Trav Le Bleu Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 the counselling required for those about to die That - is - BRILLIANT! "Right, you're sentenced to death for your crimes, but first we'd just like to make sure that you're all fine with this and not too upset." It obviously doesn't work as a deterent - The US has the death penaly and far more murderers. Not sure it helps relatives of the victims too much either. Gosh. Look who won "Most Hated Poster of the Month"... Does this mean I have to pass on my trophy? I reckon I had it for keeps after Walkers and Ultra pissed all over it. Isn't it like Brazil and the Jules Rimet Trophy for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilo Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 That - is - BRILLIANT! "Right, you're sentenced to death for your crimes, but first we'd just like to make sure that you're all fine with this and not too upset." It obviously doesn't work as a deterent - The US has the death penaly and far more murderers. Not sure it helps relatives of the victims too much either. Exactly, it's one of the major problems with having a democratic system and the death penalty. The two are completely incompatible. A democracy has to concern itself with human rights, the right to appeal and the need to prevent cruel and unusual punishment. With all this borne in mind, the death penalty and all its trappings become hideously expensive and inefficient, which is why Britain scrapped it in the 1960s; as well as miscarriages of justice. Clearly the likes of Saudi Arabia, Iran and China are completely unaccountable to their people and can largely treat prisoners however the hell they like because there is no prospect of their being held to account for any abuses or miscarriages of justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 Japan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 Japan? No. Brazil and the Jules Rimet Trophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxyPV Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 I think we should bring back the death penalty just for serial paedos. No, wait any paedo. Well murderers too. And rapists. Spouse beaters People who neglect/ abuse kids Traitors. Anyone who illegally takes money from the state Tax avoiders career politicians People who don't say thanks after you let them in when driving Anyone from the centre out to the right Ms Foxy (on occassions) the guy in the post office for being too cheery that early in the morning anyone wih religious beliefs / convictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 I think we should bring back the death penalty just for serial paedos. No, wait any paedo. Well murderers too. And rapists. Spouse beaters People who neglect/ abuse kids Traitors. Anyone who illegally takes money from the state Tax avoiders career politicians People who don't say thanks after you let them in when driving Anyone from the centre out to the right Ms Foxy (on occassions) the guy in the post office for being too cheery that early in the morning anyone wih religious beliefs / convictions. You missed out Dick and Dom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 Ms Foxy (on occassions) Fvck yeh. Especially when she does that thing with the grunting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AoWW Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 Fvck yeh. Especially when she does that thing with the grunting. She does that with you too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxyPV Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 Fvck yeh. Especially when she does that thing with the grunting. That's more for our snuff role playing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fosse Boy Posted 4 August 2011 Share Posted 4 August 2011 I'd quite like to know why the guy who started the petition thinks the life of a copper is more valuable than that of any other person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSi13 Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 **** off to this. Nobody on earth is worthy of deciding who is to be put to death against his or her will. Such a thing is called MURDER even if done by an entire nation rather than a single psycho. We as a CIVILISED nation would be degraded if we allow this to happen. Also it would be interesting to hear from those who support this...a person is put before you condemned to death...would YOU pull the trigger? Think about it. "He without sin..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingari Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 nobody should be jailed because that's like state sponsored kidnapping against someone's will nobody should be fined any money because that's like state sponsored extortion nobody should do community service because that's like state sponsored slavery any form of punishment makes us just as bad as the wrongdoers let he that is without sin cast the first parking fine . only god in heaven can decide stuff like this on the day of retribution edit; E-petitions urge MPs to debate return of death penalty http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14400246 it seems that the government is giving the people the right to petition for such things i reckon it's a dangerous road to give people the right to express their opinions honestly , that's not democracy is it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 I'd quite like to know why the guy who started the petition thinks the life of a copper is more valuable than that of any other person. Was he a copper? They have always been like that. The reason it took so long to catch Raoul Moat was they were prepared to sacrifice a member of the public so they could pull the trigger on him instead of risking officers going directly after him for an arrest. (imo of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 **** off to this. Nobody on earth is worthy of deciding who is to be put to death against his or her will. Such a thing is called MURDER even if done by an entire nation rather than a single psycho. We as a CIVILISED nation would be degraded if we allow this to happen. Also it would be interesting to hear from those who support this...a person is put before you condemned to death...would YOU pull the trigger? Think about it. "He without sin..... Yeah I would pull the trigger on anyone who has killed a member of my own family. Easily. In fact I would prefer to do it with a knife across the throat whilst making sure my eyes looking into theirs were the last thing they saw, then again I'm a bit of a bastard sometimes. Nah I dont agree its murder, I wouldnt vote for it like I have said, but if state sponsored killing is murder, prison is kidnap etc etc. Ever civilised society does needs restraints to protect who want to go about their business in a normal and civilised way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 edit; E-petitions urge MPs to debate return of death penalty http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14400246 it seems that the government is giving the people the right to petition for such things i reckon it's a dangerous road to give people the right to express their opinions honestly , that's not democracy is it ? My advice, "be careful what you click for" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samilktray Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Yeah I would pull the trigger on anyone who has killed a member of my own family. Easily. In fact I would prefer to do it with a knife across the throat whilst making sure my eyes looking into theirs were the last thing they saw, then again I'm a bit of a bastard sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charl91 Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 So, the state can't kill one person for murdering hundreds in their own country, but it's fine to send in our army to kill thousands (including innocents, even if it's accidently) in other countries? Is it only ok to murder on foreign soil? It seems to contradict the "murder is wrong in any circumstance" motif that people seem to think our country has. Yes, I would support the Death Penalty if it was used in the very very rare and extreme situations. I think there are one or two occasions where it is justified, but I believe a lot of criteria should be fulfilled. You can also argue that innocents can be put to death, but firstly, like I said there should be proof without doubt that they did it, and secondly, surely those innocents (though I don't think innocents would be, as I think they'd need substantial proof) sentenced to the death penalty would still have to serve life imprisonment anyway, if the death penalty was not around. How is that any better - many here seem to think that life imprisonment is a harsher penalty then the death penalty anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Was he a copper? They have always been like that. The reason it took so long to catch Raoul Moat was they were prepared to sacrifice a member of the public so they could pull the trigger on him instead of risking officers going directly after him for an arrest. (imo of course) Imo, for shit must come out your mouth, than out of your arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basildon Fox Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Firstly there is no evidence to suggest the death penalty would be in any way a deterrant. In the case of pre meditated murder does anyone seriously think it would make somebody who is unhinged enough to think again? Also if there is a pre meditated act that causes life long disability to someone do we then do the same to the perpetrator? Where does it end? An arguement for would be someone like Roy Whiting who killed Sarah Payne. A depraved individual with a long history of crimes against children or Leroy Bellfield who is a serious danger to the general public. Both will never be released so what is the point in keeping scum like that alive? The civilised Country arguement could well be used to support the execution of these kind of people as what benefit do we get by keeping them alive? I am not sure what the answer is. If it were a member of my family then I would want retribution but objectively I doubt it would make our streets any safer. From that viewpoint along with the amount of costs on appeals that a case like this would bring I doubt if it is the answer. Tougher sentencing on everything together with a much harsher regime inside may be. I'd quite like to know why the guy who started the petition thinks the life of a copper is more valuable than that of any other person. This is one of the most pathetic things I have seen written on here. The Police potentially risk their lives everyday to protect people like you and me. If somebody takes their life when they are trying to do their job then the severity of the punishment should reflect that. It has nothing to do with being 'more valuable' perhaps one day when you grow up you may understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fosse Boy Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 This is one of the most pathetic things I have seen written on here. The Police potentially risk their lives everyday to protect people like you and me. If somebody takes their life when they are trying to do their job then the severity of the punishment should reflect that. It has nothing to do with being 'more valuable' perhaps one day when you grow up you may understand that. Pathetic? It was a genuine question. Paramedics, firefighters etc also risk their lives but without the means to protect themselves. So should the threshold perhaps not be people dying in the line of work? What makes the police so special that one of their lives being taken demands similar fatal revenge from the state, but that of someone randomly attacked and brutally murdered doesn't? Pretty redundant as to who does and doesn't deserve execution from my personal point of view anyway because I would emigrate if the death penalty was ever brought back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingari Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 So, the state can't kill one person for murdering hundreds in their own country, but it's fine to send in our army to kill thousands (including innocents, even if it's accidently) in other countries? Is it only ok to murder on foreign soil? It seems to contradict the "murder is wrong in any circumstance" motif that people seem to think our country has. Yes, I would support the Death Penalty if it was used in the very very rare and extreme situations. I think there are one or two occasions where it is justified, but I believe a lot of criteria should be fulfilled. You can also argue that innocents can be put to death, but firstly, like I said there should be proof without doubt that they did it, and secondly, surely those innocents (though I don't think innocents would be, as I think they'd need substantial proof) sentenced to the death penalty would still have to serve life imprisonment anyway, if the death penalty was not around. How is that any better - many here seem to think that life imprisonment is a harsher penalty then the death penalty anyway! Good post Why do so many keep banging on about the death penalty being no deterrent? The murder rate has more than doubled (actually nearly trebled) since it was abolished a mere 45 years ago. Never in history has the murder rate changed so dramatically in such a short time. There have been fluctuations, but until the abolition the general trend was pretty level. Whilst I’m quite prepared to accept the there may be other factors ( although no-one ever seems to say exactly what they are ), to dismiss the deterrent effect is ludicrous So please , give me the factors that have caused this rapid rise in murder in the UK Is it better housing , less poverty , better education , better healthcare , high immigration ? , What the fook has caused the dramatic rise in murder rate in the UK in the last 4 decades or so Please don’t use the US as an example , it has no more relevance than Singapore or Saudi Arabia . Please stick to the only comparison that matters , and that is what has happened in the UK since the abolition I'm sure if there had been a downward trend in murders , this would have been the only comparison that mattered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingari Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 So, the state can't kill one person for murdering hundreds in their own country, but it's fine to send in our army to kill thousands (including innocents, even if it's accidently) in other countries? Is it only ok to murder on foreign soil? It seems to contradict the "murder is wrong in any circumstance" motif that people seem to think our country has. Yes, I would support the Death Penalty if it was used in the very very rare and extreme situations. I think there are one or two occasions where it is justified, but I believe a lot of criteria should be fulfilled. You can also argue that innocents can be put to death, but firstly, like I said there should be proof without doubt that they did it, and secondly, surely those innocents (though I don't think innocents would be, as I think they'd need substantial proof) sentenced to the death penalty would still have to serve life imprisonment anyway, if the death penalty was not around. How is that any better - many here seem to think that life imprisonment is a harsher penalty then the death penalty anyway! Good post Why do so many keep banging on about the death penalty being no deterrent? The murder rate has more than doubled (actually nearly trebled) since it was abolished a mere 45 years ago. Never in history has the murder rate changed so dramatically in such a short time. There have been fluctuations, but until the abolition the general trend was pretty level. Whilst I’m quite prepared to accept the there may be other factors ( although no-one ever seems to say exactly what they are ), to dismiss the deterrent effect is ludicrous So please , give me the factors that have caused this rapid rise in murder in the UK Is it better housing , less poverty , better education , better healthcare , high immigration ? , What the fook has caused the dramatic rise in murder rate in the UK in the last 4 decades or so Please don’t use the US as an example , it has no more relevance than Singapore or Saudi Arabia . Please stick to the only comparison that matters , and that is what has happened in the UK since the abolition I'm sure if there had been a downward trend in murders , this would have been the only comparison that mattered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basildon Fox Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Good post Why do so many keep banging on about the death penalty being no deterrent? The murder rate has more than doubled (actually nearly trebled) since it was abolished a mere 45 years ago. Never in history has the murder rate changed so dramatically in such a short time. There have been fluctuations, but until the abolition the general trend was pretty level. Whilst Im quite prepared to accept the there may be other factors ( although no-one ever seems to say exactly what they are ), to dismiss the deterrent effect is ludicrous So please , give me the factors that have caused this rapid rise in murder in the UK Is it better housing , less poverty , better education , better healthcare , high immigration ? , What the fook has caused the dramatic rise in murder rate in the UK in the last 4 decades or so Please dont use the US as an example , it has no more relevance than Singapore or Saudi Arabia . Please stick to the only comparison that matters , and that is what has happened in the UK since the abolition I'm sure if there had been a downward trend in murders , this would have been the only comparison that mattered So do you think that bringing baack a death sentance would decrease the crime rate and if so why? I am sure there could be spin put on to it by saying that there would be less murders if we sent any immigrant packing as there have been immigrants who have comitted rape, murder etc. discounting the fact that that it would be a miniscule percentage. Perhaps the fact that religion is an out dated purpose for many in this country (i am not religious btw) has made the crime rate worse. Softer sentences for less serious crimes could be a factor. Who knows? I certainly think that there is a distinct lack of morals in this country these days, could the fact that everything has been desensitised from tv to films, computer games, even books. Surely factors like these would have a far greater baring on an increase in violent crime than the death penalty being abolished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexikokopops Posted 5 August 2011 Share Posted 5 August 2011 Good post Why do so many keep banging on about the death penalty being no deterrent? The murder rate has more than doubled (actually nearly trebled) since it was abolished a mere 45 years ago. Never in history has the murder rate changed so dramatically in such a short time. There have been fluctuations, but until the abolition the general trend was pretty level. Whilst I’m quite prepared to accept the there may be other factors ( although no-one ever seems to say exactly what they are ), to dismiss the deterrent effect is ludicrous So please , give me the factors that have caused this rapid rise in murder in the UK The first thing I learnt in my stats degree was that correlation doesn't imply causation. A prime example being the episode of South Park episode where they think KFC prevents cancer Just out of curiosity have you got a link to these figures? I just like bring stats into things Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.