Death penalty

[masondd2007]

y oppose the death penalty because of innocence

[Loosehead]

Now take a deep breath, what are you asking?

[Lonnie]

This looks like the makings of a good question, as Loosehead says, start again.

[dyli795]

your question may be a bit easyer to answer if you can just explain it a bit further. what do you mean?

[THECORBYLOON]

What about the Birmingham Six, fender62?

[Pippa68]

Derek Bentley, Timothy Evans et al.

Stefan Kisko..if the death penalty had been in force he would have hanged. As it was he died shortly after release from a very long time in prison, the poor man.

[noxlumos]

Dna evidence would not have helped in the Bentley case, it was whether or not when he said "Let him have it Chris" he meant give him the gun or shoot him, so DNA would not have helped at all.
I am 100% against the death penalty as one innocent death is one too many and there will always be innocent deaths.

[Loosehead]

yes noxy especially the ones caused by lack of deterrent

[Pippa68]

The death penalty doesn't seem to have worked as a deterrent over in the USA.

[king_arthur]

Pippa,
The USA and UK have different cultures so you cannot really use that as a comparison

[Pippa68]

What has culture got to do with it? besides which, it isn't that different.

I am confused.

[Loosehead]

There's no such thing as 100% detterrent. Just becaue some are not deterred it does not mean that there is no deterrent. Some people are not deterred by jail but I am is jail then not a deterrent?

How many murders where there in 1960?

How many murders where there in 2006?

case rests

[king_arthur]

American citizens have the "right to bear arms" it is in the constitution of the USA so more handguns are available per head of population. We British have no such right, so there are not so many weapons in circulation.

[Pippa68]

Very true.

There are always going to be people who think they can get away with it..and on the other hand, terrorists are perfectly happy to give up their lives 'for the cause' and become martyrs.

[Pippa68]

A murder can take place without a gun..of course guns are available in this country, and I accept that in the USA it is acceptable to own one.

Looking at the statistics:

United Kingdom: 0.0140633 murders per 1,000 people
USA: 0.042802 murders per 1,000 people

These don't show what the murder weapon was, but it tells me that in a country where the death penalty exists (depending on the state) the 'punishment' is pretty useless..especially considering that someone can die of old age on Death Row ;o)

The American system also appears to have much longer prison sentences than the UK, although I don't actually know that to be fact.

[king_arthur]

Only the fundementalist elements Pippa, when I was in the army, very few IRA terrorists were willing to die for "the cause", however, things have changed since 9/11, the Irish element is out of the equation and we have a whole new situation to deal with so I take your point.

[noxlumos]

It's the whole idea promoted from the cradle to the grave that "stuff" ( money, goods, achievement, cars, houses, jewellery) are more important than people that causes the incredible sense of want and frustration that drives some people to commit violent crime, the massive drug abuse that we have and the high rate of muggings and robberies. We have ourselves to blame for that. We have a created a culture of people who are shown things and want things they can't easily have, so those who are none too bright and none too moral will use violence to get them, including murder. We have to adjust society's values across the board if we are to ever combat this at grass roots level. Even if we do that, you're very unlikely to be killed by someone you don't know, murders generally take place in a domestic setting and there's no deterrant for losing your cool with your family because in effect those are crimes of malice or passion.
"Terrorism" is a whole seperate issue, it's politically and culturally motivated and so cannot even be considered in terms of "normal" murder.
The death penalty also subliminally sends out the message that it's ok to kill. It is not ok to kill, anyone, for any reason, however much we might wish to on a personal level people who murder children etc etc etc, we have to set a better, less barbaric standard than affirming the killer's ideas that it's alright to kill, not to mention the innocent people that will be judicially killed because the law in this country is so lackadaisical.

[dyli795]

eighteen answers so far not counting this one because it's not realy an answer. i still don't understand the question! but, using my imagination i'll have a stab at it, i love puzzles, o.k. here goes. i don't oppose the death penalty because of innocence, i oppose it because it's wrong. there that's clear enough. i hope it's a valid answer.

[Little Willy]

Death penalty yes, Death penalty no, i will try and explain my opinion,if a man or woman comes home from work unexpectantly and catches his or her partner in bed with someone and then loses control and kills the partner or lover then they should not expect the death penalty.
But on the other hand someone who sets out to kill people on purpose,and they are proven guilty by DNA Evidence and there is no question of their guilt,should in my opinion be put to death.