Death Penalty. Yes or No

[peterb]

3 years by any chance?

[Max]

So ultimately, what is everyone elses take on this?

I think it's a complicated question and simplistic answers are never going to be satisfactory. For me, I'd support the death penalty, but only when the evidence is overwhelming, amd even then, only in cases with some level of special nastiness.

[Epixx]

I say no, to the death penalty if only we actually enforced appropriate custodial sentences.

It appears that for everyone except Peter Suttcliff a life sentence doesn't mean in jail till you die.

[papap47]

Many criminals now can easily go out of jail because of connections inside. And many innocent people may be jeopardize if this kind of people will be out there because without death sentence they can just bail out.

YES to Death penalty. Give them fear to commit a crime.

[psdie]

Stick them all on a island with nothing but blunt instruments and last one alive.. ..lives the longest*

A bit like Australia then?

[daniel32885]

Yes. My view is very much "an eye for an eye." If someone intended to murder/remove the life of another human being, then why should they keep there life?

An valid arguement for this would be the Lockerbie Bomber, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, was released from prison after taking the life of many innocent people. He was released due to his cancer condition, and given back to his family. Why? Shouldn't his useless life have been taken' many years ago after the life of the civilians was taken so brutaly?

Thank you,

Daniel

[opel80uk]

The Guildford four and Birmingham six would almost certainly have been executed had there been the death penalty at that time. That's 10 innocent people that would have lost their lives if the majority of posters on this thread had of had their way, from just 2 cases. And before anyone mentions new advancement in forensics, they were all convicted on the basis of (what was thought of then) foolproof science.

If the cost of ensuring that no innocent person is wrongly executed is that we don't execute anyone, then so be it. I certainly think that life should mean life, sentencing is woefully lenient in this country, and far from being overly concerned about those people who are genuinely guilty, I'd be more concerned about those who are genuinely innocent.

[pp05]

I think it's a complicated question and simplistic answers are never going to be satisfactory. For me, I'd support the death penalty, but only when the evidence is overwhelming, amd even then, only in cases with some level of special nastiness.

I echo your sentiments Max.

If the evidence is absolutely clear as daylight - and even then more importantly) - it has to be proven the person has mental issues / past history of that sort of thing - then death penalty should be an option. Then once the option is activated let the family or relations of the deceased have the final say on whether to go through with it. Something which takes into account the views of all parties affected.

[SeriousSam]

To those that blindly advocate the death penalty I suggest that you read "An Innocent Man" by John Grisham to see the fundamental issue with it within our / similar legal systems. That's not to say I'm against it, as locking people up for life and treating them like dangerous animals isn't that humane either. In all honesty the entire system needs a rework, and that includes the precepts on which we base our society. However, the likelihood of that happening is rather slim...

[Lucio]

There is one thing no one has suggested so far, what if the death penalty was voluntary? If life in prision really meant life, should it not be an option to have assisted suicided in those cases?

[PowerPie5000]

The person who did that should be forced to take his own life.... Lock him in a cell with with a knife so he can slit his own throat. If he fails to do this within one hour then he'll be slowly gassed. My view may be extremely barbaric and sadistic but it'll certainly make people think twice.

Oh and my answer to the death penalty is most certainly YES!

[pauldarkside]

There is one thing no one has suggested so far, what if the death penalty was voluntary? If life in prision really meant life, should it not be an option to have assisted suicided in those cases?

Seeing as assisted suicide is illegal in this country, no. Even if it were legal here, I'd still say no as a term in prison should mean just that - time to reflect on their crime, despite financial considerations.

[Damnation]

I say no if the prisons became harsher. right now they get tv in their cells, free gym etc. money to buy clothes...

[directhex]

Until the death sentence can be reversed in the event of miscarriages of justice, it should be avoided like the plague.

[pauldarkside]

Until the death sentence can be reversed in the event of miscarriages of justice, it should be avoided like the plague.

Damn right. Evidence can be misinterpreted, juries can be misguided. Anything with human input is prone to error. No respawn in real life.

[roachcoach]

If life in prison actually did what it said on the tin, any need for a death sentence would be mooted by virtue of the fact said person is going to die in prison anyway.