You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
would you
No, but I’d put a bet on it going through.
No, but I can imagine a lot who would.
Nope. Not a chance. Did you have anyone in mind Op? Mother in law perhaps?
If there was a vote I would vote Yes.
100% Yes.
er no it has no place in a civilised world.
No.
If there is a vote I would vote Yes.
to the surprise of no one
No- the state has no business murdering it's citizens for revenge
to the surprise of no one
No- the state has no business murdering it’s citizens for revenge
I think there should be a referendum on this don't you think so?
😀
100% yes. This country is far too soft. Knew someone who's husband was killed by a drunk driver whilst walking to work. The driver received 8 years If I can remember correctly. It was definitely no more than 10. The convicted laughed after she was sentenced. He left two little girls behind. No space in this world for ****'* like that.
Categorically no. But there are enough stupid people around to vote yes.
This country is far too soft. Knew someone who’s husband was killed by a drunk driver whilst walking to work.
Find me some evidence that it works or do you just want revenge?
Find me some evidence that it works or do you just want revenge?
Nothing wrong with revenge as far as I know as long as it is within the law.
No. You can't bring people back to life that have been wrongly convicted. Too many mistakes in the past.
God no. How many times have the police and the CPS got things wrong? How many innocent people would have been killed?
Do you really want to live in a barbaric country like america?
I have no evidence I admit. I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment. Maybe it would make people think about doing such heinous crimes prior to committing them. Again yes, your right. A huge part of me wants revenge when something affects you or your family so deeply!
Absolutely not. I certainly think that there may be times when justice is done a disservice due to lenient sentencing, but even for that I would say no.
The Jamie Bulger murderers are an example. One of the worst crimes I have ever come across, and yet I can not see how more death satisfies death.
No. It is barbaric and not a deterrent.
Just look at the countries that have the death penalty.
I have no evidence I admit. I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment.
It's a common assumption that is proved wrong a lot.
As much as there are plenty of people I'd like to see hanged,
Of course not. The problem with capital punishment is that it's so very, very final. People can and do get wrongly convicted.
I have no evidence I admit. I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment.
Perhaps that explains why theres such low levels of violent crime in the USA 🙂
Absolutely not.
Also the British public should not be trusted with this issue in a referendum either.
No. It doesn’t work as a deterrent, is irreversible and also a repugnant thing to do as a society.
I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment.
you assume wrongly. There's no evidence to support it.
I can't believe that anyone with an ounce of intelligence could think a death penalty is a "good thing"
Nothing wrong with revenge as far as I know as long as it is within the law.
Shut up you absolute clown shoe. Go and crawl back under whatever rock you’ve been banned to recently. The sooner you get a lifetime ban, the better.
No, but those in long term imprisonment should be put to work and earn their keep. Not something to keep them occupied, but proper work that benefits society.
I can’t believe that anyone with an ounce of intelligence could think a death penalty is a “good thing”
It comes to emotion and a sense of injustice. When people see what appears to be lenient sentences or don't get legal judgements they look to something different. It then boils down to revenge and anger.
No but I’m pretty sure we’d be promised 350 million quid for the nhs if we did.
Ill the take the bait. If there is evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt then yes.
Yes it's partly revenge but I think locking someone in a cage for 20 years is revenge too. I think some people who are career criminals are never going to change and will just have more scumbag kids who will follow the same pattern.
If a dog keeps biting people it gets put down but people can go to jail over and over and over again and we keep letting them out expecting them to be "fixed"
If a dog keeps biting people it gets put down but people can go to jail over and over and over again and we keep letting them out expecting them to be “fixed”
How about investing in rehabilitation and working on the things that have taken people that far down a road?
Some bigger questions to be asked in society like the war on drugs and what the cost of that is.
Although I believe the death penalty represents justice in some instances. The chance of miscarriages of justice and the brutalising effect it has on a society make it a no for me.
You'd have to be a gammon-shaped **** to vote yes in a referendum on capital punishment.
I can’t believe that anyone with an ounce of intelligence could think a death penalty is a “good thing”
And the reverse is also true.
As displyed here.
[quote=Chewkw]..
If there was a vote I would vote Yes.
100% Yes
Mike, is there any topic you don’t have an opinion on? 🙂
Edit: And Mick, you may have well hit the jackpot with this one!
I agree with rehab and trying to fix issues before it comes to a situation where someone is murdered but what about people who are beyond help and have been in and out of jail all their life? When do you draw a line and say we aren't letting you back out because we know you will re offend
Albert Pierrepoint (perhaps the best known British hangman) was asked if he thought the death penalty was a deterrent. His answer was unequivocally: No! Given that the best estimate of the number he executed was over 400 he might have a better insight than most.
For me, in limited circumstances I would vote yes.
but I think locking someone in a cage for 20 years is revenge too
No, it isn't its two things 1. a punishment for the criminal, and 2. to remove them from society. Plus there is rehabilitation and the chance to rejoin society*
* I'm aware that doesn't really work in this country now, but's that's down to chronic under-funding of the prison service than any philosophical shortcoming
Mike, is there any topic you don’t have an opinion on?
Ask a question get an answer.....
When do you draw a line and say we aren’t letting you back out because we know you will re offend
Start by working out where your rehab is going wrong.
If it was me.who had committed the crime Id much.rather be strung up than face the rest of my days in jail, with no possibility of release
So without even considering the pretty important element of wrongful convictions, on that basis im against it...
Ask a question get an answer…..
An opinion 🙂
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated? I'm not looking for an argument I'm just curious. I think in an ideal world everyone who committed a crime would go to jail and come out a well rounded person but in reality it doesn't seem so easy. Even if we ploughed millions into rehab I think some people would still re offend
Assume the OP was reading about the recent hangings in Japan? I’ll admit I was surprised Japan still does that.
No, it’s a barbaric revenge killing to appease the hard of thinking.
Also, if I never have to suffer another referendum again I’ll be a happy man.
In regards to crime and punishment there seems to be two polarised schools of thought (as ever) the right seems to think no punishment is too severe, hang ‘em high! Lock ‘em up yadda yadda yadda and time and time again that sort of thinking only leads one way, higher crime rates and massive prison populations. Nations who actually use science to reabitate and re-educate offenders have much lower crime and are closing prisons for lack of demand, but you know, that sort of thing jsut isn’t ‘common sense’ is it?
I think some people would still re offend
don't disagree with you, I think it's almost a certainty. Still not a good enough reason to off them though, is it? Just because we can't be arsed to deal with their re-offending?
You'd only ever reserve the death penalty for the most serious of crimes anyway, like murder. and those re-offenders are serial killers, and we lock those up in Rampton and Broadmoor, mostly for their own safety.
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated? I’m not looking for an argument I’m just curious
No but serial offending is something that needs looking at
An assessment of the 3 strikes rules in California said it didn't reduce crime but lower alcohol consumption did.
Being tough is seen as something that wins elections, nobody is going to take a policy of working with offenders and people at risk to an election.
Nations who actually use science to reabitate and re-educate offenders have much lower crime and are closing prisons for lack of demand, but you know, that sort of thing jsut isn’t ‘common sense’ is it?
It is but it takes a change of mindset.
Do you think everyone is able to be rehabilitated?
The evidence suggests yes.
Once you accept that ‘evil’ is a fictional thing, then you can accept criminals act for a few reasons, lack of options (the desperate) a lack of sense of belonging (the greedy) and poor mental health (the insane).
Thats not to say that someone like Fred West should have ever been freed if he had faced trial, but if he couldn’t have been then a secure mental facility and treatment, however unpalatable, was the right thing to do, even if it was never possible to ‘fix’ him in his lifetime.
£35+VAT should be the cut off.
Absolutely no. 12 years in law enforcement taught me that mistakes happen every day - police, prosecution, public, judiciary are not always correct but once your dead you are alwysa dead.
No, but those in long term imprisonment should be put to work and earn their keep. Not something to keep them occupied, but proper work that benefits society.
Id vote No to the death penalty, but do want to see more visiable repentance to society for the pain and damage the perpetrators cause.
HTHs.
Never. It's not an effective deterrent, look at the USA. The risks of a miscarriage and taking the life of someone innocent is too much to accept.
Also, I don't see it as punishment. Once you have been killed, there is nothing left to feel the pain of your sentence, you have, in effect, been released.
I'm not saying all murderers should be executed, and all criminals should be locked up and the keys thrown away.
I appreciate a lot of people are a product of their environment and the choices they had. But if your dad was a total scum bag then the apple doesn't fall far from the tree in most cases. It's breaking the cycle that seems to be the issue.
But on the other hand if some people are convicted beyond any doubt with bang on evidence etc and are locked up for the rest of their life with no chance of release then why are we paying to keep them alive?
Surely the money could be used to try and break that cycle and help people that can be helped?
If it was <span class="skimlinks-unlinked">me.who</span> had committed the crime Id much.rather be strung up than face the rest of my days in jail, with no possibility of release
There's this and the risk of martyring convicts. There's a reason the government never classified The Troubles as a war and never classed the IRA as soldiers. Similarly none that were convicted were given the death sentence (the hunger strikers were the closest to this, but it's easily arguable their death was of their own making).
The last thing you want is tear-jerking folk songs rousing the rabble and romanticising someone dying for their cause/actions. Think of Tommy Robinson at the moment and what would happen if some of his nastier associates swung for some of their previous work. We – the great unwashed – would know their names, for a start.
But on the other hand if some people are convicted beyond any doubt with bang on evidence etc and are locked up for the rest of their life with no chance of release then why are we paying to keep them alive?
Because we are better than that.
No. Been on the wrong side of the law and found no charge but in Texas i could have fried.
.
I'm in the No camp, but what about offering a choice to the offender?
I've no idea what the mindset is of someone on a whole life sentence. Some people are just pure evil and they must know it. Maybe for them, death penalty might be preferable to a lifetime in prison, with certainty of no release. If we are talking about our humanity here, then which is the most humane option?
I want to say yes but would vote NO because of that bit of doubt about any conviction.
I have no evidence I admit. I am merely assuming that it would lessen serious offenses due to the extreme nature of the punishment. Maybe it would make people think about doing such heinous crimes prior to committing them. Again yes, your right. A huge part of me wants revenge when something affects you or your family so deeply!
the US has the death sentence, is it a murder free country?
No for me.
Any state that believes they have the right to murder their citizens to keep them in line is in no way civilised imo.
harsher punishments do not reduce crime. it is a crutch for people who believe in good and evil but don’t want to address any of the issues in society. Much like the way the Americans like to arm themselves and protect their own rather than solve the problems in their community. Great for sound bites terrible for everyone.
Maybe for them, death penalty might be preferable to a lifetime in prison, with certainty of no release. If we are talking about our humanity here, then which is the most humane option?
There me was an American documentary on prisons in Norway. They were amazed by the prisons the attitudes and the low reoffending rates. The inmates were saying although the system seemed light by comparison they were still separated from society and their life and that exclusion was the punishment and the rest was the reforming part
Question is do you think prison should be punitive (fines, lashes, eye for eye, death etc.) or reformative?
Depends if we can find a better way to rehabilitate offenders. We can't carry on just locking people up the way we do.
Prisons are overcrowded and we also appear to have a lot of foreign criminals in the system who we can't deport because of where they're from and what will potentially happen to them.
Some people just don't seem to be able or want to be rehabilitated - look at one of the James Bulger killers - how many chances and changes of identity has he had? You can't tell me it's in societies best interest to keep releasing him and giving him yet another chance? We have to draw a line somewhere with certain offenders.
What about the Moors murderers? How much did that cost us to keep those 2 vile creatures locked up in secure units?
Although I'd vote no, there really needs to be some serious reviews on the causes of people turning to crime. Especially serious crime to try and find answers to deter it.
As others have mentioned, does it make sense to keep sending someone back to jail or pay for someone to sit in a jail for the rest of their lives to die there anyway (well, till they're let out on compassionate grounds to die at home).
Clearly death penalties doesnt work, see America. Similarly though prison doesn't seem to either.
Yes.
How about investing in rehabilitation and working on the things that have taken people that far down a road?
Your'e a bit behind the times Mike, theyv'e been doing that for years & it isn't very successful.
Ask any prison officer. In the 16 years I spent as a screw I saw very little success in the facilitation of reducing re-offending behaviour. (meaning that reducing offending behaviour is facilitated for but It's not very effective, plus at my last jail there weren't many who deserved the death sentence, even though I really thought otherwise in some cases)
At HMP Frankland, a Cat A high security prison, they had a SOTP (Sex Offenders Treatment Programme)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40460637
Even I though, as a 'hardened screw' would need to know that the perpetrator was 100% guilty of a crime worthy of the death sentence. IE, paedo rapists etc.
In itself, no.
But prisons have been a complete failure.
Deportation is the solution. Can’t live in a civilised society. Try being exported to an uncivilised one. Libya would probably pay to take them off our hands.
Your’e a bit behind the times Mike, theyv’e been doing that for years & it isn’t very successful.
So the current approach taken doesn't work? Is that what is being done elsewhere? Is there a better way of doing it?
Is there stuff that can be done at a society level that could reduce offending?
Is there stuff that can be done at a society level that could reduce offending?
Ending drug prohition would would reduce offending 90%
Interesting fact is that the Golf R is involved in 3% of UK crimes.
Is there stuff that can be done at a society level that could reduce offending?
Probably, but as a now 'ex screw' I mainly remember the re-offenders that came back in!
Ending drug prohition would would reduce offending 90%
Hmmm... maybe not 90% but I'd say a good margin. However, most drug dealers/users aren't murderers/worthy of the death penalty, just either local scrotes/smackheads.
Lots & lots of crimes are drug related but the death sentence candidates are the likes of Huntley, as an example.
Interesting fact is that the Golf R is involved in 3% of UK crimes.
might need to rethink that then
http://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf/21458/volkswagen-golf-r-power-reduced-due-to-new-wltp-regs
Declare one of the islands of South Georgia a badlands with no law, and just drop off the worst cases into an environment that they would surely enjoy.
They don't like the rules of decent society, so decent society should provide them with a suitable environment with none of the appurtenances of decent society.
No telecomms, no infrastructure, nothing provided other than basic rations, & clothing dropped by air every month.
Let them make their own rules.
Could name it Dystopia... 🙂
Essell, you have much more experience of prison than I ever will and I completely accept your point above but could it be that what has been tried, in your experience is just lip service or are therr things that haven't been tried that could give better results? As an example, the war on drugs in the UK has been going on all my adult life but yet we still have junkies falling about the streets. Could it be that the "hang em high" attitude wins votes rather than fix the problem
Even I though, as a ‘hardened screw’
Snowflake
😉
Could it be that the “hang em high” attitude wins votes rather than fix the problem
Ending prohibition would win just as many votes. And would actually reduce crime.
@pandhandj, I really don't know what the solution is, but drugs don't really seem to be the cause of much, if any, re-offending that warrants the death sentence. The likes of Huntley, Fred & Rose West, Hindley/Brady, Shipman etc weren't (AFAIK) involved in any drug scene that caused/made/helped them do what they did, but (apart from Fred & Fred) the others were as guilty as sin & have cost the country Millions in keeping them locked up. They were never going to be released & after a few years they become so institutionalised theyr'e happy enough being locked up anyway, which defeats the object of taking away their freedom.
Could it be argued that those countries with the death penalty have lower serious crime rates than they would have with no death penalty?
Could it be argued that those countries with the death penalty have lower serious crime rates than they would have with no death penalty?
Only if you have evidence to show that, otherwise you are just making an claim with no basis, see page one with the link that shows US states with the death penalty have higher murder rates then those that don't
I am not making any claim.
Nope.
OK, well using the words "could it be argued" is one of those nice tricks from people who want to make people believe something that isn't true.
the link that shows US states
Are we talking about the US or the UK?
You can't sensibly compare the two seeing as the US have MILES MORE crimes anyway due to the fact the US population is almost 4 times that of the UK & LOTS of guns.
Can we stick to the original subject please, IE, UK/death penalty. Otherwise it goes right off tangent.
Essell, sorry mate my question was poorly worded (I blame the wine), drugs was just an example, in my opion - lived in the west coast of Scotland all my days - the war on drugs hasn't worked here. could it be that the rehabilitation given to the murderers you mention hasn't worked? There is a program about a Glasgow gangland hard man who did 20 years for murder in the 80s and he now teaches art to kids in the Glasgow schemes. He has been rehabilitated. Can others not be too? But then again, there has to be a line eventually.