Death Penalty - what thoughts?

[spaced]

I know we have discussed this on here before, and we have had mixed reactions. Most people apposing it said it was because there is a risk of innocent people being put to death.

Newlove killers: -

http://www.orange.co.uk/news/topstories/5579.h tm?linkfrom=hp3&link=box_hero_pos_1_1_link_tit le&article=080212x0830heronewsdeathpenaltycall

Personally, I do.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree?

Discuss

[Kromovaracun]

People are less likely than would seem to think twice if the death penalty is in place. They're far more likely to committ crimes based on whether they get caught or not.

A good example of this is late C18 London - no cohesive or effective police force (well, not as we know it today), so the authorities merely raised the severity of punishment to stop people committing crime. People ignored it because, regardless of the punishment, they knew they were pretty unlikely to get caught.

Thus the answer (like most things) lies in education. Get people thinking that they'll be caught (and make it a reality) and most crime will decrease.

[leylander]

Suicide or death penalty should be offered to these rats
who are laughing at the more civilised members of our society
take for instance the case of the three yobs who kicked that chap to death when he had the guts to face up to them,
you can bet that if there had only been one of them the chap would be alive today !!! an eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth !!! take the case of Jamie Bulger's killers released back into society with new identities !! They could be living on your street and will most likely reoffend because they know that they will only get a slap on the wrist,maybe go to prison where they get looked after kept warm and well fed and are able to use recreation facilities that ordinary Joe public can't afford!!!
It's time our namby pamby government got off their well paid backsides and held a referendum on the subject then we would see just what the public really feel!!!

[babybombo]

spaced, you said that the bible states only God has the right to take away a life, then why do you think that you or any other man, should be allowed to take the life of a murderer? I thought only God should be able to decide if he/she dies or not? Now I know you're going to say oh yes but did the criminal think of that when he/she was commiting a murder, this brings about the whole eye for an eye idea. I believe Mahatma Gandhi who said :
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

And I'm sorry but I can't see how the death of the culprit brings about comfort to the family of a victim. Killing the murdered doesn't bring their loved one back, and the pain that they are feeling is now felt by another family.
Personally I dont think ANY living person has the right to decide to take someones life, so obviously I think muderering someone is wrong and that person should be punished, but by them killing that murderer, what exactly have you achieved that couldn't have been achieved by sticking them in a jail cell for the rest of their life.
Now I know you would say, ah but they wont be in a jail cell for LIFE because our system is too soft, but if our system is too soft with jail sentences, what do you think they would be like with death sentences?!

[funkymoped]

eye for an eye...
:-)

[Ice.Maiden]

As I said Baby - I can see your point, and others who might agree with you, but what it would achieve - is that the person would no longer be around to commit further crimes once they were released from jail. Have you read the papers recently? seems like the most hideous people might be getting out of prison early. great! Would you like a child murderer living next door to you?

[jno]

unless I've missed it, nobody's taken up your original point, spaced: that innocent people would be put to death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesley_Molseed_mu rder
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Clark

Both would have been executed if there'd been a death penalty in force. (In fact both were so broken by the miscarriages of justice that they have since died.)

Plenty of others. It was because of several such cases in the 1950s (eg Timothy Evans) where the death penalty was inflicted on the innocent that executions were stopped. The public had come to realise that the justice system isn't infallible. Now it seems people are forgetting again.

[sp1814]

Ice.Maiden

Actually - my figures are flawed. Well, not flawed as such...but my logic is wrong. The figures quoted on that site are for America as a whole, not just the states that have the death penalty.

For an accurate comparison, I would have to take all the states which have the death penalty on their statute books and look at the figures for murders per capita in just those states.

Wow...I can be wrong.

Who'd have thought it eh?

[imhotep]

Problem is, is that we are all paying our taxes for keeping scum in prisons.
So, I think that if people who are proven GUILTY of murder,then I say yes,a life for a life.It may prevent overcrowding of prisons.
But, I agree with what babybombo and Ice.Maiden said.

[Ice.Maiden]

Fair dues, sp.
Jno - with DNA testing as it stands today, the chances of there being a mistake, along with other evidence, makes the ball game a whole lot different from how it was in the 1950's.
Sorry, nothing convinces me that we're better off without the death penalty for murder. If someone killed one of mine, I'd go down for them - and yes, if the dp was in force, I'd be happy to go that way, knowing I'd avenged the ones I'd loved.

[ludwig]

jno - You are right, the justice system is not infallible.
An innocent Brazilian man had his head blown off on the underground recently, however it would be silly to argue that because this tragedy happened the police should never be allowed to carry or use firearms again.
What needs to happen instead is that controls are put in place to eliminate as far as possible the risk of this kind of thing happening - it would be the same with the death penalty.

I'd hazard a guess that there are more innocent lives currently being lost through murderers being let out and reoffending, than there would be through miscarriages of justice if the death penalty were in place. That's something we'll never know of course, it's just my feeling.
A proper life sentence would offer the same protection for the public of course, and this is my preferred option.

[jno]

IceMaiden, DNA isn't some kind of magic wand that miraculously separates the guilty from the innocent so that nobody will ever make a mistake again.

Believe me, humans make mistakes.

http://www.rss.org.uk/pdf/FT%20article%20-%20W hy%20No%20one%20Understands%20Probability.pdf

[jno]

just to add that ludwig's example, the death of de Menezes, is a classic example of human error. Controls were in place to stop this kind of thing happening. They totally failed, because police couldn't tell one person from another, because one went off for a pee at the vital moment... all the usual screwups.

Human beings make mistakes.

[snow.maiden]

Yes Jno - but genetic fingerprinting is ALMOST infallible - and notice I added "along with other evidence". A person wouldn't be tried on one piece of evidence alone.
I respect your opinions, but I also have mine. Those who set out to murder are of no use to anyone.

[sir.prize]

If capital punishment is to remain as a no option . . . .then life should mean life.

Those three who killed Mr Newlove will no doubt be boasting in future years of their actions and will once more be part of society - and maybe re-commit, knowing that the only punishment is to be looked after very comfortably.

One big failing in the judicial system is that occasionally the Government announce new maximum penalties for various crimes. They should be announcing new MINIMUM penalties instead.

People who steal vast amounts of money in raids - either armed or unarmed - are always sentenced to longer prison terms than are murderers.

Is that a good judicial system?

[snow.maiden]

You can think of loads of examples can't you, sir.prize. The whole system's a mockery.