Death penalty???

[porshiepoo]

Having seen the posting on whether we should have armed police or not, I thought maybe we could debate on another subject.

Should we bring back the death penalty?
If no, why not?
If yes, how do we ensure it's fair and just?

[Naefearjustbeer]

Yes they should.
For clear cut cases of murder, paedophiles & serial sex offenders.
I also feel that sentances for crime are too leniant in general, sex crimes assaults etc get short sentances and then get early release for good behavior! Then they will lock up a single parent for no havin a TV licence where is the justice in that.

[Jeid]

Clear cut cases of murder? Ho does one decide that?

[Naefearjustbeer]

DNA evidence, getting caught red handed etc,

[Jeid]

Thats all evidence yes. Say I had a gun and was meaning to shoot somone else but shot you instead by accident, is that clear cut murder? Obviously I was trying to kill someone, you just happened to get in the way. edit should of said if i was a police officer

also, what about that case where the Brazilian man got shot in London, he was innocent, yet was killed. Should the police officer go to jail?

I totally agree with the paedophiles and serial sex offenders though. It makes me so mad when i read about that in the paper. It disguists me so much. grr!

[armi]

Under the European Convention on Human Rights it is never going to happen and is illegal.


So no point on discussion.

[Naefearjustbeer]

If you shot me by mistake then you must be a bad aim LOL! there is a difference between killing and murder in my book, Murder is premeditated, but in your example my death would be manslaughter as you didnt mean it. I would lock you up for manslaughter and attempted murder due to the fact you missed your target. But howver if you decided you want to kill me formulate a plan of how you are going to do it, then carry that out. That is murder and if the evidence can prove then you will swing for it.

In your example about the armed police man shooting an innocent person. That was not murder because it was not premeditated the police man did not target that man and set out to kill him. The officer had to react to the situation and he made what turned out to be a wrong decision. I am sure he will have to live with that mistake on his concios every day. I would not put that officer in jail. The thing is if somone points a gun at you and says stop police or something similar do you
(a) run
(b) put your hands on your head
(c) other

even if you were guilty of something less than being a suspected suicide bomber, such as carrying drugs, unpaid fines etc is it worth running the risk of getting shot? I dont think so.


Thats all evidence yes. Say I had a gun and was meaning to shoot somone else but shot you instead by accident, is that clear cut murder? Obviously I was trying to kill someone, you just happened to get in the way. edit should of said if i was a police officer

also, what about that case where the Brazilian man got shot in London, he was innocent, yet was killed. Should the police officer go to jail?

I totally agree with the paedophiles and serial sex offenders though. It makes me so mad when i read about that in the paper. It disguists me so much. grr!

[Naefearjustbeer]

Under the European Convention on Human Rights it is never going to happen and is illegal.


So no point on discussion.

if its not worth discussing why bother posting ?
just wasting your energy typing
and its another damm good reason to dump the EEC

[Rheghead]

Thats all evidence yes. Say I had a gun and was meaning to shoot somone else but shot you instead by accident, is that clear cut murder? Obviously I was trying to kill someone, you just happened to get in the way.

Yes that would be murder.

[porshiepoo]

What about the cases where people have been jailed for a crime they didn't commit. only to be aquitted later though?
I'd be too late for them if they were dead.

For sex abusers etc, I personally think death is too easy. It's too quick and it's too humane.
What about castration? in the mans case, or hand amputation if it's female?
Mmmmm, mind you I suppose we'd end up footing the bill for an invalid then wouldn't we, scratch that last one!
What about an island where all the paedophiles, rapists, murderers etc are jailed and then when it's full, blow it up! Might not get em all first time round but they would the next.
Or, what about that sci fi film, the running man! Could make em run from death!
Ok ok I'm getting a bit carried away there, but I do think we should bring back a death penalty. I don't have a clue as to how it would be controlled etc but we should have at least some form of punishment that fits the crime.

Police are a different matter. I don't agree with the way that man was killed during the tube bombings, but, I don't have to see what they see every day of their job. I don't have to put my life on the line every day of my job.
Accidents will happen and although that doesn't excuse them, I don't think we have a really bad track record for innocent killings in this country do we?

[Rheghead]

For sex abusers etc, I personally think death is too easy. It's too quick and it's too humane.


And what if they were innocent too, too late for them an'all?

[loganbiffy]

i dont think it should be brought back, just because someone took someone else`s life still doesnt give anyone else the right to kill them, they should be in a max security prison and NEVER released but you cannot justify killing another human being!

[porshiepoo]

And what if they were innocent too, too late for them an'all?


Thats what I said!
But if the evidence is unrefutable, then we should have a punishment to fit the crime.

Would castration work? :rolleyes:

[Karen M26a]

Should we bring back the death penalty?
If no, why not?
If yes, how do we ensure it's fair and just?

Absolutely no way should something so barbaric be brought back into our juducial process!

We should lead by example and anyone who thinks capital punishment is a good thing should remember that one day it might be their child/brother or mother on death row for a crime they did not commit.

If someone trully has committed a crime, then they should be made to pay for it with a stiff prison sentence. If someone has done something wrong, killing them would be giving them the easy way out.

[Rheghead]

I have changed my mind on this issue so many times, if I hadn't then I don't think I have given it due attention. Anyway, I am currently against capital punishment but only if 'life imprisonment' actually means 'lifelong imprisonment'.

[porshiepoo]

Absolutely no way should something so barbaric be brought back into our juducial process!

But if the crimes barbaric, why not let the punishment be barbaric?


We should lead by example and anyone who thinks capital punishment is a good thing should remember that one day it might be their child/brother or mother on death row for a crime they did not commit.

If a person didn't commit the crime then obviously we wouldn't want them killed for it.
It could only be in cases of admission backed up with evidence or where the evidence is concrete.
Obviously the system we have today is not ready for a capital punishment law as there are still too many cases of wrong imprisonment.



If someone trully has committed a crime, then they should be made to pay for it with a stiff prison sentence. If someone has done something wrong, killing them would be giving them the easy way out.


I agree death is too easy an option for paedophiles. Thats why I vote for castration.

[EDDIE]

No because you might end up giving the death penalty to someone that is innocent.That person might have been stitched up.
And I wonder how much people are in prison at the moment that have been wrongly convicted or stitched up ?
Beside that its more of a punishment to keep that person in for life that means life than to give them the easy way out buy death penalty.

[porshiepoo]

Yeah but we're paying to keep em there. :(

[scotsboy]

No to the death penalty - just years and years of endless torture (and no cracks about watching Rangers Pepsi)

[smee]

There are lots of innocent people in jails today...the are called warders. You can't make omlettes without breaking some eggs...public hanging that will make them stop and think.

[spiggie]

I think it should be brought back in, then maybe it would make people think twice about commiting the crime in the first place. Its just too cozy in prison now - television, a warm dinner and a bed to sleep in at night cant be all that bad can it...? Anyway when someone is sentenced to life inprisonment thats what it should mean life - not a lousy 15 years or so!!! Its still legal in a few states in America so why not..? Against human rights - its not within human rights to be commiting these crimes anyway!

[golach]

I dont not believe that Hanging is the answer, What if you hang the wrong man. So many cases and sentences recently have overturned or appealed,
you cant appeal once you have been hanged.
Google Derek Bentley, there was a classic case against hanging. I would give them Hard Labour not sitting in a warm cell.

[phoenix]

God this is depressing! Couldnt you manage to come up with something else to discuss at this time of year? Theres enough of this on the tele and in the newspapers without coming on here and reading it..........death penalty...........castration...........cutting hands off.........hanging? Better off hiring a horror film at least its over and done with in a couple of hours!:{

[hereboy]

I think the Death Penalty could use a bit of an image overhaul to make it more appealing to the masses. That is the real problem here. It needs a wee bit Satchi and Satchi.

The fact that "penalty" implies some sort of handicap or punishment from which you can recover (ie. time penalty, distance penalty etc), makes the "death penalty" a contradiction in terms and somewhat unpalatable to most folk. Its unfair, not the death bit, the calling it a penalty bit. No one has recovered from it as far as I am aware and I think this is what makes people upset.

So - Extreme makeover.

We drop the name penalty and call its something else - something obscure or ambigous to detract from what is really going on - euphemisms work best. Such as - "I see he drew the Queen of Spades on his last hand" or "unlucky to throw a seven at his age" or some other such thing.

The next step is to completely side step the issue of this type sentence ever "hanging" if you excuse the pun, over someone. Some crimes should never see the inside of a courtroom - they should be tried, judged and executed on the spot. A sort of "thin slicing" judicial system.

eg. You are a bobby, you walk into a crime scene that looks like a butchers window - standing there in a daze is a bloke with a 1000 yard stare and machete all covered in claret. What's the verdict?

The verdict? drop him on site - don't even stop to ask him his name. Its all over before its even started. Never see the inside of a courtroom. Did you see what happened down the block of flats then? Oh yeah, heard the perp was trying to run the hearts but he drew the black queen. Nice and tidy nice and clean, no mention of "penalty" no great public debate.

and it keeps the courtrooms free for another waste of the taxpayers money - trials for traffic offences.

What will I be doing at Christmas - playing cards and having turkey, sprouts the lot!!

PS. If you don't think clever marketing can make anything sell - how do you explain Pet Rocks, Pot Noodles and anything for sale in an inflight magazine.

[porshiepoo]

God this is depressing! Couldnt you manage to come up with something else to discuss at this time of year? Theres enough of this on the tele and in the newspapers without coming on here and reading it..........death penalty...........castration...........cutting hands off.........hanging? Better off hiring a horror film at least its over and done with in a couple of hours!:{


If you don't like it, don't read it and certainly don't reply to it!
Start a new thread on all nice girly xmasy things instead!

[dragonfly]

looks like Gary Glitter may be facing a firing squad in Vietnam if he's found guilty of child abuse. If he wants off with this one he'd better have a good lawyer and a new place to bolt to, hopefully where there are no children! :mad:

[porshiepoo]

looks like Gary Glitter may be facing a firing squad in Vietnam if he's found guilty of child abuse. If he wants off with this one he'd better have a good lawyer and a new place to bolt to, hopefully where there are no children! :mad:


I've missed that one, what's it all about?

[marion]

I agree death is too easy an option for paedophiles. Thats why I vote for castration.

In addition to the above, place a photo of the victim(s) so the guilty person is always confronted with what he has done.

[porshiepoo]

In addition to the above, place a photo of the victim(s) so the guilty person is always confronted with what he has done.


Hmmmm, I think they would need some other kind of reminder too. How about 'I am a paedophile' tatooed on their forehead?
Sadistic I know, but they really should get more than a few years in jail before being released back into the innocent population.

[Rheghead]

How about 'I am a paedophile' tatooed on their forehead?

Since some victims and some perpetrators are often one and the same, it probably would be folly to do that, but I appreciate that the Public needs something to be seen to be done to satisfy their need for justice.

Rome is the mob...

[Naefearjustbeer]

Since some victims and some perpetrators are often one and the same, it probably would be folly to do that, but I appreciate that the Public needs something to be seen to be done to satisfy their need for justice.

Rome is the mob...

this is often the case but if the perpetrators are removed from society permanently after the first conviction be it locked up or swing from the gallows then we do not need to have sex offenders released back into our towns and villages, we do not then need to know where they have been re homed. Eventually this would break the cycle and hopefully these crimes would disappear or at least be drastically reduced. Think of the poor kid who gets harmed by a convicted offender who has been released into society after a short jail sentence. This is an unnecessary crime as If I had my way the pervert would never get back into society, and at least one victim will of been saved from such a horrible attack. I wonder what percentage of released offenders attack again and end up in court again?

[porshiepoo]

It's no wonder this goes on though, have you seen the latest poll on the TV?
Theres a high percentage of people that think it's a womans fault when she gets raped.
What a joke. It's no wonder there are so many rapes that don't get reported.

[lassieinfife]

In addition to the above, place a photo of the victim(s) so the guilty person is always confronted with what he has done.


How would you like your childs photo in view to them on daily basis?

[golach]

It's no wonder this goes on though, have you seen the latest poll on the TV?
Theres a high percentage of people that think it's a womans fault when she gets raped.
What a joke. It's no wonder there are so many rapes that don't get reported.

Porshie, you are at it again!!!! Changing the thread!!!! what has rape and the Death penalty got in common, but good try :lol:

[lassieinfife]

It's time they found a deserted island with high electric fences, pack them all in ships,transport them and leave them to fend for themselves,then they could murder and mame till their hearts content and rid us all of their presence....

[porshiepoo]

Porshie, you are at it again!!!! Changing the thread!!!! what has rape and the Death penalty got in common, but good try :lol:


Oops sorry! :rolleyes:

Not so much a change though, cos shouldn't rapists get the death penalty? lol ;)

[scotsboy]

Check out the story relating to an execution scheduled for Abha, Saudi Arabia last week - it is in the middle of the front page of the Gulf Daily News:

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/source/XXVIII/242/images/page1.pdf

[Naefearjustbeer]

Check out the story relating to an execution scheduled for Abha, Saudi Arabia last week - it is in the middle of the front page of the Gulf Daily News:

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/source/XXVIII/242/images/page1.pdf

notice how it is not the main headline on the paper, just a fill in bit lower down the page!

[Fran]

Having seen the posting on whether we should have armed police or not, I thought maybe we could debate on another subject.

Should we bring back the death penalty?
If no, why not?
If yes, how do we ensure it's fair and just?
Yes , we should definetly bring back the death penalty, there would be less serious crimes then.
a murderer can be jailed for 8 years, if he is good, he is out in 4 and then does it again.

[SandTiger]

Yes , we should definetly bring back the death penalty, there would be less serious crimes then.
a murderer can be jailed for 8 years, if he is good, he is out in 4 and then does it again.

So how is it that studies tend to show that the death penalty is not a deterrent?


A recent New York Times survey found states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The gap between the cumulative murder rates of death penalty and non-death penalty states actually widened in 2003, from 36% in 2002 to 44% in 2003. "The two states with the most executions in 2003, Texas (24) and Oklahoma (14) saw increases in their murder rates from 2002 to 2003. Both states had murder rates above the national average in 2003: Texas - 6.4, and Oklahoma - 5.9. The top 13 states in terms of murder rates were all death penalty states. The murder rate of the death penalty states increased from 2002, while the rate in non-death penalty states decreased."(www.deathpenaltyinfo.org).

[scotsboy]

Naefearjustbeer wrote
notice how it is not the main headline on the paper, just a fill in bit lower down the page!

To be fair it is a Bahrain newspaper and the event happened in Saudi.

[dpw39]

Hi Porshiepoo,

nice to see that you've lost the RED box thingmyjig and that it has been replaced with the GREEN one.

Since hanging/death penalty was abolished in the UK, there has not been a deterrent for serious criminal cases that we here more and more about in life.

I agree with the death penalty, however, before we go back down that road again, the legal system has to experience a severe "wake-up" call, as I believe that people who "abuse" our legal systen due to tecnicalities/wizard barristers/solicitors etc. It's more of a "moral issue" rather than a legal one...

I was always brought up to believe that if you did something wrong, then you owned up to it and accepted your punishment, as simplistic as it may be, certain people today will not accept their personal responsibility to society and themselves as a whole, and try to cheat the system for their own ends...

Whats the point of say, giving a dictator such as Sadam (at a huge expense) a triail, when his record stands for itself. If out of 100 persons executed, we execute 1 by mistake, then thats an unfortuanate occurrence (even if it was me that was the innocent party). Trial by jury takes into consideration all the relevant evidence at that moment in time, and if the cards are stacked against you, then you'll be found guilty.

Without a deterrent in society, then we will still experience heinious crimes, and a legal system that seems at times, to be more lenient to the criminal rather than the victim.

Thats me off my soapbox, hope it stimulates something.

Ciao,

Dave the Rave :cool:

[SandTiger]

...

Thats me off my soapbox, hope it stimulates something.

Ciao,

Dave the Rave :cool:
Allllllllrightythen... Howsabout, if the family *do not* wish to see the death penalty implimented in the name of their loved one?

"The death penalty is about revenge and hate, and revenge and hate is why my daughter and those 167 other people are dead today."

Bud Welch, father of Julie Marie Welch,
victim in the Oklahoma City bombing

[Whitewater]

There has to be a deterent for serious crime. At the present time you may get a life sentence for murder, with good behaviour you can be out in about 8 years, that no good. We get all this talk today about the human/civil rights of the criminal and why they should not be abused. The law seems to have forgotten about the victim who has had all his/her rights removed forever, the person who done that should suffer the same fate.

My wife tells me we have been happily married now for 35yrs 5 months and 15 days, and keeps reminding me that is she shot me she would have been out long ago!!!!!

[The Griffin]

I for one would personally like to see a return to public floggings and I think it's about time that we really seriously considered the removal of limbs for shoplifting and that, again preferabbly in public as these so called "minor" offences are the very heart of the attack on the very fabric of our society!

I am sick to the back teeth of reading about this type of thing day in, day out - You only have to open the Sun to read about how our country is being taken over. Monsieur Blair, my friend, you need to wake up and smell the coffee beans!!

It's all very well for those woolly do-gooding cardigans to go on about the so called european freedom of rights act - But is this something that we really want in this country and what do they know anyway???

As for hanging - Well it's the only thing that some people will ever understand, so lets hang some sense into them! so as long as we have proper safegaurds like a confession then this must please those winging lefties because nobody would admit to something that they havn't done, would they?

Ofcourse I think that we should be able to use a minnumum amount of force if the confession is not forthcoming. But to please those freedom of Rights mob and stop those wet judges playing up then it would have to stop after the confession is got. I think that we can all live with this constriction if it means we get the right person and can stop them all moaning about civillian libertys.

It's a fact that all these punishments were carried out before and there was never any crime then and this was also a time for everyone in the community to get together - We desparatly need this return to a Basic Values system and we need it now!

common sense will always prevail, my friends!

[smith2585]

i think people who attempt murder or murder someone should be killed themselves

coz if u do it once u cud do it anytime

e.g once a theif always a theif
same applies to murder n all that kinda things if they r capibale to do it again

[SandTiger]

i think people who attempt murder or murder someone should be killed themselves

coz if u do it once u cud do it anytime

e.g once a theif always a theif
same applies to murder n all that kinda things if they r capibale to do it again

Yes, but lets face it, if we attempt to rehabilitate them at least they come out with the chance of the ability to spell - That must be worth something?

[porshiepoo]

The human rights act is really abused for criminals. We even had to do away with slopping out at jails because it was deemed against human rights. The fact of the matter is, rapists, murderers and paedophiles have no human rights. They took away any human rights of their victims to live a safe, peaceful life and so in return should have no rights themselves for the rest of their lives, however long that may be.

[Sandra_B]

I would be against the death penalty being brought back. As far as it being a deterrent, it doesn't seem to work that way in America, does it?

[porshiepoo]

No but at least it gets rid of them.
I'm not entirely sure either way what I think of it. Part of me says they deserve it but the other part of me says it's too good for them. I think I'm maybe teetering toward torture.

[unicorn]

wouldn't it help a bit if prison was actually a decent punishment with no perks niceties gyms tv's etc and proper slop to eat??

[SandTiger]

I'm wondering if anybody grasps what prisons are about - Yes there is a punitive element but also surely they have to also be places that rehabilitate or guess what - People run an increased risk of re-offending again?

Surely any right person wants to tackle the problem be dealing with the root of the matter rather than spouting nonsense about not being able to make people slop out anymore?

[porshiepoo]

Surely any right person wants to tackle the problem be dealing with the root of the matter rather than spouting nonsense about not being able to make people slop out anymore?
[/QUOTE]

Glad you think that prison punishment is nonsense. Personally I think it's exactly what they deserve. Slopping out was just one of the things that made them feel the degraded excuse for human beings that they are! It's no wonder that prison is becoming more of a vacation camp that a punishment if people like you think they should get all the niceities rather than the punishment.

[SandTiger]

Glad you think that prison punishment is nonsense. Personally I think it's exactly what they deserve. Slopping out was just one of the things that made them feel the degraded excuse for human beings that they are! It's no wonder that prison is becoming more of a vacation camp that a punishment if people like you think they should get all the niceities rather than the punishment.[/quote]

Please don't put words into my mouth - I suggested you were spouting nonsense, which you have just gone on to prove by this post. You refer to prisons being a vacation camp - I take it that you have some credible evidence to back your assertion up with?

Rehabilitation is not about handing out a load of "niceties" but about getting people to take responsibility for their offending patterns and to deal with them properly rather than your rather misguided fantasy of how prisons do and should be run.

[porshiepoo]

Glad you think that prison punishment is nonsense. Personally I think it's exactly what they deserve. Slopping out was just one of the things that made them feel the degraded excuse for human beings that they are! It's no wonder that prison is becoming more of a vacation camp that a punishment if people like you think they should get all the niceities rather than the punishment.

Please don't put words into my mouth - I suggested you were spouting nonsense, which you have just gone on to prove by this post. You refer to prisons being a vacation camp - I take it that you have some credible evidence to back your assertion up with?

Rehabilitation is not about handing out a load of "niceties" but about getting people to take responsibility for their offending patterns and to deal with them properly rather than your rather misguided fantasy of how prisons do and should be run.
[/QUOTE]


Oh great! Tell the victims of the paedophiles and the rapists and the families of the murder victims that they've not to worry, the scum bag may be inside for less than half his / her term but hey, we will make them realise what they've done.
And yes prisons are holiday camps as far as I'm concerned, compared to what they used to be. They get a chance of a good education, all their human rights are protected by all and sundry and they'll be out in half the time.
Maybe they have their freedom taken away, wow! Well, I'm sure the victims families are greatful for that little tidbit, if not, why not eh!

[SandTiger]

Porshiepoo - Settle down for a moment and ask yourself what these victims and their families would rather have - Have someone locked up and treated like an animal then come out even more messed up and go on to commit further crimes or a chance of rehabilitation that may nip the offending pattern in the bud and prevent further distress for other families and victims. I'm asking you this question in relation to all offence not just the few that you have mentioned previously.

This is not about being soft on crime but attempting to proactively address it and deal with it – rather then just lock it away in a 6x6 box for a few years and then let the person out – How does that benefit society?

[unicorn]

just out of interest does anyone now the statistics on reoffending nowadays and reoffending maybe 50 years ago?? I suppose they will be somewhere but sounds like hard work to find :)

[porshiepoo]

In the case of paedophiles, rapists and murderers I think they'd rather know that theres no chance of them ever getting out again but are spending the time being punished and tortured.

I agree that there are some crimes that don't warrant the death penalty or torture and those cases only are the ones that should get the chance of rehabilitation. Like I said the others should get no chance of ever coming out.

Personally I don't think paedophiles can be rahabilitated or rapists and generally not murderers either - obviously depending on the circumstances. Self defence is slightly different to serial killers!
Theres something in their make up that is just not set right, and personally, if I were a victim of one these psychos, I'd rather not feel the need to watch my back all the time frightened of seeing that person again after they've been released and supposedly rehabilitated.

[SandTiger]

just out of interest does anyone now the statistics on reoffending nowadays and reoffending maybe 50 years ago?? I suppose they will be somewhere but sounds like hard work to find :)

Not really - http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page1.asp

But, you have to be very careful with statistical data own its own as it does not prove anything - There are many other variables - The obvious ones being an increase in public confidence regarding the reporting of 'domestic violence' and rape matters over the last 10 years and there are many more. Hope the link is of some help.

[unicorn]

there are some pretty huge increases there but as you said this may have many reasons such as crimes that were taboo to mention years ago. Either way though there has to be some type of review of the justice system as people dont seem to have the same fear of being punished.

[porshiepoo]

there are some pretty huge increases there but as you said this may have many reasons such as crimes that were taboo to mention years ago. Either way though there has to be some type of review of the justice system as people dont seem to have the same fear of being punished.


Exactly! It's because theres no punishment left to fear. They know they're pretty safe inside. If anyone dare step on their human rights they sue em when they get out!

[SandTiger]

In the case of paedophiles, rapists and murderers I think they'd rather know that theres no chance of them ever getting out again but are spending the time being punished and tortured.

I agree that there are some crimes that don't warrant the death penalty or torture and those cases only are the ones that should get the chance of rehabilitation. Like I said the others should get no chance of ever coming out.

Personally I don't think paedophiles can be rahabilitated or rapists and generally not murderers either - obviously depending on the circumstances. Self defence is slightly different to serial killers!
Theres something in their make up that is just not set right, and personally, if I were a victim of one these psychos, I'd rather not feel the need to watch my back all the time frightened of seeing that person again after they've been released and supposedly rehabilitated.
Porshiepoo – Thank you for your reply. You have made it very clear as to what you would or would not like to see so lets put that to one side for a moment and deal with some facts!

Save for the exception of the very few serial offenders in the above 3 categories that you mention most people who are convicted of murder rape or peadophile offence will be released back into the community at some point – That is a fact whether you like it or not.

So given that this fact is true would you rather see an encaged animal released back into society to offend again or someone who’s time being incarcerated has been productively spent and are released back into society having undergone some form of rehabilitation?

[porshiepoo]

The thread was actually to discuss whether we should bring back the death penalty not whether we should rehabilitate or not, but I'll humour you.

As you say the fact of the matter is that we don't have the death penalty so at some point offenders are re-released into society. Obviously if we have to put up with that fact I'd much rather have them rehabilitated than not BUT, I don't believe that paedophiles, rapists, serial murderers etc can be rehabilitated. I think they will and do re-offend so that really takes away from whether we should rehabilitate them or not. It doesn't help!

So how about castration then? Won't that help? There are countries where they chop off the hands of thieves, some thing along those lines could work?:D

[unicorn]

Porshie
for a woman who doesn't believe in violence my god you have a bloodlust!!!!!!!!! lol

[SandTiger]

Thank you for taking the time to humour me porshiepoo and also pointing out to me what the original topic of this thread was. However, if you take the time to go back through your posts you will find that it is in fact you that has gone off on any available tangent in order to suit your argument. You can not therefore expect to be taken in any way seriously when you then attempt to reel it all in again because you suddenly find that you are losing ground on the point that you are attempting to make. It was you that brought up the slopping out nonsense and I have responded to that or maybe you don’t remember as it was a few hours ago now?

I think The Griffin is way ahead of you as far as the removal of limbs goes.

[SandTiger]

there are some pretty huge increases there but as you said this may have many reasons such as crimes that were taboo to mention years ago. Either way though there has to be some type of review of the justice system as people dont seem to have the same fear of being punished.
Eh?? What were you looking at Unicorn? The overal statistics for England & Wales show that total crime peaked in 1995, and has since fallen by 39%...

Which does tend to scupper a lot of arguments does it not?

http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/files/images/BCS_Total_crime_04.gif

Source: http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/output/Page54.asp

[Fran]

i am talking about the death sentence in britain.

[angela5]

Porshie
for a woman who doesn't believe in violence my god you have a bloodlust!!!!!!!!! lol


Unicorn, well said.

[porshiepoo]

Porshie
for a woman who doesn't believe in violence my god you have a bloodlust!!!!!!!!! lol


Not bloodlust. I just think the punishment should fit the crime! Perhaps castration would help to prevent a person (male anyway) from repeat offending, I don't know. It works for dogs! lol

So what do people think is a suitable punishment for the crime? We've talked about rehabilitation, which is the way we do it now, but does it really help prevent people re-offending?
I know each case has to be heard on it's own merits but generally life doesn't mean life and the offenders out and mingling with innocent people far too quickly.
Theres no chance of the death penalty coming back I know, but whats the alternative?

[DrSzin]

Theres no chance of the death penalty coming back I know, but whats the alternative? A week in a cell being ranted at non-stop by porshiepoo. For male offenders, the added fear that she'll castrate them before the week's out should do the trick nicely. :cool:

It probably won't work for SM offenders mind.

I'm just glad I'm not her dog.

For women offenders, those recently-touted flower essences are reputed to cure everything.

[porshiepoo]

A week in a cell being ranted at non-stop by porshiepoo. For male offenders, the added fear that she'll castrate them before the week's out should do the trick. :cool:

Castration with two house bricks should do it! :rolleyes:


It probably won't work for SM offenders mind.everything.

I wouldn't be so sure. I mean there's pain and there's PAIN! :rolleyes:

[DrSzin]

Porshie
for a woman who doesn't believe in violence my god you have a bloodlust!!!!!!!!! lol Indeedy...

[Drutt]

Perhaps castration would help to prevent a person (male anyway) from repeat offending, I don't know. It works for dogs! lol

No, I doubt it would.

One, humans are not dogs.

Two, chemical castration removes physical abilities but not the drive or desire to abuse.

Three, there are many ways in which paedophiles can abuse children, the possibilities of which I'm sure you don't need me to get into.

Four, it's believed that chemical castration may make paedophiles angrier and therefore abuse children in even more brutal ways.

Five, by treating paedophilia in a medical way (by using chemical castration), you've validated them; they'll believe even more than they have an illness, that they can't help themselves, and that they're not committing a crime.

Chemical castration could very possibly make paedophiles even more dangerous, not less.

[porshiepoo]

Two, chemical castration removes physical abilities but not the drive or desire to abuse.


Castration does not remove the ability at all, but it does remove some of the desire or need.


Three, there are many ways in which paedophiles can abuse children, the possibilities of which I'm sure you don't need me to get into.

Obviously I am aware of this but it would remove at least one of the ways.


Four, it's believed that chemical castration may make paedophiles angrier and therefore abuse children in even more brutal ways.

But thats based on the thought process of the human brain overriding the decrease in hormones due to castration.


Five, by treating paedophilia in a medical way (by using chemical castration), you've validated them; they'll believe even more than they have an illness, that they can't help themselves, and that they're not committing a crime.

By not treating it in such a way are we cutting off our nose to spite our face? We don't want to acknowledge it as a medical condition therefore we don't look into possibilities that may help!
I don't know the ins and outs of what makes a person carry out sick acts such as paedophilia or rape but I'd hate to think we're not doing all we can to prevent it rather than treat it.



Chemical castration could very possibly make paedophiles even more dangerous, not less.
[/QUOTE]

I quite agree that it may, but it also may not. Obviously thats not a chance that could be taken without a great deal more research being undertaken.
And yes, it would only be one way of perhaps helping to prevent this kind of abuse, and obviously wouldn't work with female abusers but at the moment we have nothing!

[Drutt]

The problem is that the drive to abuse children is in the brain. Chemical castration doesn't remove that drive, only the control over the genitals. Treating sex offenders in this way, and assuming that'll fix it, would be like paralysing the hands of stranglers and assuming we've fixed their desire to murder. It's pointless treating body parts as they didn't initiate the crime.

Another problem is that abusive crimes are as much about having power over the victims as they are about sexual drives. Chemical castration won't fix that either. The desire to express their power over their victims in increasingly sadistic ways would be very possible, perhaps very likely.


Obviously I am aware of this but it would remove at least one of the ways.
Leading to the possibility of more brutal abuse? Oh, but if we've removed one of the ways, that must be okay then?


By not treating it in such a way are we cutting off our nose to spite our face? We don't want to acknowledge it as a medical condition therefore we don't look into possibilities that may help!
I believe you're ignoring the possible serious implications of treating it in this way, but I guess that's your prerogative.


I don't know the ins and outs of what makes a person carry out sick acts such as paedophilia or rape but I'd hate to think we're not doing all we can to prevent it rather than treat it.
So we shouldn't treat it? I hate to break it to you, but there are tens of thousands of child sex offenders out there. They can't all be locked up. The police don't have the resources to monitor them. So far as I've seen, chemical castration won't fix the problem... far from it. So, hate it though you might, we're really doing very little to prevent it.

And how do you prevent it in people who've not been convicted of any crime? Chemically castrate any man who was accused of looking funny at a child?

For what it's worth, I believe in treatment. I believe that the government needs to ensure far wider access to cognitive-behavioural therapy than is currently available for paedophiles. I think they need treatment to address both their thinking and their behaviours. I think they need treatment for as long as it takes until they understand that it's wrong, it's a crime, that no child wants this, that no child is asking for it. Paedophiles find ways of justifying their crimes... they don't even see them as crimes... and that needs to be addressed.

Currently, only a minority of paedophiles get CBT. We'd be far better off calling for more resources for CBT in prisons than calling for chemical castration.

[porshiepoo]

[quote=Drutt]The problem is that the drive to abuse children is in the brain. Chemical castration doesn't remove that drive, only the control over the genitals. Treating sex offenders in this way, and assuming that'll fix it, would be like paralysing the hands of stranglers and assuming we've fixed their desire to murder. It's pointless treating body parts as they didn't initiate the crime.

I quite agree, but if removal of those body parts has an effect on the hormones etc that stimulate the brain to make a person think and need, surely that could be one possible treatment?


Another problem is that abusive crimes are as much about having power over the victims as they are about sexual drives. Chemical castration won't fix that either. The desire to express their power over their victims in increasingly sadistic ways would be very possible, perhaps very likely.

Obviously castration won't fix every sicko out there, there are a multitude of reasons why people do these things. But perhaps we should be looking at different forms of teatment for different individuals.



Leading to the possibility of more brutal abuse? Oh, but if we've removed one of the ways, that must be okay then?

Thats not what I was saying. I'm pointing out that the removal of even one of the ways has to be good.



I believe you're ignoring the possible serious implications of treating it in this way, but I guess that's your prerogative.

I'm not ignoring the implications at all. I'm not for one minute suggesting that this is the one and only way for every single abuser out there. But as I said before one form of treatment isn't necessarily going to be suitable for everyone.



So we shouldn't treat it? I hate to break it to you, but there are tens of thousands of child sex offenders out there. They can't all be locked up. The police don't have the resources to monitor them. So far as I've seen, chemical castration won't fix the problem... far from it. So, hate it though you might, we're really doing very little to prevent it.

I know only too well how little is being done to prevent it. Perhaps we shouldn't be looking at whether all child sex offenders can be locked up but rather whether they should be locked up. The answer to that has to be yes. Perhaps if our criminal justice system worked in such a way that the punishment did fit the crime then we would be able to lock them all up. Jails wouldn't be full of people who don't pay taxes or who have had boundary disputes and are serving ridiculous sentences when the real criminals get nothing in comparison.


And how do you prevent it in people who've not been convicted of any crime? Chemically castrate any man who was accused of looking funny at a child?

Of course not!


For what it's worth, I believe in treatment. I believe that the government needs to ensure far wider access to cognitive-behavioural therapy than is currently available for paedophiles. I think they need treatment to address both their thinking and their behaviours. I think they need treatment for as long as it takes until they understand that it's wrong, it's a crime, that no child wants this, that no child is asking for it. Paedophiles find ways of justifying their crimes... they don't even see them as crimes... and that needs to be addressed.

I believe in treatment as well, but I also believe in prevention and punishment. I'm not sure what form this would take but I think it's something that should be looked into.
I do agree that people with repetitive obsessions and thoughts will probably gain more from CBT but not in all cases.

[Astra]

Porshiepoo please go to bed. BORING .