[Closed] I'm disgusted by this: Pensioner battered to death by burglars

just for them? or across the board for murder?

Across. We need a serious deterrent for serious crime.

But would it work? Probably not.

Angry yes.

are there less murders in US states where they still have the death penalty?

not denying its a sad story but is it any worse that the other 600 odd murders in the UK last year?

The death penalty != fewer murders - this is proven in all countries which do have the death penaly.

Further, if there is a mis-carriage of justice its all a bit late to do anything about it...

Cheers

Danny B

I've got the tea and biscuits for when someone spots the Daily Mail readers "light the blue touch paper, bring out the pitchforks" part of the story.

That's the point, when the death penalty is just revenge.

Deterrent or not, people will still commit crime.

both ????? given that one of them denies the crime and is legaly presumed to be innocent, is not your decision a little premature not withstanding the merits or otherwise of your desire to kill people to make your self feel better.

ha ha at ian hislop :D, "the deterrent is killing the wrong people?"

If guilty they should be both locked up for life and bring back the death penalty.

Surely it's one or the other, unless you time it just right and hang them a few minutes before they pop their clogs from old age....

Sickening. Whatever your views on the death penalty, the current system obviously does nothing to deter scum like this.

Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life, and not in some hotel room with bars on the windows. No Sky TV etc - it ain't meant to be nice.
I know it would cost, but I'd happily pay another penny on my income tax to keep my family safe from these idiots.

Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder

Well that [i]is[/i] what we currently have. Anyone released from prison is on license for the rest of their life. Any crime commited by them and it is back to jail.

Oh and that "extra penny" would only protect your family against repeat offenders they would still be at risk from everyone else who hasn't previously commited a murder.

Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life, and not in some hotel room with bars on the windows. No Sky TV etc - it ain't meant to be nice.

IIRC this was done recently. Europe don't like it, so we can't.
If I find someone in my house, i will not be taking ANY chances at all. Better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.

Well that is what we currently have

No, that's not what we have, because you selectively quoted half of the sentance I wrote, which was:

Perhaps statutary life sentances for murder - with life actually meaning whole life

oh, and screw Europe.

The issue is that tough sentences aren't a very good deterrent (to criminals) as demonstrated by the fact that people still commit crimes in countries with the death penalty.

I don't support the death penalty - as far as i'm concerned it is little more than medieval revenge, and i'd like to think we are better than that. (Just look at the majority of countries that still use it)

Besides - the death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent, as it only deters people who are capable of rational thought - and those who murder pensioners, or rape/murder School girls are clearly not capable of rational thought.

However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental - I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.

I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.

Yes we do. A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not however the same as a "whole life" tarrif which is what the recent appeal to the ECHR (different to Europe) was about. The tarrif that judges give out at sentencing is the [i]minimum[/i] time that must pass before a person can be considered for release. That does not mean that they will be released after that time and as I said any release is only on license.

However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental - I hope this can be redressed with the forthcoming negotiations with Europe.

Personally I think it's a good thing that Europe provide Daily Mail Free checks and balances over our rather spineles politicians who'd bring back the death penalty for not eating your greens if they thought it might buy them a few votes...

with life actually meaning whole life

A life sentence is a life sentence, it is not however the same as a "whole life" tarrif which is what the recent appeal to the ECHR

So, we actually don't have what Legoman originally suggested.

Death Penalties, SKY TV in prison, EHCR, renegotiating with Europe

whats next - are we to have 5 page thread on what stylish,understated yet practical oufit kate middleton will be wearing during the birth of the royal baby?

Well that rather depends on whether or not he meant "life sentence" or "life tarrif" when he said "life sentence". I rather naively assumed that he meant the [s]later[/s] doh Former.

Nonsense kimbers. The lovely Kate will be naked and oiled up. Her sister will be stood next to her in the same outfit gently mopping her brow.

Thing is, if we had the death penalty, we could kill both of these scum, and they would not be able to kill anymore innocent people. Forget all the do gooders, and bullllshitt about we are better than the death sentance.
Every one we killed would be one less parasite walking the planet, and believe me these people are parasites, they prey on elderly, lonely people who can't fight back.
Try sitting in court for a few weeks during a trial and consoling this mans family, what so you tell them when someone gets a life sentence, but will be released in 10 years on licence.
I dealt with a traveller some time ago, he had been fleecing an old man for 6 months, coming back on a monthly basis taking money from him, the old guy was too scared to tell his son, who was a doorman.
One day the son was at his dads mending the upstairs toilet, the traveller called by for more money, not expecting the son to be there, son overhead traveller threatening his dad, said traveller tried to leave, but was detained by the son after a very violent struggle where the son feared for his life and had to use reasonable force to detain he traveller until the cops arrived.
The traveller got 6 years custody, but if you cold see how it's affected this old mans life you would cry, I visit him every so often, and its heartbreaking.

so easygirl what would you say to the families of those wrongly convicted (and in your utopia) executed for murder?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases#United_Kingdom

Thing is, if we had the death penalty, we could kill both of these scum, and they would not be able to kill anymore innocent people. Forget all the do gooders, and bullllshitt about we are better than the death sentance.

So the whole argument about miscarriages of justice went right over your head? Wouldn't it bother you even a little bit if the state murdered innocent people?

They might be innocent of the current crime. But I'm sure they will have got off with plenty in the past, so I reckon its karma time

We could find some bleak and forsaken land on the other side of the world and just send them all there. Genius. 😀

We cold send em all to Scotland when they get independence, write in a clause that they take all the dross, and put them in a deep dark pit on the moors, then if they are innocent in 20 years, we can take em out the pit and let them have a bungalow in glentress

They might be innocent of the current crime. But I'm sure they will have got off with plenty in the past, so I reckon its karma time

So why not just let police shoot people in the head? After all, everyone has broken a law or two. And we can trust the police not to make stuff up, lose evidence or be corrupt, can't we?

Ben you crazy bastard!!!
It's like [i]the wire[/i]. I like it.

easygirl you are the woman Ian Hislop mocked on question time and I claim my bag of skittles

No that would be ridiculous, the police do not meter out punishment.
The police are there to uphold the law without fear or favour.
The courts are there to make decisions re sentences, and appoint relevant people to carry out the sentences.

So why not just let police shoot people in the head? After all, everyone has broken a law or two. And we can trust the police not to make stuff up, lose evidence or be corrupt, can't we?

and if they start, can we shot back with a carte blanche? I mean shirley just like everyone else, they'll have broken a law or two themselves...

Kimberly
No one mocks me cock

Anyway, got to go now, my brother will be back from the pub soon and he will want sex and his tea making

and if they start, can we shot back with a carte blanche? I mean shirley just like everyone else, they'll have broken a law or two themselves...

Last time I in the American equivalent of Decathlon:

[url= http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/9312987563_94907a1bc4.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/9312987563_94907a1bc4.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/9312987563/ ]Anyone need an assualt rifle?[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/brf/ ]brf[/url], on Flickr

However the fact that we've got ourselves in this position where Europe can dictate how long we lock people up for is mental

Except that's not actually the case, "Europe" doesn't dictate how long we can lock people up for. What it actually said was that you can lock people up for life, but must have some provision to look into the sentence at some predictable time in the future. There's no obligation to release the criminal at that point, just that the sentence should be reviewed. So no oubliettes or lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key, but at the same time no obligation to release dangerous and unrepentant criminals.

No that would be ridiculous, the police do not meter out punishment.
The police are there to uphold the law without fear or favour.

Um. Yes. In theory.

Apart from the times the police frame innocent people, bully witnesses into giving false statements, "lose" paperwork, and sometimes just go crazy and shoot someone several times in the head without warning.

But yeah, apart from that the police are great.

Last time I in the American equivalent of Decathlon:

But yeah, apart from that the police are great.

The death penalty is great in theory, but we've moved on from the dark ages.
That, and the police do, sometimes get it very wrong.

punishment as a deterrent will always be ineffective. For a start you have to get caught first and no-one thinks they'll get caught.

Those two are a lost cause, but we need to change our society to try and get to the next two before they end up like that...

Sorry I went all rational there for a moment, Yeah - String em up, 'angings too good for em, feed em to the ****ing dogs, yeah sick scum like that should have sick nasty horrible things done to them, yeah, with coat hangers and rusty nails, pull their thumb nails, then glass em in the face, and set them on fire... that's what you have to do to sickos who think violence is good...

[i]But yeah, apart from that the police are great. [/i]

And you wouldn't miss them if they were sold off to G4S.

We are lucky that there's no such thing as society or we'd be blaming that too.

Careful what you wish for
G4s are already bidding to take over some patrolling of police areas
Now if that happened, it would be scary

Death penelty bad .
Police largely good occasionaly bad rarely evil.
European court very good but often deliberately and dishonestly reported.
Granny/Granada farmers truely evil
Murders often evil sometimes tragically sad.
G4s really really bad .

Ben
British police are well regarded, and known as some of the best police in the world.
Individuals do make mistakes, they are human after all.
Some police officers are plain dishonest, they are after all only human, and there are dishonest people in all jobs, and after all policing is a job.
I've been a police officer for 25 years in a busy inner city division, I can honestly and proudly say, I've never bullied anyone, made false statements, lied, lost paperwork on purpose, or shot anyone in the head.
What I have tried to do over these years is be compassionate, protect people's property and be as fair as I can to offenders, but at the end of the day offenders are called offenders for a reason, and they are breaking the law, a police officers job is to uphold the law of the land .
I am used to be slagged off, spat at, etc etc, but all this is worth it when I get a thank you from a victim I've helped.
So before slagging ALL police officers off Ben, have a think what you are saying, you may be offending an honest hard working police officer like myself, and you wouldn't want to do that, would you.!

What's the ratio of innocent to guilty executions?

That probably needs a graph.

I wonder what the acceptable threshold is for innocent people being executed instead of guilty ones.

So before slagging ALL police officers off Ben, have a think what you are saying, you may be offending an honest hard working police officer like myself, and you wouldn't want to do that, would you.!

Hmmm, perhaps it's time that all those honest hardworking officers started to clear out the wrong uns, then your reputation wouldn't be quite so muddied.

@piemonster - I think 1 person put to death by mistake or due to a miscarriage of justice is one too many and given the miscarriages of justice that have taken place over the years in this country whereby those convicted would likely have received a noose round the neck I'd say its a very good job we do not have capital punishment.

Cheers

Danny B

Hmmm, perhaps it's time that all those honest hardworking officers started to clear out the wrong uns, then your reputation wouldn't be quite so muddied.

Yup, exactly - and it happens too often and there's too much of a coverup when it does happen for the "occasional rotten egg" theory to hold much water.

I do feel sorry for the majority of police officers who do do a tough job in difficult circumstances - but when we get to the situation that so many people distrust the police and their motives, you have to ask what's gone wrong.

so, the deterrent for criminals would be a death sentence, which would somehow or other reduce crime? how come countries with the death penalty still have a significant crime rate then? and what is the death sentence deterring innocent people from, who may or may not get wrongly accused? are we seriously saying that miscarriages of justice never happen?
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases#United_Kingdom ]here is a handy list[/url], i'm sure there is more.
the death penalty is a ridiculous idea, what's needed is a justice system that is open and properly accessible to all, a police force that is free from corruption, and a prison system that recognises the need for rehabilitating people, and a society that values all people equally. no? ok then, i'm buying an island, and stay the **** off my land!

They might be innocent of the current crime. But I'm sure they will have got off with plenty in the past, so I reckon its karma time

Woody,
You are right, and I think normal people who don't come into contact with these people daily can't grasp how utterly despicable they are.they have in the most part been brought up to lie steal and cheat their way through life.
Most of them have no moral code at all, they have never been taught right from wrong, and this is hard to grasp if you have not witnessed it.
It is demoralising to be around these people all the time, its draining, nothing you say to them sparks any kind of remorse, and that's hard to deal with.i think that may be the reason so many cops get disillusioned with life's in general, they forget that the people we deal with day in day out are a tiny minority.
The secret is to remember that we(the police) are there to protect the vast majority of people, from the tiny minority.

The death penalty would reduce crime , if you take a convicted murderer, he will have committed numerous crimes during his life.He will continue to commit crimes when released from prison.
If we killed him, he would not commit any more crimes,therefore crime has been reduced.
Now I know all the social implications, problems of miscarriages of justice etc etc etc, but at the end of the day ending a criminals life will reduce his offending behaviour.
Ben, I spent 3 days in court in may giving evidence against one of my collegues, after an assault in a kebab shop.he was found not guilty by magistrates.No cover up, no lies, found not guilty.care to comment

easygirl - why stop at murderers?

Here's my list
Murder
Any sexual offences against children

Most of them have no moral code at all...nothing you say to them sparks any kind of remorse

So do you think capital punishment would instill a sense of right and wrong or do you see it as a convenient way of permanently removing them from society?

Smacks a bit of putting them down as you would a dangerous animal.

Permanently removing them from society 😕

or shot anyone in the head.

Now are you really sure about this?

but at the end of the day ending a criminals life will reduce his offending behaviour.

By what percentage and have you got any stats to back this up? 😉

@easygirl - how to you ensure, 100% in every case, that the person is guilty?..

And bear in mind the good 'ol US has a very high percentage of poor black and hispanic people on death row who can't afford good lawyers and very very few white middle class people who can - miscarriages of justice happen all the time there...

Cheers

Danny B

problems of miscarriages of justice etc etc etc

You mean state murdering of innocent people ?

You mean state murdering of innocent people ?

We, in the Labour Party, like to call it 'tidying up loose ends' like Dr Kelly.....

if you take a convicted murderer, he will have committed numerous crimes during his life.He will continue to commit crimes when released from prison.
If we killed him, he would not commit any more crimes,therefore crime has been reduced.

Orrrrrrrr, we could go further. If we killed everyone there would be no more crime, ever! Perfect world!

Ssssssinnnneerr, the sentence is death

I'm still looking for a peer reviewed paper with a statistical breakdown of crimes committed before and after death. I'd hate to jump to the wrong conclusion based on poor quality stats.....

Make sure you find some graphs

[img] [/img]

[quote=easygirl ]Here's my list
Murder
Any sexual offences against children
Have I understood this right then? Anyone accused of these crimes (whether actually guilty or not) should be put down as they are a thoroughly bad egg, having been involved in lots of other undetected crimes over the years.

I have dug out some home office statistics from 2011
It studied criminals offending behaviour over a 10 year period
The study was carried out by a respected team of academics and they found that 100% of criminals who were killed, stopped committing crime after their death.
Not one single dead criminal re offended
Now if those stats are not convincing, you are just trolling

Scotroutes
Now I never said accused, that would be plain silly
Anyone found guilty by a jury 😀

[quote=easygirl ]
Scotroutes
Now I never said accused, that would be plain silly
Anyone found guilty by a jury So if they are [i]found[/i] guilty, [i]even if that was subsequently found to be in error[/i] then it doesn't matter as only the baddies are ever accused of murder or sexual offences against kids?

Wow. That's really dry... I'm gonna call... Not serious.*

*but I'm really not sure, easygirl has played a very good game here, seemingly very serious to begin with, but that smiley makes me think, actually, having us on...

[quote=unklehomered ]Wow. That's really dry... I'm gonna call... Not serious.*
*but I'm really not sure, easygirl has played a very good game here, seemingly very serious to begin with, but that smiley makes me thing, actually, having us on...
Ah. The Edinburgh Defence?

So, easygirl, when the police, cps and
Judge get it wrong, and they will. Are you volunteering to tell the family of a completely innocent person, "sorry about that, got it wrong, sorry we killed your loved one"?

If we killed him, he would not commit any more crimes,therefore crime has been reduced

Not one single dead criminal re offended

Not really sure whether to thank you for being a copper or be concerned that you have become jaded by all the "scum" you have had to deal with to the extent you no longer have any compassion

FWIW hindley and Brady committed their crimes whilst the death penalty existed but were charged after it was repealed.

It did not deterred them and neither has reoffended currently Brady is campaigning to end his life [ as he has done for a number of years] so the sky tv and holiday camp atmosphere of prison [ trademark Daily Mail } may not be all it is cracked up to be

Ah. The Edinburgh Defence?

I DON'T KNOW!!! I've been thinking about it too much know, i'm doubting everything. I am at this moment the very embodiment of indecision, it could the knowing double bluff, is she trolling the liberals or hardcores? At this moment only easygirl knows for sure. I doff my cap... At this point I can only hope to learn...

"Anyone found guilty by a jury "
Barry George
judith ward
the birmingham six
the guilford 4
That's 12 innocent people killed by the state in easygirl's world before i even resort to google. The problem is calling for the death penelty sounds good and makes those touched by a killing feel as if their grief is acknowledged but it is a useless deterent a barbaric punishment no comfort to the family of the victim, leads to the aquital of the guilty and mistakes cannot be rectified . It is also inexperienced nonsence to suggest that those accused of murder have committed loads of other crimes before , murder like rape is one of those crimes where people of no previous convictions are as likely to end up in the dock as hardened offenders.

if we kill everyone there will be no crime

OI, stop nicking my idea!!!*

*patent pending.