for the likes of Sutcliffe, Brady and Huntley to stay at her majesties pleasure. A waste of my taxpayers money.
Rather than lock these people up hang them, they are never going to be released and are never going to be anything to society other than a burden.
my thoughts exactly. the way criminals human rights are defended makes my blood boil, what about the right of the real innocents, who spent their last moments on this earth in agony and no doibt mental terror.
living is to good for these people, how can the live and breath the same air as the people whos lives they turned upside down when they took their loved ones lives away.
as for hanging someone that hurt my kids.... theyd have to get to them before i did!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Camel Spider
10-Jan-08, 17:10
For those against the Death Penalty ..
A murderer is released from prison and kills again. In this case the Death Penalty would have saved an innocent life.
I would love to hear some arguments justifying not passing the Death Sentence after the first conviction.
my thoughts exactly. the way criminals human rights are defended makes my blood boil, what about the right of the real innocents, who spent their last moments on this earth in agony and no doibt mental terror.
living is to good for these people, how can the live and breath the same air as the people whos lives they turned upside down when they took their loved ones lives away.
as for hanging someone that hurt my kids.... theyd have to get to them before i did!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My thought`s exactly ! jan x
Where there is no possibility of doubt of a heinous crime - such as premediated murder or rape or child predation - and there is 100% certainty of the guilt of the offender, then I would support the death penalty.
If there is even 1% possibility of doubt, then no. It's not worth the chance of being wrong. Better the taxpayers support an innocent person for 40 years in jail than end the life of the wrong person.
I think you have a good point. Scots law (thankfully) has an option of not proven as well as guilty or not guilty. So if we did go for capital punishment at least the jurors have an alternative option if they cannot be certain of guilt or lack of it.
There is also the aspect that many criminals, even murderers, do genuinely repent of what they have done, turn their lives around and are able to influence others for good.
Is it much comfort for a mother (and you seem to care about mothers) to know that her child was murdered, but the murderer is really, really sorry about it?
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 20:19
For those against the Death Penalty ..
A murderer is released from prison and kills again. In this case the Death Penalty would have saved an innocent life.
I would love to hear some arguments justifying not passing the Death Sentence after the first conviction.
Easy - lock them up for the rest of their lives. If they're wrongly convicted, at least there is a chance of justice.
Easy - lock them up for the rest of their lives. If they're wrongly convicted, at least there is a chance of justice.
OK. Will YOU pay to keep every Tom, Dick and FRED in prison until we are satisfied that they are merely victims themselves?
Picture yourself telling someone that their son cannot have life-saving treatment because we have to keep Rose West warm and fed. Similarly, how many law abiding and innocent people cannot access drugs, procedures etc because we spend a fortune locking up and tending to every whim of offenders, who, quite frankly, are nothing more than scum?
Crikey, these prisoners can even sue US now, for the fact that prison life is boring!!
I had a vision of you as a tough, no nonsense metal man. Two scrapes of rust off the surface and a wimpy Liberal appears. What next? Veggie Spiritualism?
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 22:06
OK. Will YOU pay to keep every Tom, Dick and FRED in prison until we are satisfied that they are merely victims themselves?
Picture yourself telling someone that their son cannot have life-saving treatment because we have to keep Rose West warm and fed. Similarly, how many law abiding and innocent people cannot access drugs, procedures etc because we spend a fortune locking up and tending to every whim of offenders, who, quite frankly, are nothing more than scum?
That's a bit sensationalist is it not? Funding for prisoners and prisons comes out of a different budget than the NHS, as well you know. Spending more on one does not equate to spending less on the other. The refusal of treatment for Little Johnny could not possibly be laid at the feet of those who refuse to kill murderers.
And yes, I'd happily pay extra to keep convicted murderers locked up for the rest of their lives, if the alternative was to kill innocent convicted murderers.
I had a vision of you as a tough, no nonsense metal man. Two scrapes of rust off the surface and a wimpy Liberal appears. What next? Veggie Spiritualism?
LOL! Standing up for what you believe in, in the face of overwhelming indifference doesn't make me a Spiritualist Veggie-crunching Lily-Liberal!
As for tough and no nonsense? Nah, not really. Big softie, with plenty room for nonsense, more like. Metal to the core, though. \m/ ;)
Yoda the flump
10-Jan-08, 22:16
That's a bit sensationalist is it not? Funding for prisoners and prisons comes out of a different budget than the NHS, as well you know. Spending more on one does not equate to spending less on the other. The refusal of treatment for Little Johnny could not possibly be laid at the feet of those who refuse to kill murderers.
And yes, I'd happily pay extra to keep convicted murderers locked up for the rest of their lives, if the alternative was to kill innocent convicted murderers.
So your taxes, my taxes and those paid by everyone else do not go to the government who then set the NHS budget, the prison budget, etc.?
If we are spending money to keep murdering scum in prison then obviously the government cannot allocate that money to other worthier causes.
Whilst I am not advocating that all murders be hung there are certainly some that are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt that should swing.
As previously mentioned Huntley, Brady, Sutcliffe and the likes of Rose West are never going to be released and are 100% guilty as charged - why should I pay for the likes of these to 'people' to exist? What are they ever going to contribute to society?
Metalattakk
10-Jan-08, 22:17
There are plenty more who don't contribute to society. Are they to be dealt with in the same way too?
Yoda the flump
10-Jan-08, 22:43
There are plenty more who don't contribute to society. Are they to be dealt with in the same way too?
Have they murdered anyone?
If your argument against capital punishment is that innocent people might be put to death then how can it apply in their cases? They are 100% guilty of abominable crimes, why should they have the right to life? A right they so callously took from others.
That's a bit sensationalist is it not?
I don't think so. You have run a few people down for being members of "The Tufty Club" and then reveal yourself to be a big "Jessie's Blouse"
Metal to the core? Oh aye, the Mercury is well melted.
Tufty Club meeting is next Wednesday. I assume you will be there?
psyberyeti
10-Jan-08, 23:08
Yes, when caught red handed, caught on video. Don't waste valuable time, money and resources on a trial.:cool:
Metalattakk
11-Jan-08, 00:18
They are 100% guilty of abominable crimes, why should they have the right to life? A right they so callously took from others.
Are they 100% guilty of the crime though. I keep going back to Badger's scenario, where your brother/sister or son/daughter is found guilty and executed, and then later found innocent. I cannot, simply cannot believe that some people would happily accept that scenario, just so they could see abhorrent, sub-human murderers killed.
I don't think so. You have run a few people down for being members of "The Tufty Club" and then reveal yourself to be a big "Jessie's Blouse"
A "Jessie's Blouse" because I don't agree with killing possibly innocent people?
Metal to the core? Oh aye, the Mercury is well melted.
Tufty Club meeting is next Wednesday. I assume you will be there?
Aye, I will. Do you want a lift again, like last week? [lol]
Yoda the flump
11-Jan-08, 00:31
Are they 100% guilty of the crime though. I keep going back to Badger's scenario, where your brother/sister or son/daughter is found guilty and executed, and then later found innocent. I cannot, simply cannot believe that some people would happily accept that scenario, just so they could see abhorrent, sub-human murderers killed.
Brady innocent? In some cases there can be no doubt that they are responsible, what if they are caught on camera or as in this case recorded what they did to their victims. Why should they live?
In these cases hang them. How can you dispute this evidence?
Highland Laddie
11-Jan-08, 00:36
It has been repeated several times in this thread, if their is 100% proof of guilt, witnesses, video etc etc, then what is the point of putting them up for life in a warm dry and comfy cell with three square meals a day.
we have kids living on the streets that the money could be put toward
to try to help those who could be worth trying to help to give a future to.
I should give up on this Metal - some people are never going to come out of the dark ages however logical your arguments.
Maybe we should hang them all and just give out posthumous pardons to those found to be innocent but many years later.:roll:
rob murray
11-Jan-08, 14:45
I don't think so. You have run a few people down for being members of "The Tufty Club" and then reveal yourself to be a big "Jessie's Blouse"
Metal to the core? Oh aye, the Mercury is well melted.
Tufty Club meeting is next Wednesday. I assume you will be there?
Unbelievable eh !!!! I have sent yer posting to Kenny Ritchie pal, expect a visit and a good smack !!!!
rob murray
11-Jan-08, 14:56
When things go wrong.
Though all methods of execution can be botched, electrocutions go wrong frequently and dramatically, in part because the equipment is old and hard to repair. At least 5 have gone awry since 1983. A particularly appalling instance of this took place on the 4th of May 1990, in the case of Jesse Joseph Tafero in Florida. According to witnesses, when the executioner flipped the switch, flames and smoke came out of Tafero's head, which was covered by a mask and cap. Twelve-inch blue and orange flames sprouted from both sides of the mask. The power was stopped, and Tafero took several deep breaths. The superintendent ordered the executioner to halt the current, then try it again. And again.
Apparently a synthetic sponge, soaked in brine, had been substituted for the natural one applied to Tafero's head. This reduced the flow of electricity to as little as 100 volts, and ended up torturing the prisoner to death. According to the state prison medical director, Frank Kligo, who attended, it was "less than aesthetically attractive."
Another electrocution in Florida went seriously wrong in 1997 when Pedro Medina was executed on the 25th of March. Witnesses saw a blue and orange flame shoot 6-10 inches out of the helmet covering Medina's head. It burned for about 10 seconds, filling the chamber with acrid smoke and the smell of burning flesh.
An investigation by prison officials blamed the flare-up on a corroded brass screen used in the helmet.
Michael Morse and Jay Wiechart, both experienced in electric chair design and operation, blamed the malfunction on a dry sponge used in conjunction with a wet sponge in the helmet.
Electrocution was challenged through the Florida courts, by death row inmate Leo Jones as a "cruel and unusual" punishment, something which is banned under the American constitution.
However, a Florida Supreme Court hearing ruled by 3 to 1 on the 21st of October 1997, that its use did not constitute cruel or unusual punishment.
Yet another electrocution in Florida seemed to be botched in 1999 when Allen Lee "Tiny" Davis was executed for murder on the 9th of July.
Blood appeared to ooze from Davis' nose and mouth as he was hit with 2,300 volts at 7:10 a.m. But the governor's office said it was simply a nosebleed. The official photographs of the execution seem to bear this out. (These photographs can be viewed on the Florida Supreme Court website and are not suitable for those of a squeamish disposition.)
By the time Davis was pronounced dead 5 minutes later, there was blood on the collar of his white shirt, and the blood on his chest had spread to about the size of a dinner plate, even oozing through the buckle holes on the leather chest strap holding him to the chair.
"Nothing went wrong," said Cory Tilley, a spokesman for Gov. Jeb Bush. "The chair functioned as it was designed to function and we're comfortable that that worked." Tilley said that despite how things seemed to witnesses of the execution, there was no blood from the mouth or chest.
"The only source of blood was from the nose. He had a nosebleed. Why that was will be in the autopsy." Tilley said there was some speculation the nosebleed was caused by Davis' high blood pressure.
The photographs of the execution showed "distinct signs of pain," according to Dr. Donald Price, a neurophysiologist who was commenting upon Davis' half-shut eyes, scrunched-up nose and bruises on his face.
A physicist who specialises in the effects of electricity testified that it was possible for an inmate to remain conscious 15 to 30 seconds into the execution.
"It's my opinion that death is not instantaneous and make take several minutes," said Dr. John Wikswo of Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee.
The autopsy report said Davis had "several predisposing risk factors" for nosebleeds, including hypertension and arthritis that required him to take blood-thinners.
http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/florida.jpgFlorida had a new oak chair built in 1998 to replace the original one built in 1923.(see picture) Attorneys acting for Allen Lee Davis claimed that state Department of Corrections documents show the chair may be operating with "obsolete breakers" and outdated electrical components that it was proposed to replace in April 1999. Florida decided not to install the new parts, including leg and head electrodes, apparently due to the $265,000 cost.
j4bberw0ck
11-Jan-08, 15:24
A viewpoint:
If you agree with capital punishment, since we can't bring back someone wrongly executed, then you explicitly and unequivocably declare your faith in the accuracy of the State's legal system.
Since you do, then if your son / daughter / father / mother / wife / husband is accused of murder and sentenced to death, you may be devastated, but you acknowledge their guilt and the need for their execution. You stand aside while they're taken away. Even if you believe them to be innocent. Even, in fact, if you believe you can show there ARE innocent - since you have faith in the legal system.
Of course, if you wouldn't want things to be that way, you just conclude that capital punishment is wrong, not necessarily for any high-flown moral reason, but just because you think people should have a chance to prove their innocence.
Dr Crippen, hanged in, what? 1910? for murdering his wife was wrongly hanged, it seems. DNA tests on tissue remains from the victim show that the victim couldn't possibly have been his wife. He protested at the execution "I am an innocent man, and one day, the means will be found to present evidence which proves my innocence". Sorry, Doc. 100 years too late.......
Right, back to OT..... :D
A "Jessie's Blouse" because I don't agree with killing possibly innocent people?
No, that comment was made because you scoffed at others for not being "tough" enough to deal with certain aspects of life.
Unbelievable eh !!!! I have sent yer posting to Kenny Ritchie pal, expect a visit and a good smack !!!!
I don't see what Kenny Ritchie has to do with Metalattakk?
When things go wrong.
Though all methods of execution can be botched, electrocutions go wrong frequently and dramatically, in part because the equipment is old and hard to repair. At least 5 have gone awry since 1983. A particularly appalling instance of this took place on the 4th of May 1990, in the case of Jesse Joseph Tafero in Florida. According to witnesses, when the executioner flipped the switch, flames and smoke came out of Tafero's head, which was covered by a mask and cap. Twelve-inch blue and orange flames sprouted from both sides of the mask. The power was stopped, and Tafero took several deep breaths. The superintendent ordered the executioner to halt the current, then try it again. And again.
Apparently a synthetic sponge, soaked in brine, had been substituted for the natural one applied to Tafero's head. This reduced the flow of electricity to as little as 100 volts, and ended up torturing the prisoner to death. According to the state prison medical director, Frank Kligo, who attended, it was "less than aesthetically attractive."
Another electrocution in Florida went seriously wrong in 1997 when Pedro Medina was executed on the 25th of March. Witnesses saw a blue and orange flame shoot 6-10 inches out of the helmet covering Medina's head. It burned for about 10 seconds, filling the chamber with acrid smoke and the smell of burning flesh.
An investigation by prison officials blamed the flare-up on a corroded brass screen used in the helmet.
Michael Morse and Jay Wiechart, both experienced in electric chair design and operation, blamed the malfunction on a dry sponge used in conjunction with a wet sponge in the helmet.
Electrocution was challenged through the Florida courts, by death row inmate Leo Jones as a "cruel and unusual" punishment, something which is banned under the American constitution.
However, a Florida Supreme Court hearing ruled by 3 to 1 on the 21st of October 1997, that its use did not constitute cruel or unusual punishment.
Yet another electrocution in Florida seemed to be botched in 1999 when Allen Lee "Tiny" Davis was executed for murder on the 9th of July.
Blood appeared to ooze from Davis' nose and mouth as he was hit with 2,300 volts at 7:10 a.m. But the governor's office said it was simply a nosebleed. The official photographs of the execution seem to bear this out. (These photographs can be viewed on the Florida Supreme Court website and are not suitable for those of a squeamish disposition.)
By the time Davis was pronounced dead 5 minutes later, there was blood on the collar of his white shirt, and the blood on his chest had spread to about the size of a dinner plate, even oozing through the buckle holes on the leather chest strap holding him to the chair.
"Nothing went wrong," said Cory Tilley, a spokesman for Gov. Jeb Bush. "The chair functioned as it was designed to function and we're comfortable that that worked." Tilley said that despite how things seemed to witnesses of the execution, there was no blood from the mouth or chest.
"The only source of blood was from the nose. He had a nosebleed. Why that was will be in the autopsy." Tilley said there was some speculation the nosebleed was caused by Davis' high blood pressure.
The photographs of the execution showed "distinct signs of pain," according to Dr. Donald Price, a neurophysiologist who was commenting upon Davis' half-shut eyes, scrunched-up nose and bruises on his face.
A physicist who specialises in the effects of electricity testified that it was possible for an inmate to remain conscious 15 to 30 seconds into the execution.
"It's my opinion that death is not instantaneous and make take several minutes," said Dr. John Wikswo of Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee.
The autopsy report said Davis had "several predisposing risk factors" for nosebleeds, including hypertension and arthritis that required him to take blood-thinners.
http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/florida.jpgFlorida had a new oak chair built in 1998 to replace the original one built in 1923.(see picture) Attorneys acting for Allen Lee Davis claimed that state Department of Corrections documents show the chair may be operating with "obsolete breakers" and outdated electrical components that it was proposed to replace in April 1999. Florida decided not to install the new parts, including leg and head electrodes, apparently due to the $265,000 cost.
Were the prisoners involved actually innocent of the alleged crimes?
If not, did any of the prisoners give any consideration as to how long it took THEIR victims to die?
I don't know if you have anyone you love, Scorrie. But if you do, perhaps you would like to read j4bberw0ck's post (and mine earlier on similar lines) and then tell us - if someone you loved was wrongly convicted of murder and suffered the fate (death by torture) which you seem to approve, then that's all right is it? No problem. After all, as you admit, you don't know if the prisoners involved were innocent. It's no good saying "if not .... " .
If even one of those men was innocent, it's too late but guilty or innocent, no-one deserves to die like that and no civilised country should allow it.
Dr Crippen, hanged in, what? 1910? for murdering his wife was wrongly hanged, it seems. DNA tests on tissue remains from the victim show that the victim couldn't possibly have been his wife. He protested at the execution "I am an innocent man, and one day, the means will be found to present evidence which proves my innocence". Sorry, Doc. 100 years too late.......
The would still be the fact that there was a mutilated corpse found under his basement whether it was his wife or not?
Metalattakk
11-Jan-08, 16:42
I don't see what Kenny Ritchie has to do with Metalattakk?
I don't see what any of this has to do with Metalattakk. I am not the subject of this thread.
rob murray
11-Jan-08, 17:06
I don't see what any of this has to do with Metalattakk. I am not the subject of this thread.
Oh sorry, I thought you were Metalattack the reknown cannibal !!
j4bberw0ck
11-Jan-08, 17:07
The would still be the fact that there was a mutilated corpse found under his basement whether it was his wife or not?
Yes. He was charged with, and found guilty of, murdering his wife. The presence or otherwise of a wrongly identified corpse is another matter entirely. It may be he did indeed murder the anonymous person, but not having been charged, and certainly not having been found guilty, he's innocent. Capisce? That's the way the law works (except for motoring offences [evil] ).
j4bberw0ck
11-Jan-08, 17:13
I don't know if you have anyone you love, Scorrie
Nice point, badger. Scorrie misses the point that there is such a thing as stooping to the level of the lowest common denominator. Also that the law is supposed to be about justice and possibly rehabilitation, not revenge of sufficient nastiness to match or exceed the nastiness of the original crime.
The electric chair is one of the most barbarous methods of execution. I suspect even being beheaded by one of our Islamic terrorist chums isn't as purely agonising though I intend never to have to find out.
There, see! It's a deterrent! It works!
Woops..... :lol::lol:
Capital punishment is almost a law of nature. If someone attempts to kill you or kills one of your family then your reaction (natural one, mind) is to kill them. In a social environment we elect groups to effect the law on our behalf - this prevents long running feudal systems. So, if someone commits a capital crime - a capital punishment should be there for enforcement. Quid pro quo
rob murray
11-Jan-08, 17:26
Capital punishment is almost a law of nature. If someone attempts to kill you or kills one of your family then your reaction (natural one, mind) is to kill them. In a social environment we elect groups to effect the law on our behalf - this prevents long running feudal systems. So, if someone commits a capital crime - a capital punishment should be there for enforcement. Quid pro quo
And televised live as well, surely we all have a right to witness this quid pro quo justice being done in our names. Executions could be staged live at Premier football grounds and the imaging rights sold to pay for the costs of the executions, why profits can be made eh. The ultimate reality tv show eh Death at 3, no Ive one better, how about "You The Jury Decide" : Using interactive key pads and phone ins, viewers can vote on sentences and prefered methods of execution..red for hanging blue for gas, green for electric chair, yellow for stoning..brilliant eh, just think how many revenue streams can be leveraged off the core product : think of the advertising revenue when you take a 2 minute break immediatly prior to the actual execution, fantastic, yes a great concept.
Capital punishment can never be fairly applied until we have a 100% foolproof lie detector whatever the circumstances. Too many mistakes have been made.
Pay for murderers to stay in jail? well we already do - don't we, as mentioned earlier my own modest opinion is that these kind of people should spend the rest of their life in prison, with no hope of parole.
Easy number being in Prison? I don't think they enjoy it that much, last year 18 lifers killed themselves whilst in nick; http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article3300974.ece (http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article3300974.ece)
One in five men in prison, and nearly 40 per cent of women, have attempted suicide at some time.. http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/subsection.asp?id=327 (http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/subsection.asp?id=327)
And the analysis of suicide rates in England and Wales from 1978 to 2003 that 1,312 committed suicide during the period studied. It found that men are 5.1 times more likely to kill themselves in prison than in the general population. http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/subsection.asp?id=328 (http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/subsection.asp?id=328) and in Scotland; over 600 people commit suicide in Scotland each year, and over 7,000 people are treated in hospital each year following episodes of non-fatal deliberate self-harm.. and in Northern Ireland, figures place the suicide rate at almost one person a day.
Fair enough these are not all murderers, but it must go some considerable way to showing their reaction to the situation they find themselves in? the fear that 'lifers' have of dying in jail; Prison populations are experiencing rapid increases and many more offenders are dying in prison. This study investigated key variables associated with death anxiety among a group of aging prisoners. For this research, 102 respondents residing in a maximum security prison with a mean age of 59 completed Templer's Death Anxiety Scale. A regression analysis showed that age, inmate social supports, and a number of health related variables were important predictors of death fear. The findings revealed that fear of death is slightly higher among older prisoners than for similar age groups in the community. Qualitative information based on personal narratives found that some inmates see death as an escape,[my underlining] while others expressed fears of dying in prison or the stigma associated with imprisonment; http://www.phrn.nhs.uk/library/record/print.aspx?PublicationID=1125 (http://www.phrn.nhs.uk/library/record/print.aspx?PublicationID=1125)
So bottom line; let 'em rot in jail and throw away the key..
I don't know if you have anyone you love, Scorrie. But if you do, perhaps you would like to read j4bberw0ck's post (and mine earlier on similar lines) and then tell us - if someone you loved was wrongly convicted of murder and suffered the fate (death by torture) which you seem to approve, then that's all right is it? No problem. After all, as you admit, you don't know if the prisoners involved were innocent. It's no good saying "if not .... " .
If even one of those men was innocent, it's too late but guilty or innocent, no-one deserves to die like that and no civilised country should allow it.
A cheap shot to start with!!
I am married with two kids. Is that good enough for me to have a say in this argument?
If you read my original post, you will see that I am undecided on the use of the death penalty. I merely make observations on the pros and cons. It is far easier to just say that killing is wrong, I like a challenge and try to present some points looking from the side of the victims.
I always look at the scenario of an innocent person accused of murder and wonder how on Earth someone would end up in that position purely by chance? It must be extremely long odds against a person going out on a particular day and ending up as the suspect in a murder case.
If one of my family committed the crime, without any grain of doubt, then I would expect them to face the statutory punishment for that crime.
I am not talking about torturing anyone. I merely asked whether any murderers give any thought to the way their victims died. I happen to have less sympathy for murderers than I have for innocent people. If that makes me inhuman, then so be it.
I do take exception to the notion that I do not have anyone to love though. That reeks of desperation to run someone else's opinion down.
I don't see what any of this has to do with Metalattakk. I am not the subject of this thread.
Well you are posting on the thread. I didn't pull your name in off the street. I feel an off-topic rant coming on here. I thought you liked a bit of banter, maybe it is only a one-way deal though?
Camel Spider
11-Jan-08, 19:43
Easy - lock them up for the rest of their lives. If they're wrongly convicted, at least there is a chance of justice.
Didnt answer my point.
My question was that a person had been killed by a convicted murderer released from prison, an innocent life had been lost and I wanted someone against the Death Penalty to justify their stance in allowing this to happen. All you did was suggest a sentencing option.
You asked me to answer Badgers point which I did, you have conveniently ignored the point in answering my question. Could this be because this has already happened and it is patently obvious to anyone that an innocent life could have been saved if only we had the stomach to get rid of those who have shown they are basically the vermin of society. The argument that you cant introduce the Death Penalty because they could be innocent shows an alarming naivete about the prison population, basically assuming that convicted criminals are nnocent as that suits your argument.
As for the point you did make in putting people in prison for the rest of their life .. err no sorry cant do that today I am afraid as the do gooders would say that would be against their Human Rights. You know the types .. those who care not a jot about the victims of crime as they are too busy making themselves feel important in defending Murderers, Rapist, Child Abusers etc etc. Anyway I dont want to pay for criminals to stay warm and eat while there are innocent homeless people on the street, I would rather slot the criminals and use the money to pay for the homeless to get some help. I would also harvest the criminals organs for use so that maybe they can help someone to live.
I have noticed that those against the Death Penalty use the argument that if you want revenge by using the Death Penalty against those who have killed a relative or friend you are somehow at the same level as the killer .. I personally dont accept that, I explained why in a previous post.
Lets look at it this way .. I would suggest that those against the Death Penalty are at the same level as the Murderer, they both have little or no consideration in the feelings for the victim and their family by putting the rights of a killer above those of the innocent.
And televised live as well, surely we all have a right to witness this quid pro quo justice being done in our names. Executions could be staged live at Premier football grounds and the imaging rights sold to pay for the costs of the executions, why profits can be made eh. The ultimate reality tv show eh Death at 3, no Ive one better, how about "You The Jury Decide" : Using interactive key pads and phone ins, viewers can vote on sentences and prefered methods of execution..red for hanging blue for gas, green for electric chair, yellow for stoning..brilliant eh, just think how many revenue streams can be leveraged off the core product : think of the advertising revenue when you take a 2 minute break immediatly prior to the actual execution, fantastic, yes a great concept.
Ah yes, Rob. Can see it now - "audience choose your selection from the key pads now." Then a nice colourful bar chart displaying the choices. Perhaps there could be some nice animated graphics: the 'electric chair' represented by a lightning strike up to the voting level; gas chamber as a waft of gas up to its level; hanging could be a drop from its level to the base line and beheading could be a bar filling up with a nice red. Lovely. Reminds me of France and the guillotine.... not that I was there, mind! ;)
I read somewhere that the EU requires that its members to stop their capitol punishments for EU entry. Therefore justice is linked to economic pressures for EU membership. So if we are to have EU membership then we will have to leave the EU. (I can hear the cheers now)
Personally, I have changed my views towards capitol punishment. The number of miscarriages of justice have been staggering lately and any one of them would have seen the guilty sent to the gallows, for which there is no return trip. However, I do think life should mean life, and lifeimprisonment is enough punishment for anyone.
j4bberw0ck
11-Jan-08, 20:03
A cheap shot to start with!!
Scorrie, you're famously over-sensitive, wanting apologies from all manner of people for sins real or imagined in the past - I think if you take a deep breath, repeat "I shall be rational" three times, and re-read badger's post you'll perhaps see it as I saw it, which is not as an intended "dig".
Yoda the flump
11-Jan-08, 21:07
So what if they are guilty - the Moors Murderers taped their victims as they tortured them. Why, when they are guilty, and in their case the were should they not face the death penalty.
How about the perpetrators of the crimes in Rwanda? Should they not face the death penalty? Are they any better than those hanged at Nuremburg sixty years ago?
You have to admit that in some cases of murder where there is no possibility, and I am not just talking about beyond reasonable doubt that those convicted are guilty. Why should they not die for the crimes they have committed.
Yes. He was charged with, and found guilty of, murdering his wife. The presence or otherwise of a wrongly identified corpse is another matter entirely. It may be he did indeed murder the anonymous person, but not having been charged, and certainly not having been found guilty, he's innocent. Capisce? That's the way the law works (except for motoring offences [evil] ).Whoever the person was the fact remains that he was proven guilty of the murder of that person.
I'm sitting on the fence on this one - part of me agrees that if you take a life, you should lose a life, but the rest of me is with badger - too many innocent people have been convicted for it to be the right thing.
I agree. I have often thought a life for a life but what if they didnt do it.
What I find hard is that people that do serious crimes get less time than the ones that do less serious crimes.
I agree. I have often thought a life for a life but what if they didnt do it.
What I find hard is that people that do serious crimes get less time than the ones that do less serious crimes.True, if one innocent dies then the whole system is wrong and the death penalty should never rear it's head again. On your point of serious crime, an armed robber or embezzler is most likely to receive a harsher prison sentence than a murderer.
Scorrie, you're famously over-sensitive, wanting apologies from all manner of people for sins real or imagined in the past - I think if you take a deep breath, repeat "I shall be rational" three times, and re-read badger's post you'll perhaps see it as I saw it, which is not as an intended "dig".
How famously? Are we talking org famous, county famous, country famous?
Why would I see anything as you saw it? We are different people.
I could tell you to take a deep breath and re-read MY posts. That would be patronising and rude though. It is one of the most curious habits that people have, when having read something that disagrees with their thinking, stating that people have "missed the point" and urging them to read the post again. The reality is simply that people have read the post, didn't miss the point but just happened to disagree with it. Not long after, the "Dark Ages", "Your wasting your time", "Get a life", "You are sad and lonely" jibes can often surface. I see no need for that and I don't think it over-sensitive to expect people to refrain from suggesting that you have not a soul in the world to give love to.
No doubt, if I had made the remark, there would be many queuing up to condemn me.
How famously? Are we talking org famous, county famous, country famous?
Why would I see anything as you saw it? We are different people.
I could tell you to take a deep breath and re-read MY posts. That would be patronising and rude though. It is one of the most curious habits that people have, when having read something that disagrees with their thinking, stating that people have "missed the point" and urging them to read the post again. The reality is simply that people have read the post, didn't miss the point but just happened to disagree with it. Not long after, the "Dark Ages", "Your wasting your time", "Get a life", "You are sad and lonely" jibes can often surface. I see no need for that and I don't think it over-sensitive to expect people to refrain from suggesting that you have not a soul in the world to give love to.
No doubt, if I had made the remark, there would be many queuing up to condemn me.You are being held up to ridicule the same as Fred was. Wait for the insult about googling, that is a favourite and one accusation that will surely be levelled your way.
j4bberw0ck
12-Jan-08, 09:36
I don't think it over-sensitive to expect people to refrain from suggesting that you have not a soul in the world to give love to.
Errrrr. are you familiar with the abbreviation "Q.E.D.", Scorrie? I think you just proved my point by enlarging on it. Badger didn't, as I see it, suggest you "have no one to love", chucky egg....... just that if you cast, in your imagination, someone you love or who loves you, as someone who's receiving a death sentence, then it gives another perspective.
No doubt, if I had made the remark, there would be many queuing up to condemn me.
"Poor little me........" syndrome again. Now, do settle down and stop getting restive.
You are being held up to ridicule the same as Fred was. Wait for the insult about googling, that is a favourite and one accusation that will surely be levelled your way.
I think you and I got off on the wrong foot, TBH, TBH, with some of your more fanciful rantings. I don't think I'm alone in considering certain people to be over-sensitive. How about you quit trying to perpetuate something that would have slid unnoticed off most people's backs and get back to dreaming of the day when there were no white settlers and other things that came here to disrupt your Caithnessian Paradise? :roll::roll:
Or failing that, get back to the point of the thread?
I have been asked by my son to put the following to you all. He would appreciate your views and comments for a report he is doing ( he is 15 so please no heavy duty views) I think he just wants as wide a number of opinions as possible
My thanks
May I remind everyone....
Thing is Rheghead, it's not a subject people hold 'milk sop' views about.
It's a life and death matter and (rightly) evokes strong responses.
Perhaps that is a vital thing for this lad to understand as he is writing a report about it and not simply indulging a fleeting curiosity.
You can't really ask people to give their views ..but only a little bit!
I am sure that Veekay will edit out anything she deems unhelpful and unduly extreme.
NickInTheNorth
12-Jan-08, 14:40
Brady innocent? In some cases there can be no doubt that they are responsible, what if they are caught on camera or as in this case recorded what they did to their victims. Why should they live?
In these cases hang them. How can you dispute this evidence?
Because video evidence can so very easily be faked! And sound recordings even more easily!
There is no way to prove with a 100% degree of accuracy that something happened.
That is why it is the only standard of proof I would accept.
Many people are worried about the cost of keeping people in prison. Should we therefore execute all prisoners? Many repeat offenders actually serve longer than folk sentenced to life only the total is made up of many short sentences. What amount of time are we prepared to pay for? Should anyone serving longer than say 12 years in total be executed? Cost is a ridiculous justification for state killing of the guilty. The motive behind such calls is quite simply vengeance.
I am a great believer in taking wisdom from where ever I find it. In this case from Gandalf the Grey in The Lord of the Rings:
Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them,Until we can dole out life to those that deserve it, I suggest we should not be so keen to dole out death!
May I remind everyone....
Thanks for this Rheghead but I did realise that the topic was going to stir up a good many heated views - and rightly so I think - So I have been taking a look first. To be honest I think it is important that he does realise that this is a hugely controversial subject and that people do have a lot to say about the subject so it was silly of me to say anything about his age and to worry about what was going to be said.
I sometimes feel that life and death are not taken seriously enough by some youngsters what with all the shooting and killing games on xbox nintendo and all the others and witht he news programmes being so graphic so to see so many people having such strong feelings is probably good for him and any other youngster reading what is being said.
Thanks you to everyone who has taken the time to post it has been of great help
I don't think I'm alone in considering certain people to be over-sensitive.
OK, where is your evidence? Either Pee or get off the pot. Prove it or shut it.
Where is badger by the way? It seems that they have scuttled back to their Sett and left a proxy mouthpiece to do the shouting for them.
ps Is Rheghead moderating the boards now? Sure seems that way.
ps Is Rheghead moderating the boards now? Sure seems that way.
Someone has to....;)
Yoda the flump
13-Jan-08, 01:10
Am I on the wrong thread?:)
Errrrr. are you familiar with the abbreviation "Q.E.D.", Scorrie? I think you just proved my point by enlarging on it. Badger didn't, as I see it, suggest you "have no one to love", chucky egg....... just that if you cast, in your imagination, someone you love or who loves you, as someone who's receiving a death sentence, then it gives another perspective.
"Poor little me........" syndrome again. Now, do settle down and stop getting restive.
I think you and I got off on the wrong foot, TBH, TBH, with some of your more fanciful rantings. I don't think I'm alone in considering certain people to be over-sensitive. How about you quit trying to perpetuate something that would have slid unnoticed off most people's backs and get back to dreaming of the day when there were no white settlers and other things that came here to disrupt your Caithnessian Paradise? :roll:
Or failing that, get back to the point of the thread?Fanciful rantings? You have a nice way with words.[lol]
I bet Veekays 15 year old can hardly wait to join the happy bunch that is the Org!
I apologise for taking a day off - had other things to do. No need for insults just because we don't all spend every minute here. J4bberw0ck read my post as I intended, Scorrie, just trying to get you to think of it from the point of view of the families of anyone threatened with execution. I was going to say, everyone is someone's loved child but sadly that isn't true and I believe the most sadistic crimes are carried out by people who were never loved as children and probably don't know what it is either to love or be loved.
Many people on death row though are loved and many are not guilty of the crimes for which they may die. Kenny Ritchie and his mother have somehow to try to rebuild their relationship. There was a man interviewed on the radio I think this morning (or was it yesterday? been so busy) who had spent 20+ years on death row for a crime he did not commit, much of it in solitary confinement. He fell foul of a police officer for a minor crime and somehow it escalated to the death sentence. He could now be dead but instead he is now living in the UK, married to an Englishwoman and with two young children. The fact is that innocent people, for all manner of reasons, are wrongly convicted and I just wanted you to put yourself in the shoes of their families. Spending many years in prison for a crime you didn't commit is bad enough - much of a lifetime gone but at least there is some life left. If you're dead - that's it.
I have never believed in an eye for an eye - it achieves nothing. Criminals should be punished but not in a way that brutalises them and their warders. Far too many prisoners re-offend because they are shown no other way. What does this achieve except more crime? Our legal system may not be perfect but it's better than personal revenge. Violence begets violence - it always has. The people I admire most are those who can forgive - not sure I could do it but it is an amazing thing.
The problem nowadays is that "doing time" is a relatively easy experience,they can study and better themselves,they get 3 meals a day,clothed and warm(how many on state pensions or benefits struggle to heat their homes?) and they are even complaining about slopping out :eek: I worked in a hospital for years and lost count of the bedpans I have emptied...and they were not even my own!If they do the crime do the time!I would be happy to see "chain gang"type punishments being dished out...if they had to do some hard graft they may think twice about re-offending!x
I apologise for taking a day off - had other things to do. No need for insults just because we don't all spend every minute here. J4bberw0ck read my post as I intended, Scorrie, just trying to get you to think of it from the point of view of the families of anyone threatened with execution. I was going to say, everyone is someone's loved child but sadly that isn't true and I believe the most sadistic crimes are carried out by people who were never loved as children and probably don't know what it is either to love or be loved.
Many people on death row though are loved and many are not guilty of the crimes for which they may die. Kenny Ritchie and his mother have somehow to try to rebuild their relationship. There was a man interviewed on the radio I think this morning (or was it yesterday? been so busy) who had spent 20+ years on death row for a crime he did not commit, much of it in solitary confinement. He fell foul of a police officer for a minor crime and somehow it escalated to the death sentence. He could now be dead but instead he is now living in the UK, married to an Englishwoman and with two young children. The fact is that innocent people, for all manner of reasons, are wrongly convicted and I just wanted you to put yourself in the shoes of their families. Spending many years in prison for a crime you didn't commit is bad enough - much of a lifetime gone but at least there is some life left. If you're dead - that's it.
I have never believed in an eye for an eye - it achieves nothing. Criminals should be punished but not in a way that brutalises them and their warders. Far too many prisoners re-offend because they are shown no other way. What does this achieve except more crime? Our legal system may not be perfect but it's better than personal revenge. Violence begets violence - it always has. The people I admire most are those who can forgive - not sure I could do it but it is an amazing thing.I have just read an article where an ambulance man lost the sight in one eye through some yob throwing a brick at the ambulance window, he received £40,000 in compensation. The yorkshire ripper lost an eye in a prison attack and received £200,000?[disgust]
The yorkshire ripper lost an eye in a prison attack and received £200,000?[disgust]
Yes, and he will be free in 3 years time to enjoy it.[evil]
The problem nowadays is that "doing time" is a relatively easy experience,they can study and better themselves,they get 3 meals a day,clothed and warm(how many on state pensions or benefits struggle to heat their homes?) and they are even complaining about slopping out :eek: I worked in a hospital for years and lost count of the bedpans I have emptied...and they were not even my own!If they do the crime do the time!I would be happy to see "chain gang"type punishments being dished out...if they had to do some hard graft they may think twice about re-offending!x
Agreed. I can see both sides of the capital punishment coin. That aside time should be hard time. You commit the crime you give up your rights to soft time. I don't think we should go back to the time of beating prisoners but they should have no more than basic facilities.
I can't help thinking about the adverts of one of those reality shows were the presenter is going to go to a prison in the US, one of the inmates is bragging that he will be "taken care of until he dies". That should no be the case - It needs to be HARD time.
Margaret M.
13-Jan-08, 23:33
the presenter is going to go to a prison in the US, one of the inmates is bragging that he will be "taken care of until he dies". That should no be the case - It needs to be HARD time.
If an inmate in the U.S. needs an organ transplant, they go to the top of the waiting list.
Yoda the flump
13-Jan-08, 23:41
I can't help thinking about the adverts of one of those reality shows were the presenter is going to go to a prison in the US, one of the inmates is bragging that he will be "taken care of until he dies". That should no be the case - It needs to be HARD time.
And fascinating viewing it was to. It does give you an insight into the US system.
Their time was hard compared to the UK system. 23 hours in their cells at a minimum, and still none of them complained.
The real problem is with the criminals mindset. Listened to an interview several months ago on 5live with a guy who had been in and out of prison for over 40 years, he said that most of the criminals, him included looked at prison as a risk of the job, if they got caught then so be it, they will just serve whatever time they get and then carry on.
Prison does not deter these people.
webmannie
13-Jan-08, 23:54
Yes, and he will be free in 3 years time to enjoy it.[evil]
Where did you get this bit of info from?
The ripper has not been given a whole life sentence because he failed to submit written representations in court before his tariff was fixed,the High Court will therefore determine his tariff in due course.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=424144&in_page_id=1770 (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=424144&in_page_id=1770)
Cedric Farthsbottom III
14-Jan-08, 00:09
I have been asked by my son to put the following to you all. He would appreciate your views and comments for a report he is doing ( he is 15 so please no heavy duty views) I think he just wants as wide a number of opinions as possible
My thanks
Veekay,for yer 15 year old.Capital Punishment is in the past.Its no gonnae happen anymore.The closest I got to Capital punishment,was seeing ma best mate getting three aw the belt for chewing gum in the class.His hands were a mess for weeks.He's making more in a month now,than she ever made.
Where did you get this bit of info from?
The ripper has not been given a whole life sentence because he failed to submit written representations in court before his tariff was fixed,the High Court will therefore determine his tariff in due course.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=424144&in_page_id=1770 (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=424144&in_page_id=1770)
Well observed, I should have written 'could be free in 3 years' as that is when his parole is up. My pessimism obviously led me into thinking that was a certainty. Knowing the system like we do, he probably will be free in 3 years.
As for capital punishment, I think Washington DC should get a big smacked bottom.
Well observed, I should have written 'could be free in 3 years' as that is when his parole is up. My pessimism obviously led me into thinking that was a certainty. Knowing the system like we do, he probably will be free in 3 years.I sincerely hope you are wrong on this one Rheghead. If that spawn of Satan ever gets released then it will be the death of the British penal system and god help us all.
As for capital punishment, I think Washington DC should get a big smacked bottom. I think you should smack Denzel to, never really liked him as an actor.
Many thanks to all of you who have contributed to this thread it has beenof great help to my son. His report was to be of some 1500 words and his big difficulty is only using 1500 words. You have made him far more aware of the issue.
In answer to a post, we know that it is a thing of the past here in Britain the report was on the moral issues surrounding C.P. and peoples views of it so this exercise has been of great help.
Thanks again
I know this is going off thread a bit but do completely agree with those who complain that prison life can be too easy. There should be hard work for everyone physically capable (might make some of them fitter), education for those who need it so they can get work when they come out, get rid of this nonsense of compensation (makes me really angry), total ban on drugs including cigarettes (with medical help where really necessary) and far stricter parole hearings for violent offenders.
Going even more off thread - what on earth was someone accused of murder doing out on bail? Are they completely crazy? Must go and do something else for the rest of the day so please don't accuse me of hiding. Back later.
I apologise for taking a day off - had other things to do. No need for insults just because we don't all spend every minute here. J4bberw0ck read my post as I intended, Scorrie, just trying to get you to think of it from the point of view of the families of anyone threatened with execution. I was going to say, everyone is someone's loved child but sadly that isn't true and I believe the most sadistic crimes are carried out by people who were never loved as children and probably don't know what it is either to love or be loved.
Many people on death row though are loved and many are not guilty of the crimes for which they may die. Kenny Ritchie and his mother have somehow to try to rebuild their relationship. There was a man interviewed on the radio I think this morning (or was it yesterday? been so busy) who had spent 20+ years on death row for a crime he did not commit, much of it in solitary confinement. He fell foul of a police officer for a minor crime and somehow it escalated to the death sentence. He could now be dead but instead he is now living in the UK, married to an Englishwoman and with two young children. The fact is that innocent people, for all manner of reasons, are wrongly convicted and I just wanted you to put yourself in the shoes of their families. Spending many years in prison for a crime you didn't commit is bad enough - much of a lifetime gone but at least there is some life left. If you're dead - that's it.
I have never believed in an eye for an eye - it achieves nothing. Criminals should be punished but not in a way that brutalises them and their warders. Far too many prisoners re-offend because they are shown no other way. What does this achieve except more crime? Our legal system may not be perfect but it's better than personal revenge. Violence begets violence - it always has. The people I admire most are those who can forgive - not sure I could do it but it is an amazing thing.
Gee whiz!! I thought I was supposed to be the sensitive one?
I only asked where you were. Surely a wee Badger returning to the Sett gag is hardly an insult?
Anyway, I have already stated that I have never made my mind up on the use of the death penalty. I came to that conclusion after having considered ALL the possible elements. You talk as if I have not thought about potentially innocent prisoners and not thought about their families. I have done all of that many times throughout my lifetime and also considered how many lives could have been saved if repeat murderers were not allowed that chance to take another life. Could you really face the mother of a child killed by a repeat offender, and tell her that it would not have been right for us to have passed the death sentence on the killer? Could you tell her that her child died because we have to be a more civilised society? How civilised a society are we anyway, when children and pensioners are raped and murdered in our midst?
Over the years I have heard many people state that they would support the death penalty for anyone who had killed someone in THEIR family. Yet the attitude is different if it was the murder of someone they did not know. That is a natural enough reaction but is it a logical one? Is someone else's child less worthy of obtaining the same sentence you would expect for your own?
It is a complex and emotive subject, particularly if you want to go down the road of discussing the resources we should commit to the criminals in our society, compared to what we commit to our sick and vulnerable people. I can understand both views on the subject and am not condemning either.
Highland Laddie
14-Jan-08, 20:29
A cop who killed his wife is released on bail,
what does he do, kills again.
where is the excuse for capital punishment that he could be innocent.
another life lost needlessly by a society that has gone soft on the culprits
and negligent of the victims.
A cop who killed his wife is released on bail,
what does he do, kills again.
where is the excuse for capital punishment that he could be innocent.
another life lost needlessly by a society that has gone soft on the culprits
and negligent of the victims.
This man had been neither tried nor sentenced so even if we had CP he would not have been executed. As I said earlier, the decision to allow him out on bail was crazy and will no doubt be investigated - too late for his second victim.
Too many violent offenders seem able to fool parole boards and that's another thing that needs sorting.
Scorrie - we seem to be good at misunderstanding. You thought I was accusing you of having no family, I thought you were saying I was chicken (if a badger can be chicken). It seems we were both wrong.
This has gone on long enough but forgot to mention something - anyone wanting to know more about CP should watch the new Horizon series starting tomorrow (Tues.) night on BBC 2.
This has gone on long enough but forgot to mention something - anyone wanting to know more about CP should watch the new Horizon series starting tomorrow (Tues.) night on BBC 2.
I agree that most points have been covered and most people will still hold the opinion they held prior to this thread.
I leave the details of this trial, which started yesterday:-
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article3185486.ece
Yoda the flump
15-Jan-08, 17:52
Did anybody hear the interview with Kenny Richey on Radio 5 today?
He certainly was hard work to interview and at times came across as a thoroughly unpleasant individual. Maybe thats what 20+ years on death row does to you.
Did anybody hear the interview with Kenny Richey on Radio 5 today?
He certainly was hard work to interview and at times came across as a thoroughly unpleasant individual. Maybe thats what 20+ years on death row does to you.
Nobody listens to radio 5 Flump.:lol:
i never knew there was a radio 5.
Did anybody hear the interview with Kenny Richey on Radio 5 today?
He certainly was hard work to interview and at times came across as a thoroughly unpleasant individual. Maybe thats what 20+ years on death row does to you.
Of course it could be that it made no difference to him at all and he was always like that! It could explain how he ended up in the situation he did in the first place.
I know this is fiction but the current Woman's Hour serial, We Need to Talk About Kevin, is based on letters written by a mother to her husband about their son who becomes a serial killer. She knew from the start there was something wrong with the child but her husband always denied it, said she was imagining it and spoilt the boy in consequence. She was presumably not confident enough to get help, or maybe she couldn't prove what she instinctively knew. I don't know whether it is based on research as I missed the beginning and have only heard bits but following the development from baby to killer is chilling.
I know this is fiction but the current Woman's Hour serial, We Need to Talk About Kevin, is based on letters written by a mother to her husband about their son who becomes a serial killer. She knew from the start there was something wrong with the child but her husband always denied it, said she was imagining it and spoilt the boy in consequence. She was presumably not confident enough to get help, or maybe she couldn't prove what she instinctively knew. I don't know whether it is based on research as I missed the beginning and have only heard bits but following the development from baby to killer is chilling.
If the woman DID know that something was amiss from the start, then it goes against the, fairly prevalent, notion that parents/society are responsible for turning kids into monsters.
Did anyone watch the Horizon program by the way? It was very difficult watching and almost all current methods of execution came across as barbaric. Certainly very chilling when you get right down to the science of killing people.
Yoda the flump
16-Jan-08, 20:20
Of course it could be that it made no difference to him at all and he was always like that! It could explain how he ended up in the situation he did in the first place.
I was trying to be diplomatic and give the guy the benefit of the doubt but.....
If the woman DID know that something was amiss from the start, then it goes against the, fairly prevalent, notion that parents/society are responsible for turning kids into monsters.
Did anyone watch the Horizon program by the way? It was very difficult watching and almost all current methods of execution came across as barbaric. Certainly very chilling when you get right down to the science of killing people.
Oh dear, vowed I wasn't going to get back into this thread then went and did it this morning :( . Take your point about the baby and I suppose the nature v. nurture argument will run and run but if she had been more assertive, if the husband had believed her, then maybe what was just a slightly difficult baby could have been sorted out. She is writing in retrospect and I suppose it's easier to say the baby was born bad than to take any blame for the way he turned out. Why do children in the same family, apparently brought up the same way (if that's possible), turn out so different? Sorry, I'm taking this off thread. Better shut up.
Haven't watched Horizon yet but taped it and will watch if I can bear to.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.