PDA

View Full Version : String them up !


stuckgear
4th Aug 2011, 07:47
As soon as the government’s e-Petitions website goes live later today we will email the thousands of people who have already registered to support the restoration of the death penalty.
We petition the government to review all treaties and international commitments which may inhibit the ability of Parliament to restore capital punishment. Following this review, the Ministry of Justice should map out the necessary legislative steps which will be required to restore the death penalty for the murder of children and police officers when killed in the line of duty.
The findings of the review and the necessary substantive legislation to be presented to House of Commons for debate no later than 12 months after this petition passes the acceptance threshold.


While in favour of the death penalty, in certain cases, it does come with the caveat that only when the justice system is infalliable..

As far as 'immediate' issues are concerned is the death penalty as immediate as say.. a referendum on the EU and if we should be more associated with the EU a la Switzerland/Norway ?

So string up the kiddie fiddlers or the European parliament first ?

Lon More
4th Aug 2011, 07:54
it does come with the caveat that only when the justice system is infalliable..
British Justice; the best money can buy.





First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Parapunter
4th Aug 2011, 07:55
Reading this nonsense in the quote makes me wonder why for example grown men or women's lives should be less valuable in the eyes of the law than a copper or a child.

stuckgear
4th Aug 2011, 07:58
Reading this nonsense in the quote makes me wonder why for example grown men or women's lives should be less valuable in the eyes of the law than a copper or a child.


Ahh but what if someone kills a copper who is a kiddie fiddler ?

Checkboard
4th Aug 2011, 08:27
With 11 executions spread over 27 years, on a per execution basis, California and federal taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each execution.
Death Penalty : The High Cost of the Death Penalty (http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42)

It's cheaper (and safer) to have a "Life without Parole" sentence than to knock 'em off these days. In order to get a death penalty through, it has to be watered down with so many appeal processes and the like that it simply isn't worth it.

The only countries with an "efficient" death penalty are the ones who care nothing for due process.

tony draper
4th Aug 2011, 09:03
Well if they strung the buggas up within 24 hours of sentence being passed it would not cost that much.
:)

Cacophonix
4th Aug 2011, 09:27
Hang em high eh!

Give it up fellahs!

In the UK at least this chestnut has been done to death (:\) and, happily, there is more chance of an amoeba inventing a time travel machine than what you want.

I suggest you return to fuliminating over your breakfast cereals and reading the Daily Mail. ;)

Best Wishes

Caco

Edited to say - The fellahs (or petitioners) may have included some of the female persuasion as well. I know that my other half often wants to string me up so I apologise to members of the "gentler" sex for the fellahs assumption.

radeng
4th Aug 2011, 09:38
There would probably be less support for this if so many sentences were not relatively short, and if, for example, life meant life. Although we do need degrees of homicide, as they do in the US.

Not sure what the line of duty the children are supposed to be in is, either..

sisemen
4th Aug 2011, 09:43
The 'Carl Williams' solution generally works....


Gangland killer Carl Williams died at the high security Barwon Prison after being bashed several times with part of an exercise bike, Victoria Police has revealed.
Police say Williams was sitting in a common area outside his cell area just before 1:00pm when an inmate snuck up behind him and struck him several times in the head with the stem of the bike.
Williams suffered serious head injuries, went into cardiac arrest and could not be revived.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/402034-3x2-340x227.jpg :eek::eek:

Slasher
4th Aug 2011, 09:59
Nail 'em up I say! Nail some fcukin sense into 'em!

Ce9NLZRrui4

unstable load
4th Aug 2011, 10:08
California and federal taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each execution.

I'll do them for $200mil...

Lon More
4th Aug 2011, 10:21
may have included some of the female persuasion as well
I think they thought it was about men being well-hung?

Cacophonix
4th Aug 2011, 10:26
I think they thought it was about men being well-hung?


As my better half often says, a woman's life is one of perpetual disappointment! ;)

goudie
4th Aug 2011, 10:55
Well there's no pleasing them anyway. Mrs G is a strong advocate of hanging rapists, kiddie fidders et al... but not by their neck!:eek:

bnt
4th Aug 2011, 11:16
Well if they strung the buggas up within 24 hours of sentence being passed it would not cost that much.
:)
I know you didn't mean that entirely seriously, but there's a serious point in there. I see many people citing the failings of the systems in the USA as an argument against capital punishment in all cases, but that's not a very scientific way of approaching the problem. There are other countries were it's done differently, such as Singapore: they don't do it willy-nilly, and the appeals process is very thorough, but it's not allowed to drag on for decades. I'm not saying it's perfect - I'm not even sure I support it - but that's not my point. This demand for "perfect justice" is distorting the issue, in my opinion.

I mean this in the best possible way: we are all going to die, and it won't always be just, or fair, whatever that means. Is it fair to be killed by a tsunami caused by an earthquake, or to starve to death because your country has no infrastructure due to civil war? Where's the justice in that? We all have rights, but there are no guarantees that those rights will translate to reality. There is no justice: there's just us.

Al Fakhem
4th Aug 2011, 11:25
Justice gone completely mad.

In Germany, a convicted child killer has sued the police for having contravened his human rights by "mentally terrorizing" him during his interrogation. He initially wanted €10,000 for having gone through this "traumatic experience", the judge - instead of telling him to [email protected] off - awarded him €3,000 :ugh:

He had kidnapped and murdered the son of a banker and was arrested in 2002.

Urteil: Gericht spricht Kindermörder Gäfgen Entschädigung zu - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten - Panorama (http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/0,1518,778343,00.html)

The SSK
4th Aug 2011, 11:37
Get a sheet of paper

Down the left-hand side, write the names of all the countries which have the death penalty

Down the right-hand side, list all the countries which do not have the death penalty

Then decide which list you're most comfortable associating yourself with.

Um... lifting...
4th Aug 2011, 11:43
Then decide which list you're most comfortable associating yourself with.

I should imagine if one does this exercise completely, one will be quite as fuddled as one was when one started. There are plenty of countries in each category one would be foolish to buy a used car from.

stuckgear
4th Aug 2011, 12:20
Get a sheet of paper

Down the left-hand side, write the names of all the countries which have the death penalty

Down the right-hand side, list all the countries which do not have the death penalty

Then decide which list you're most comfortable associating yourself with.


Personally, I dont have a problem associating with our cousins across pond, if their state has the death penalty it makes no odds to me.

Um... lifting...
4th Aug 2011, 12:38
Hard labor, bread & water, solitary confinement, and life sentences from which one can only emerge carried out feet first would be necessary if one was to eliminate the death penalty.

Sentences as they exist now simply are not deterrents. The inmates are indeed running the asylum.

tony draper
4th Aug 2011, 12:56
Well if we dont have the bottle to neck the bastards, lobotomize em, wipe their brains,turn em into drooling cabbages.
Think one shall start a petition.
:E

Neptunus Rex
4th Aug 2011, 14:41
Sadly, Drapes, I fear it will take a revolution rather than a petition.

Krystal n chips
4th Aug 2011, 16:00
" lobotomize em, wipe their brains,turn em into drooling cabbages."

I fear Mr D, the UK already has a surplus of Sun / Mail / former N.o.W readers and football supporters already.....:E

Slasher
4th Aug 2011, 16:48
IF THEM BLEEDING HEART DO-GOODERS DON'T WANT 'EM HUNG -

Murder - stick the murderer in a small cell, say 10'x10'. Lock
the cell door forever and put the cell key in the same coffin or
ash urn with the victim. There will also be a note with the key.
If the victim comes back to life, the note will instruct to use
the key and open the cell door...and heeyy presto you're free
baby free!

Drug trafficking/pushing - sentence will be served in a small
cell similar to that above, except the key will remain with the
city drug rehab centre until the day it closes when there're no
more drug addicts to be rehabilitated.

All cells should be equipped with -
- No windows
- No clocks or timepieces
- No TV or visual entertainment of any kind. No radios.
- No comforting smokes, no booze to escape the misery.
- No books except one small magazine from the 1960s on
butterflies and moths (replaced bi-monthly)
- One incandescent 40W electric light from 9am to 6pm. The
bill to be paid by prisoner. If he has no money, one small
free candle per week will be supplied.
- One bed and hardply mattress
- One pillow stuffed with cow dung (replaced bi-annually)
- One sink with cold water tap only. Prisoner pays water bill.
- One toilet with no seat. No toilet paper except old prison
notices.
- Three free squares a day including healthy diet programs
that promote longevity.
- One broom.
-One great big black huge bull-queer guard who loves to
pull surprise inspections at least twice a day.

goudie
4th Aug 2011, 16:49
Slasher, never took you for a fluffist liberal:rolleyes:

Davaar
4th Aug 2011, 16:55
.... but now you are disappointed at his moderation?

Slasher
4th Aug 2011, 17:00
Yeh Goudie I have to admit giving the pr!cks a broom is a bit
liberal extremist, but I stand by the free healthy tucker bit - I
mean who wants 'em dead in a year when they can healthily
rot in a rat-infested cesspool for years and years and years! :)

G&T ice n slice
4th Aug 2011, 17:44
The trouble with the death penalty is that it is really, really final.

And if someone, somehow screws up. cheats, "fits up" or whatever and the wrong chap gets the big drop.....

However when it is really, really obvious who done what, like this nutty Norwegian, then the hemp fandango is the only answer

sitigeltfel
4th Aug 2011, 18:41
Does anyone seriously believe the government will take a blind bit of notice of public opinion.

Cornish Jack
4th Aug 2011, 18:42
Now let's see if I've got this right ... the response to someone possibly/probably killing someone else is that we authorise them to be killed on the premise that our moral code says "Thou shalt not kill" ... Hmmm.??? And as for those who chortle and salivate over the potential shower room antics of 'Big Bubba' or whoever - what fascinating mental processes are going on there!!:ugh:

possibly/probably killing someone else - search for details of Stefan Kishko (sp?) a mere 16 years inside for a crime HE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE COMMITTED.:mad: Our superbly crafted and totally reliable judicial system will keep us safe from fatal 'mistakes'. One has no choice about being a part of the 'human' race but would that it were not so.:mad::mad::mad::mad:

tony draper
4th Aug 2011, 18:49
Yer had the bastards took any notice of the only petition I ever signed Clarkson would be prime minister now.:E

Cacophonix
4th Aug 2011, 19:03
No books except one small magazine from the 1960s on
butterflies and moths (replaced bi-monthly)

Ah, you forget Buffalo Bill!

Somebody's pain is always somebody else's pleasure!

RLq3U6hkx-g

Parapunter
4th Aug 2011, 19:07
My god I love Jodie Foster. I'd turn her all the way round.

Can't put me in jail for that.:cool:

Pitts2112
4th Aug 2011, 19:50
Having reached an enlightened view on capital punishment is one of the things that gives the UK the moral higher ground and marks it as a civilized society. Don't change that.

Capital punishment isn't about deterrence or justice against the accused. It's about vengeance, pure and simple.

After many years contemplating it, I came to the conclusion that no one has the right to take the life of another person, regardless of their crime or their position in life/society.

Besides, don't you see the irony in a state which says "YOU can't take the life of another person but WE can." Isn't that hypocrisy taken to its ultimate conclusion?

hellsbrink
4th Aug 2011, 20:01
Isn't that hippocracy taken to its ultimate conclusion?

What? A world run by hippos?

Oh, you mean HYPOCRISY, and the answer is "No" because when you take a life, like a certain person in Norway or a certain subhuman who killed Milly Dowler or a piece of pondlife who thinks that planting bombs to take the lives of innocents in an attempt to "further the cause", you have thrown away all rights to be classed as a member of society, all rights to be called a person, all rights to exist in a so-called civilised society.

After all, we kill dogs for less. And we "humans" are merely animals too despite the stupid notion that we are somehow a "higher form" of creature. There's no "hypocrisy" in the notion of taking subhumans out of existence.

Parapunter
4th Aug 2011, 20:19
you have thrown away all rights to be classed as a member of societyI could come on all Hellsbrink and say WRONG!!

..But I won't. The flaw in that argument is that it's purported status is entirely contingent on the individual that comes up with it & presumably as a supporter of democracy, you diasgree with the UK's legal position yet paradoxically support it as a result of the parliamentary process.

So, the choice is whether or not you wish to live in a society that seeks vengeance or one that seeks justice. No shortage of either in the world for the discerning fan of legal pursuits, but please don't anyone try to argue the deterrence angle since in logic, if that were right, there would only be one execution required per generation to encourage the others.

Besides, what's the worst torture? An eye for an eye or 40 - 50 years in jail til you die? Ian Brady - wants to die, hasn't got the balls. Harold Shipman - couldn't face it, Fred. West - couldn't face it. Scores of others - couldn't face it.

Take the thrill, pay the bill.

tony draper
4th Aug 2011, 20:23
There is nothing wrong with good honest revenge,:E

Stockpicker
4th Aug 2011, 20:24
Can't help noticing that there are about a dozen or more separate petitions to bring back the rope; and one to retain the ban. Which appears to have more than twice as many supporters as the multiple requests from the former group. Doesn't say much for the string-em-up party's attention to detail? It would be a shame, though, if the debate was avoided only because the terms and conditions (don't be too much like an existing petition) had been, er, forgotten by the moderators of the site.

Parapunter
4th Aug 2011, 20:31
Yes Mr. D. A very human fallibility.:)

Well Stocky, all you need is one pillock on Terwitter like say that odious prat John Gaunt or Richard Littlejohn to bang on about it & bosh! hundreds of thousands of signatories, so I wouldn't set too much store my the body count.

tony draper
4th Aug 2011, 20:52
It is one of the prime movers that brought us down from the trees Mr P, so now we can wander about the ground with mobile phones glued to our lugs,the higher brain fuction, the ability to remember slights and to plan retribution.
:)

Parapunter
4th Aug 2011, 21:12
And yet we have moved on so little in those hundreds of thousands of years judging by the average post around here.;)

hellsbrink
4th Aug 2011, 21:22
The flaw in that argument is that it's purported status is entirely contingent on the individual that comes up with it & presumably as a supporter of democracy, you diasgree with the UK's legal position yet paradoxically support it as a result of the parliamentary process.

So, the choice is whether or not you wish to live in a society that seeks vengeance or one that seeks justice. No shortage of either in the world for the discerning fan of legal pursuits, but please don't anyone try to argue the deterrence angle since in logic, if that were right, there would only be one execution required per generation to encourage the others.

It's not just the UK's legal position I disagree with, which, incidentally, is the reason why the calls for the restoration of Capital Punishment will ultimately be futile (just think about it, I'm sure you'll get it), but the point is that those who commit certain crimes, like Levi Bellfield, should not be allowed to spend the rest of their natural life in prison as they did not afford that respect on their victims.

That's my opinion and, since the law says something else (and there is no chance of the situation changing. Think again of the reason why, no matter what the sheeple say, there will be no change in the law) I have no option but to accept it. Of course, I ain't no lily-livered pinko socialist huggy fluff who believes that the right of the criminal supersedes the rights of the victims or general public at large. But I am someone who knows that, ultimately, ALL punishments, whether it is a slap on the wrist or a life sentence (yeah, as if that will ever be true for over 90% of those actually sentenced to "life") is "vengeance" for someone having the temerity to break some "law" he does not believe in. So we're not talking about anything but the extent that someone is allowed to be penalized for things, not "vengeance" like has been claimed on this thread. And, ultimately, the ultimate penalty should be an option.

But it will never happen again, thanks to the reason I hinted at. And that is the real shame, no matter what the Parliamentary process is, as anything that is said by your Government, any decision that is made, is irrelevant.....


Makes ya proud to be British, knowing that they're going to discuss something they have no control over.........

Gertrude the Wombat
4th Aug 2011, 21:22
Capital punishment isn't about deterrence or justice against the accused. It's about vengeance, pure and simple.
I think it's about economics actually, and I'm slightly surprised not to see this mentioned very often.

If the cost of keeping a criminal in jail over the winter is that two honest people die of starvation, because the amount of available labour is only just enough to produce enough food without trying to support someone who's eating but not working, then it's a bit of a no brainer, what?

But a richer society, which can afford to keep a criminal in jail over the winter without such a dramatic cost, can afford to manage without a death penalty.

hellsbrink
4th Aug 2011, 21:26
But a richer society, which can afford to keep a criminal in jail over the winter without such a dramatic cost, can afford to manage without a death penalty.

And when the annual costs of that "person" in jail would stop a fair amount of older people dying of hypothermia in winter since they have a choice between "eat or heat"...................

Gertrude the Wombat
4th Aug 2011, 22:09
And when the annual costs of that "person" in jail would stop a fair amount of older people dying of hypothermia in winter since they have a choice between "eat or heat"...................
Yes exactly. What I don't get is why we never hear that debate - it's always all about morals, not economics.

Cacophonix
5th Aug 2011, 03:56
I think it's about economics actually

it's always all about morals, not economics

And the question of "morality" doesn't effect economics? I put it to you that you are wrong.

Capital punishment was voted down in the UK in 1969 because many people found it morally repugnant. I suggest you look to Hansard in those (often heated) parliamentary debates and try and find anybody (pro or con) who was taking the primarily "economic" angle at the time.

Could the UK afford to be altruistic in 1969? I suspect not! Emotions and thoughts will always trump economics unless you are an economist or an accountant that is. ;)

Anyway more on the present "debate".

What will another death-penalty debate in parliament achieve? | Alexander Chancellor | Comment is free | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/04/death-penalty-debate)

There are certain issues that just do not go away. It doesn't matter how definitively they appear to have been settled. They fester away beneath the surface of public life and every now and then burst through like boils. One is Britain's membership of the EU, which, though approved in a referendum of 1975, is still much resented by some. And another is the death penalty, which, though "permanently" abolished in 1969 by a large majority of the House of Commons, now looks likely to come before it again. This is thanks to a government initiative under which people are invited to petition parliament, via the internet, about subjects of their choice. Any subject of a petition with more than 100,000 supporters then has to be considered by the House of Commons for debate.

sitigeltfel
5th Aug 2011, 07:01
Capital punishment was voted down in the UK in 1969 because many people found it morally repugnant.

Wrong, it was abolished by parliament against what continues to be the opinion of a sizeable majority of the population. One of the clearest examples of politicians ignoring the people they profess to represent. I am not interested in the hypocritical "conscience" they profess to hold on this policy, they seem to be very keen to visit capital punishment on Johnny Foreigner when he gets a bit uppity in his tribal homelands, while ignoring the slaughter of the innocents in their own back yard.

radeng
5th Aug 2011, 07:23
It's not that far back in time that the Governor of Illinois suspended all executions because they had started to find a number of convicts on death row were actually innocent....

Although I doubt that would bother them in Texas...

alwayzinit
5th Aug 2011, 07:58
Personally I believe the Death Penalty should be re-instated. The current penalties for crimes where an innocent life is taken are simply not a deterrent. The old joke " If I had killed the Mrs when I met her I would be out by now!" parodies real life and the penalty for murder.

How many children were abducted and murdered prior to the abolision of the "Drop"? I have no evidense but suggest the sprectre of the hangman must have made the sickos out there think twice.

The recent case of the "Free Breakfast" bludgening of some poor lass is a case in point.

To those who say that we, as society, have no right to take another life, I say tosh, we wage war to "liberate" the oppressed why not execute some scum bag to "liberate" the grieving parents of said scum bag's victim?

If actually killing the convicted murderer, terrorist, etc is too much, then how about denying all sensory input to the convict? A medically induced coma of sorts. Thus available to attend any appeal hearings then back to "sleep" should it fail.

Something has to change as the current system is not working. IMHO

Cacophonix
5th Aug 2011, 08:10
Wrong, it was abolished by parliament against what continues to be the opinion of a sizeable majority of the population


I will rephrase that, "a large majority in parliament"!

Sitigeltfel are you one of those people who subscribe to the tyranny of the plebiscite? :-). If we subscribed to that principle what strange laws might be enacted and what a warped society might we inhabit?

Still it is good to know that you believe in unfetterred democracy. ;)

The link I posted makes the point about the tyranny of plebiscites better than I can.

Caco

sitigeltfel
5th Aug 2011, 08:32
The link I posted makes the point about the tyranny of plebiscites better than I can.

Firstly, I note the use of the OTT phrase "Tyranny". Secondly, it is in the Guardian (usual suspects etc.)

Well, I wonder. If the restoration of the death penalty goes to parliament for debate and is then rejected by it (as it is bound to be), will people feel they have got "more power" or will they feel even more let down by their politicians? Instead of responding to the expenses scandal with phoney displays of humility, thereby raising false hopes of people power, MPs should just go straight for a bit and then, over time, re-establish their dignity as the people's independent elected representatives.

They will gain no respect until they listen to the voters, whom they have been shafting for decades. But again, I suppose the country gets the politicians it deserves.

Parapunter
5th Aug 2011, 08:42
That's a fundamental misconception about democracy.

Parties publish manifestos, the voters choose between them & a mandate is handed to the winning party. The key word being mandate. It's got sweet fanny adams to do with running to the electorate on each and every event that may blow the ship this way or that.

Of course, whether or not a party sticks to it's manifesto is another discussion entirely...

Cacophonix
5th Aug 2011, 08:42
Firstly, I note the use of the OTT phrase "Tyranny".


I suppose they could have used the term ochlocracy but then I suspect the majority wouldn't have understood what the hell they were going on about.

As you know the term was coined by a man that lived in your neck of the woods (a large wood though) Monsieur De Tocqueville, a sanguine fellow generally it seems. :ok:

I suspect justice and democracy would be better served if the petitioners directly canvassed their MPs about this issue.

Caco

shedhead
5th Aug 2011, 09:19
How many children were abducted and murdered prior to the abolision of the "Drop"?
Just off the top of my head I can cite you Brady and the Cannock chase murders and that is without thinking too hard. The idea of capital punishment as a deterrent is a non starter as most criminals do not believe they will ever be caught. Personally I have no objection to a return to capital punishment for certain crimes as long as there is absolute incontrovertible proof of guilt.However I do have the feeling that this is letting them off easy and actually making them serve a full life sentence without hope of parole would be a better idea. unfortunately we do not have the prison conditions that would make that a worthwhile proposition.

tony draper
5th Aug 2011, 09:29
I alway remember summat my father shouted after me me on my eighteenth birthday as I headed out the door pubwards,
"Watch what your doing,remember your old enough to hang now"
Stuck in my mind that did.
:E

Cacophonix
5th Aug 2011, 09:33
It seems that the issues that were covered in graphic fiction in Burgess' Clockwork orange are partially being played out here on this thread again.

Ludovico's technique didn't work in the novel and similar tehcniques or punishments won't work in society today.

The reality is that criminals need to be headed off at the pass i.e. before they do down the route of crime and violence. The societal issues involved in that encompassing economics, poverty and education, amongst so many other factors, are so large that I doubt we will ever get a handle on them and those who appear to have put themselves beyond the pale.

For the simplistic I suppose the head crack of a noose is the answer! Personally I would rather not be involved in such a world!

Caco


I alway remember summat my father shouted after me me on my eighteenth birthday as I headed out the door pubwards,
"Watch what your doing,remember your old enough to hang now"
Stuck in my mind that did.



Sheer luxury, my Dad told me to bugger off when I was seventeen before he broke my neck. Who can blame him? ;)

tony draper
5th Aug 2011, 10:03
Well one was away on the high seas most of that period Mr C, if I over stayed me leave and me welcome I would find me discharge book on me breakfast plate one moring.
It's a tradition up here,when the Border Reiver's missus found picking were getting thin in the larder,she would put the chaps spurs under a covered dish and plonk it in front of him at the breakfast table.
We took the hint.:rolleyes:

Davaar
5th Aug 2011, 10:17
Of course, whether or not a party sticks to it's manifesto is another discussion entirely...

..................... as is the discussion of the fundamental change that never appeared in any manifesto, as in "official bilingualism", which appeared overnight from the mind of the late Pierre Elliot Trudeau, noted also for riding his Harley around Montreal in WW2, he clad in his Nazi helmet.

OFSO
5th Aug 2011, 10:56
No no no. It's not about "revenge" or "deterring" or even "saving money".

It's about a majority of people in a country voting for a law: the government implements the law: and the population - including the minority who voted against the law - sitting back and accepting it.

This, dear friends, is called DEMOCRACY. It may be feeble and fallable and unfair but everything else humanity has tried is worse.

Now personally I'm in favour of pre-emptive string-em-up: anyone even mildly dodgy-looking should be whipped away and executed within 24 hours. Stop a lot of crime, that would.

And that statement is a good example of why democracy, the voice of many equals (and not of few, and especially not of one, when it's me) is necessary.

stuckgear
5th Aug 2011, 11:28
It seems that the issues that were covered in graphic fiction in Burgess' Clockwork orange are partially being played out here on this thread again.

[...].

The reality is that criminals need to be headed off at the pass i.e. before they do down the route of crime and violence.


interesting presentation ? so to what extent is that precept based ? family profiling ? DNA profiling ? preemption of criminal activity ?

So what we bang up or execute members of society who have committed no crime, but may do so in the future ?

???

How about instead of comfy cell with the EUHCR to fall back on, playstations and a weekly rub down and a shiatsu, capital offences met with a life (meaning life, not 25 years a third off for good behaviour, parole and out on licence) sentence of of shovelling seagull guano on rockall or penguin sh!t on a Falklands outpost. of the course the appeals process is still available for those who may have been wrongly convicted, but the Hindley/Brady types, turn them into chum for the fishies.

papajuliet
5th Aug 2011, 12:25
The economic case for a death penalty is a sound one. Death for serious crime would reduce the prison population considerably.

Checkboard
5th Aug 2011, 13:47
Besides, don't you see the irony in a state which says "YOU can't take the life of another person but WE can." Isn't that hypocrisy taken to its ultimate conclusion?

It might be hypocritical, if your original premise were true - however the State doesn't say "YOU can't take the life of another person but WE can."

The State actually says "You may kill another person, if it is necessary in the immediate defense of your own life, or the life of an other."

Given the number of murderers et al. who re-offend after being released, then the state deciding that a person is:
Dangerous to the community, and
Unlikely to be rehabilitated (i.e. Adult, sane and proven to have taken a violent course in life)

.. well, the State is most definitely not being hypocritical by knocking them off, in the defense of possible future victims.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 15:08
I see nobody has figured out the hint I gave earlier as to why, no matter what the sheeple say and whatever Parliament says, there will be no chance of having capital punishment back on the statute books in the UK......

galaxy flyer
5th Aug 2011, 15:13
Four types of homicide:

Felonious
Justified
Excusable
Praiseworthy

Hanging seems to fall into the last one.

GF

stuckgear
5th Aug 2011, 15:18
I see nobody has figured out the hint I gave earlier as to why, no matter what the sheeple say and whatever Parliament says, there will be no chance of having capital punishment back on the statute books in the UK......


well the EUCHR for one. also no one picked up on the OP


As far as 'immediate' issues are concerned is the death penalty as immediate as say.. a referendum on the EU and if we should be more associated with the EU a la Switzerland/Norway ?

So string up the kiddie fiddlers or the European parliament first ?

the point was, if we can force [sic] parliament to debate the death penalty, how can we not force [sic] a debate on the UK and its involvement in the EU ?

but i'm all up for a debate on the death penalty instead !

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 15:32
well the EUCHR for one. also no one picked up on the OP

It ain't that.

In 2000 the EU introduced the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which bans capital punishment, under ANY circumstances, in every EU State. That was ratified into law with signing of the Lisbon Treaty.

The European Convention for Human Rights, has been superseded. And thanks to Broon's sneaky signing of Lisbon, the only way that the UK can have capital punishment is to quit being a member of the EU and we all know what the chances of that happening.

In other words, we're all wasting our time with this thread as, no matter how many people wish to see scum like Levi Bellfield strung up, the UK Government can do NOTHING.

stuckgear
5th Aug 2011, 15:36
The European Convention for Human Rights, has been superseded. And thanks to Broon's sneaky signing of Lisbon, the only way that the UK can have capital punishment is to quit being a member of the EU and we all know what the chances of that happening.


well hells, perhaps you caught the irony of my OP in that if people power is such, why not force a debate on an issue that we could actually reclaim our own governance instead of an issue that cannot be changed.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 15:44
I did, stuckgear, I was dropping a hint to others to see if they would notice the futility of a debate on capital punishment when the real issue is a bunch of money-grabbing wasters in a certain complex of buildings in Brussels.....

I think we both know how much they saw the hint....

Krystal n chips
5th Aug 2011, 15:53
These e-petitions....surprised nobody else has mentioned that they offer plenty of opportunity to generate the orchestrated responses for those with varous agenda's....and jurassic idealogies. This being summer, there was a Tory MP who, by a pure coincidence also recently opened his gob in support of the death penalty..well it does attract public interest after all..and opined to the fact he was aware of the potential for a miscarriage of justice....condescending of him I suppose.... but as this would be a murder trial then possibly the burden of proof / guilt / innocence..whichever term you prefer could be made a bit more stringent than for ordinary crimes..so that's a nice two tier system to begin with...:rolleyes:

Thankfully, the honourable member's idea is never going to see the light of day..I can hear the wailings and laments from those staunch advocates on here already...I mean, we could go back to bear baiting, trial by ordeal.and a host of other now consigned to history forms of barbarity..if only the Gov't would listen to the cries of the masses .....:ugh:

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 17:08
But I equally want that no young, pre-teen girl be raped, tortured, and murdered by a previously convicted killer released on parole, an even greater calamity.

Doesn't even have to be females (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2022494/Convicted-paedophile-molested-10-year-old-boy-just-hours-release-secure-unit.html) who are attacked.

Now, what do people think the most suitable action for a subhuman like Shaun Tudor is. A period of time living in relative luxury compared to some law-abiding people before being released to carry out similar attacks again, or a rope around the neck to make sure no other child gets harmed in any way?

Oh, please don't mention castration, either actual castration or chemical castration. It doesn't stop the urges, doesn't stop the psychological pleasure such people get, it merely stops the subhuman from being physically able to penetrate with the part of his genitalia that is still there. He'll still be "attracted" to children, he'll still assault them, and, since one physical pleasure is removed, is more likely to turn to other methods to get his "satisfaction".....

Sallyann1234
5th Aug 2011, 17:18
I will happily endorse the death penalty when guilt can be proven 100%.
Not "beyond reasonable doubt".
Beyond all doubt.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 17:20
Like when the subhuman pleads guilty like Shaun Tudor?

stuckgear
5th Aug 2011, 17:28
the thing is hells, i don't know who is more mental, the lefty huggie fluffs, who deem it acceptable for a convicted child molester to be let out of prison on his own unsupervised, or the character that molests a kid while being let out on his own, unsupervised.


Torture-obsessed paedophile who kept 'how to kidnap young girls scrapbook' has sentence slashed to just THREE YEARS

Milsom had been given an indeterminate sentence by Mold Crown Court in March this year after pleading guilty to a catalogue of sexual offences.


Paedophile with 'uncontrollable child pornography and torture obsession' has sentence slashed by appeal court judges | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2022733/Paedophile-uncontrollable-child-pornography-torture-obsession-sentence-slashed-appeal-court-judges.html#ixzz1UB125Rkq)

Flash2001
5th Aug 2011, 17:41
One watched a TV program the other day that exposed a case in which several innocent, but weak, characters had been coerced into confessing to a murder they did not commit by being threatened with the death penalty if they refused to confess. One was also induced to implicate others who, equally innocent, were convicted. There are a lot of criminals, bankers, lawyers etc. who need to be dead but, while things like this happen, I have to oppose the death penalty.

After an excellent landing you can use the airplane again!

Neptunus Rex
5th Aug 2011, 18:00
There is a simple solution, and that is to make Parole Boards responsible for their actions. Every convict is to serve his full sentence, unless released by a Parole Board. No automatic time off for 'good behaviour.'

However, if the criminal reoffends after release by a Parole Board, he must complete his original sentence before beginning any further sentence.

In addition, every member of a Parole Board who has released a criminal who subsequently reoffends, should be prohibited from serving on any other Parole Board for life.

And another thing, for multiple offenders stop the ridiculous concurrent sentences. Make them all consecutive.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 18:06
One watched a TV program the other day that exposed a case in which several innocent, but weak, characters had been coerced into confessing to a murder they did not commit by being threatened with the death penalty if they refused to confess. One was also induced to implicate others who, equally innocent, were convicted.

And where were these cases and when?

Flash2001
5th Aug 2011, 18:37
Virginia. I've forgotten how long ago but I think 7-10 years.

After an excellent landing etc...

Sallyann1234
5th Aug 2011, 20:03
Like when the subhuman pleads guilty like Shaun Tudor?

If only it was that simple.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 20:31
So it's got absolutely nothing to do with things in the UK then, Flash.

hellsbrink
5th Aug 2011, 20:34
If only it was that simple.

In that case, it is.

Same as Brady and Hindley, same as Fred and Rose West, same as Peter Sutcliffe, same as Levi Bellfield, same as Ian Huntley, same as Anthony Milsom, same as the Irish "Freedom Fighters", how big a list do you want?

Capetonian
5th Aug 2011, 23:01
I'll be pretty close to the front of the line to sign that petition. Shame though that it's all a dream as until Britain takes back control of its legislation from that useless self-serving bunch of oxygen thieves in Brussels, nothing will come of it.

No judicial system is infallible, but many murderers get off on technicalities and I'd be comfortable to see the death penalty reintroduced.

Flash2001
6th Aug 2011, 13:40
No, nothing to do with UK. Timothy Evans has though...

After an excellent landing etc...

fitliker
6th Aug 2011, 20:53
If cruxifiction was good enough for the lamb of god it should be good enough for those who molest little boys in his name.
Nail them up:}:}

cavortingcheetah
6th Aug 2011, 21:05
Actually, being nailed up on the cross prolonged the dying time. That's why JC, after he was taken down at the beginning of the Jewish sabbath, was able to hop it to Turkey with Mary Magdelene after he'd let his friends have a bit of a poke around his wounds. The other two had their legs broken and died of collapsed lungs, suffocation and pneumonia. Pontius was a judge of rare acumen and subtle foresight. Punishments meted out to criminals in Britain might be more appropriate and to the public taste for justice if judges were elected.

Sallyann1234
6th Aug 2011, 21:29
In that case, it is.

Same as Brady and Hindley, same as Fred and Rose West, same as Peter Sutcliffe, same as Levi Bellfield, same as Ian Huntley, same as Anthony Milsom, same as the Irish "Freedom Fighters", how big a list do you want?

Of course you can point to the extreme cases, who deserve to die.
BUT how far down your list, away from the most cut-and-dried cases at the top are you prepared to go, how much risk are you prepared to accept, before you draw the line and say "well this guy is almost certainly guilty but perhaps we didn't ought to hang him just in case he's been wrongly charged or fitted up?".

tony draper
6th Aug 2011, 22:00
Only certain classes of murderers were hanged as I recal it,premeditated murder,ie by poison or firearm,it assumes you had went to the trouble of obtaining said poison or firearm and therefore knew exactly what you were up to, or something I thoroughly approve of, causing death,in the commission of a crime ie if you mugged someone hit them over the head and took their wallet or mobile phone and they died, you took the drop,or multiple murders I think,though not always, the notoroius multiple husband scragger Mrs Wilson had her death sentence commuted to life by the home secretary,Mrs Wilson lived a street away from me grans house.
Not all murderers were hanged by any means.
Once those that did had had their morning appointment with Albert,they seldom re offended.
:E

Davaar
6th Aug 2011, 22:10
............... and then there was that one on whom the judge commented (going by memory here, but pretty accurately, I think):

".......... and not only did you kill or slay the deceased, whereby he was bereft of his life, but you did push or pierce or thrust or propel the aforesaid lethal weapon through the bellyband of his regimental breeches, which were Her Majesty's ...."

Not much doubt about him, ("Don't know what came over me, m'lud"), would you say?

G-CPTN
6th Aug 2011, 22:59
By 1957 a number of controversial cases highlighted the issue of capital punishment again. Campaigners for abolition were partially rewarded with the Homicide Act 1957 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homicide_Act_1957). The Act brought in a distinction between capital and non-capital homicide. Only six categories of murder were now punishable by execution:


in the course or furtherance of theft
by shooting or causing an explosion
while resisting arrest or during an escape
of a police officer
of a prison officer by a prisoner
the second of two murders committed on different occasions (if both done in Great Britain).

The police and the government were of the opinion that the death penalty deterred offenders from carrying firearms and it was for this reason that such offences remained punishable by death.
From:- Capital punishment in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_Kingdom#Reform)

DG101
6th Aug 2011, 23:29
I bet Derek Bentley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley_case), for example, may have been pleased if Albert had delayed making his aquaintance for 20 years or so. Poor bugger was hanged in 1953, pardoned in 1998.

"Sorry about that, mate. No hard feelings, eh?" seems a bit inadequate.

tony draper
7th Aug 2011, 00:44
They both went out tooled up to commit robbery and killed a policeman,they should have topped both the bastards.:suspect:

hellsbrink
7th Aug 2011, 05:33
Of course you can point to the extreme cases, who deserve to die.
BUT how far down your list, away from the most cut-and-dried cases at the top are you prepared to go, how much risk are you prepared to accept, before you draw the line and say "well this guy is almost certainly guilty but perhaps we didn't ought to hang him just in case he's been wrongly charged or fitted up?".

This is the thing, SallyAnn, with the abilities we have now to prove things beyond doubt via DNA, etc, there should be absolutely no doubt over someone going to the rope.

If there is the slightest doubt, then they go away for life.

Simple, ain't it.

DG101
8th Aug 2011, 01:56
If, by "tooled up", you mean carrying firearms, then your assertion is almost correct, TD. One of the miscreants was "tooled up", but, interestingly, it was the unarmed partner who earned that appointment with Albert.

I suspect you are familiar with the details of the case, but others may not be so informed; so, in summary:

- Bentley was in police custody when the copper was killed
- Craig admitted firing at the police
- Bentley was subsequently convicted of murder, and hanged

Under the laws applicable at the time, the case appears to be "open and shut". Craig was under age and could not be executed but Bentley, the accomplice, was equally guilty and condemned. So far,so good.

But why, after 45 years, was Bentley's conviction quashed? HM Government (of which the courts are but one tentacle) isn't renowned for saying "sorry", so there must be more to the story than you would have us believe. Delving a little deeper we find that the pathologist estimated PC Miles was killed by a bullet of between .32 and .38 calibre fired from a distance of between 6 and 9 feet. Craig was "tooled up" with a .455 calibre pistol which could not have fired the lethal shot, and, during the encounter, he was never less than than 40 feet from PC Miles. So whence the lethal projectile?

Well, it just happens that in 1953, the MPS standard issue firearm was a .32 calibre Webley. Some (I don't claim all) of the police at the scene were armed with standard issue revolvers. Is it co-incidence that one of the spent bullets recovered from the scene was .32 calibre?


Hellsbrink - DNA profiling isn't 100% accurate. And even if it was there is still the possibility of miscarriage of justice.

hellsbrink
8th Aug 2011, 02:16
Hellsbrink - DNA profiling isn't 100% accurate. And even if it was there is still the possibility of miscarriage of justice.

Well, DUH!

That's why I said "via DNA, etc" meaning that there are other tools that can be used, and why I also said that if there is the slightest doubt then they don't face the rope.

If you think about it, being able to prove a case beyond any doubt is possible especially when the scumbag admits it like Shaun Tudor. Let's face it, would you have said there was any doubt in the case of Denis Nilsen? Or the Wests? Or those caught on CCTV using firearms in robberies? Of course not, so in some cases there is absolutely no doubt and in these cases the only option should have been a rope.

It's simple, if you think about it

tony draper
21st Aug 2011, 08:35
Danish firm Lundbeck to stop US jails using drug for lethal injections | World news | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/01/lundbeck-us-pentobarbital-death-row)
:uhoh:
There are aother options :E
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/Deaddogbay/Alain.jpg

Slasher
21st Aug 2011, 11:54
...Or just go back to the old tried 'n trusted methods.

http://cdn1.newsone.com/files/2010/06/firing_squad_2.jpg http://static7.businessinsider.com/image/4b1cf87e0000000000092d90/hangman-noose-gallows-execution-death-hanging.jpg

Lon More
21st Aug 2011, 12:18
No doubt here (http://www.dgstandard.co.uk/dumfries-news/local-news-dumfries/local-news-dumfriesshire/2011/05/20/anniversary-of-police-shooting-in-dumfries-51311-28724654/). William Gibson was apparently a mate of my dad who drank in the same pub, The Flesher's Arms, opposite the Police Station.
THe shooting took place just across from our house, although I was much too young to remember it.

Flying Lawyer
22nd Aug 2011, 17:53
BBC 'ON THIS DAY' 28th January 1953: Derek Bentley hanged for murder (http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/28/newsid_3393000/3393807.stm)

Decision of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): R v Bentley (Deceased), 30th July 1998 (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/1998/2516.html)


FL