Reintroduce the death penalty?

[JackieP10]

Most days now you get a shocking newspaper story which goes beyond anything you could stand to imagine or believe - 2 recent examples of a 3 year old girl raped and today a 12 week old baby raped. The 2 offenders got prison sentences but with the way the legal system works in Britain they will be out and about in a year or so. Bad enough for adults but how much worse will society get over the next 10 years for our children if something isn't done about how we deal with dangerous people like these?

[Lonnie]

I believe in these days of DNA, we should re-introduce the death penalty for certain crimes, a dead criminal can't re-offend, as at present so many do. I know there are some who are opposed to this view, and thats fair, we all differ, but apart from the grief of the victim and families, I know how I would feel if certain crimes were committed on me and mine, and my view is in accordance with that.

[jake-the-pig]

Where the guilt is beyond doubt - as are many notorious criminals (Huntley, etc. etc.) I just cannot see the logic in keeping them alive. Why not dispose of them instead of having a perpetual reminder of their evil deeds. The moors murderers remained almost as celebrities as do several others. Surely the victims families do not need to keep hearing their names for many years - especially when they are released - and then often re-offend. In the recent cases you refer to with young children being raped, I for one would welcome the chance to be the executioner.

[bernardo]

What's all this about "they will be out and about in a year or so"? The man was given a life sentence, with a MINIMUM tariff of 12 years, and the woman was given a sentence of 5 years. Therefore there is no way, by any stretch of the imagination, that they will be out in a year or so.

[jno]

Anyone remember Colin Stagg? They thought he had murdered Rachel Nickells on Wimbledon Common. They set up a 'honey-trap': a plainclothes policewoman tried to seduce him, saying she loved violence and would sleep with him if he would just admit to the killing.

Fortunately, Stagg stuck to his guns and said he didn't do it. But supposed he'd yielded to lust, or just a desire to get his name in the papers, and pretended he'd done it? Where would he be now? In jail. And where would he be if the death penalty had been in force? He'd be dead.

But he was innocent. Anyone supporting the death penalty will have to ponder how he - and plenty of other innocent people who have been put in jail - could ever be recompensed. And all those volunteering to be the executioner might like to consider just how they'd feel when he'd been posthumously cleared?

[Oneeyedvic]

So if a person was found guilty of killing two children, I assume (Lonnie ********) that you would be happy to 'kill them off'.

Just a thought - what about Angela Cannings.

I guess it is down to what is 'guilty beyond doubt'. Obviously in the eyes of the first judge / jury, she was guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. How much of an appeals process would you sugggest? From what I can gather, in the States, if someone is on death row, the appeals procedure last for many years (possibly the equivalent of life over here).

I would possibly also suggest that those people who think that jail is 'cushy' should go on an open day to one.

[Grunty]

The rape of the baby must be about the most sickening crime I have heard of (and I have heard the details of very many crimes). But to impose the death penalty, which has not been available in such cases since the nineteenth century, would involve such a massive change that it will never happen. A little less humanity in the prison system might do the trick, but where would that put us as a supposedly civilised society?

[Drusilla]

I admit I'm so liberal I make Mother Theresa seem like Ghengis Khan, but even I could be tempted to pour petrol over these two abusers and throw the match. I'm glad cooler heads than mine have been involved in the prosecution and sentencing in this case.

[Marky B]

I doubt the death penalty will come back,but what we need is tougher law and order measures of zero tolerance. It has worked in New York and Birmingham,Alabama.

Murderers like Huntley (and that sicko,who raped the little baby) should be told by a judge that they are going to prison for life - as in walking into prison on two legs and coming out in a wooden box. No consideration should be given for parole.

Drug peddlers should be banished for life,and the same applies to armed robbers. Those who on the wrong side of the law should feel the punishment and those on the right side should be able to feel safe to walk the streets,dismantle fortresses they have to convert their homes into,be assured their children can play safely outside and old people need no longer to lock up their houses.

It can be done - no gimmicks,but more policing the streets,dealing with real crime and if means a copper ******** an offender,then so be it.

Ta Ta

Marky B

[undercovers]

no one has blamed the "wishy washy liberals" or "liberal elite" yet - and this is 7 posts in! This must be a record of some kind for the news section

[johnlambert]

jno Colin Stagg wasnt convicted because the police used an illegal means of entrapment. The Met are not looking for anyone else in connection with killing Rachel.

I say it again and I'll keep on saying it:- HANG ALL MURDERERS.

We can prove it now with DNA, there is hardly and reasonable doubt when this is used, AND the are not free to kill again

[claireyfairy]

I have mixed views on this subject myself but just a little thought - science is exact but the human use of scientific methods is not so results such as those of a DNA test can be inaccurate.

Also people of power have a tendancy to lie. Don't kid urself for a second that some high ranking police chief or government official wouldn't think of framing someone for a crime if an investigation wasn't going well and the public was getting stressed about it, purely to look like they were doing their job and "keep the peace".

That said I do believe in harsher punishments but the death penalty is not an anwer because there are too many cases where innocent people are wrongly convicted.

[Lonnie]

oneeyedvic, first, can you put the first letter of the name you called me, i'd like to know, i've given my view, and thats what it is, as I said, we all differ, and because I don't have the same as you, you apparently insult me, at least, thats the way it appears, this, I always thought was a discussion forum.

[Oneeyedvic]

Lonnie - I did not call you a name - I promise. It is rather bad editing by Ab Ed.

I put brackets Lonnie & another user's name close brackets. It turned out that there was an imposter and it was not the user I thought. The Ed then removed the imposters post, the poster who's pointed out that there was an imposter, and then my apology.

I think that is about as clear as mud, but suffice to say, I did not call you a name and the asterix refers to another user!

[Lonnie]

Okay Oneeyedvic, I accept that, because reading your answers on other posts, this did surprise me, but you can understand why I took exception, these things happen from time to time I suppose.