Should the royal family go

[Gurm]

Novdid:

I just want to say two things.

1. You're high on crack.
2. Murder is WRONG and violates human rights. So are rape, kidnapping, and a few other nasty offenses. You know what else is WRONG? Me having to pay my tax dollars to keep murderers and rapists in better style than many Americans can afford. You want to do away with the death penalty? Fine. Then let's return prisons to the old system... toss 'em in a dark hole and close the lid to let them rot.

- Gurm

[Novdid]

No I'm not high on crack, I have nothing against the idea that prisons should be like you said, worse than they are today. The deathpenalty is wrong. Atleast that's my opinion and many people I believe do agree with me.

[Dr Mordrid]

Perhaps a lot of folks in Europe, which consists largely of a bunch of weenies on this issue, do want to see the death penalty go. Toodamnbad.

Over here we have a more "what you get is what you earned" attitude. As such noxious POS's like Tim McVeigh or Ted Bundy get the needle, electrocuted, hung or gassed.

The world is a better place without 'em and the weenies sympathies would be much better placed by not worrying about these animals getting their just desserts and instead supporting the families of their victims. Talk about misplaced platitudes....

My only problem with the majority of death penalties is the use of the needle. The needle, for which we owe "thanks" to our own set of weenies, is TOO damn neat and tidy. Another problem is that executions are not PUBLIC.

IMHO executions should be both messy AND public. Reasons;

1. it needs to be public to be a better deterrent. People aren't afraid of what they can't see and fear is THE great motivator in modifying human behavior.

2. it needs to be messy for the same reason. Some guy sitting in an electric chair with a distorted face and flames coming out of every orifice on his head fits the bill nicely.

The death penalty also gets rid of prisoners that would otherwise put other prisoners and prison staff at risk of death or major injury. This is a big problem, even in high security prisons.

This business of trying to be humane to the inhumane is a rediculous exercise in circular logic.

Dr. Mordrid

[TdB]

1. it needs to be public to be a better deterrent. People aren't afraid of what they can't see and fear is THE great motivator in modifying human behavior.

fear is not the answer, why not make people respect the law instead of fearing it?
make laws that respect the people, then people will respect the law.

[The PIT]

The only thing I've got against the death penatly is that the police cock up too often and therefore the wrong guy would be sent to the chair or whatever.
As for human rights. Since the person commiting the crime (Definatley guilty) have removed the other persons rights (The Victimns) I feel they already have forgone any Human rights that they used to have.

[RichL]

To save Gurm and a few others the trouble before they read my 2p worth, no I am not high on crack or any other drugs, not drunk, and I am as sane as anyone can be.

If this negates over 50% of your reportoire of disagreeing statements, please look away now.

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth dates way back to biblical times.
However, while this is all a very fine idea, barely a month goes by without someone being cleared of having commiting a major crime, that in many cases would have put them on death row.

The justice system is fallible. Prisoners wrongly imprisoned can be released if found innocent.

Dead people cant.

End of story.

(Edit - damn, I hate it when someone steals your thunder while you're still typing it! )

[Dr Mordrid]

"fear is not the answer, why not make people respect the law instead of fearing it? make laws that respect the people, then people will respect the law."

A moratorium on capital punishment was tried in the US in the late '60's and '70's when the Supreme Court of the time disallowed it. It didn't work....murders went to sky-high levels that haven't been seen since. When another Supreme Court decision reversed the first and capital punishment came back murder rates took a nosedive.

The problem with the people who commit murder is that they don't respect ANYTHING...laws...other peoples lives...social norms....NOTHING. Presuming that they'll "respect the law" just because it respects them is just downright silly. The experiences of the 60's and '70's showed that bigtime. Sociopaths only respect their own overactive impulses.

As for the execution of innocents...yes...any system made by humans is imperfect. Even so there are many who would argue that life in solitary confinement is torture and even worse than death.

To make an even stronger effort to prevent the execution of innocents I'd agree that there should be a ONE STEP review of execution orders. I would also support slightly relaxed evidentiary standards relative standard court procedure to as to make REAL new evidence more available for the review.

However: NO pseudo-science or psychobabble allowed.

I would also agree that those with organic brain syndrome and/or PROVEN mental retardation or Downs syndrome should not be executed. Neither should those under the age of 16 at the time of the crime. The physical development of the brain is insufficient for adult level impulse control at those ages.

After this is all satisfied.....hang 'em high....

Dr. Mordrid

[Wombat]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. it needs to be public to be a better deterrent. People aren't afraid of what they can't see and fear is THE great motivator in modifying human behavior.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

fear is not the answer, why not make people respect the law instead of fearing it?
make laws that respect the people, then people will respect the law.

I'm sorry, but this is complete drivel. There are a <B>lot</B> of laws that suck, and/or are there for corporate benefit. But how exactly do you propose that I write a disrespectful murder law? What rape laws don't give the rapist adequate "respect"?


I absolutely favor the death penalty, in principle. In practice, too many innocents are killed (one is too many). Since we seem incapable of stopping ourselves from occasionally convicting the innocent, the death penalty should be handed out a lot less often than it is, but it should certainly be used.

Novdid, you've said nothing other than it's "wrong" and it "violates human rights." Why? How?

The reason we have the death penalty is as a deterrent. Killing a person for their crimes offers the criminal no chance of reform, but their life has more worth as an example to those who would think to follow in their footsteps. There are potential murderers and other criminals who would not mind prison, but are scared enough of being killed that this alone keeps them in check. So, if killing one murderer spares at least one innocent, society has profitted.
The death penalty is not "an eye for an eye," it is punishing a wrong to prevent further greater wrongs.

[Schorsch]

Originally posted by Wombat

The reason we have the death penalty is as a deterrent. Killing a person for their crimes offers the criminal no chance of reform, but their life has more worth as an example to those who would think to follow in their footsteps. There are potential murderers and other criminals who would not mind prison, but are scared enough of being killed that this alone keeps them in check. So, if killing one murderer spares at least one innocent, society has profitted.
The death penalty is not "an eye for an eye," it is punishing a wrong to prevent further greater wrongs.

Sorry Wombat, but I have to disagree. The assumption that executing somebody may stop another person from committing a crime is nothing but pure speculation - you'll never be able to prove that since you cannot know what would have happened if the executed person would have been left alive. It certainly doesn't justify killing a human being.

Death penalty as a deterrent is a very questionable concept - maybe you know that in Canada the murder rate (is that the correct term for it?) has gone down after the death penalty was abolished. No, the death penalty is "an eye for an eye", and as Mahatma Gandhi once said: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind".

It seems this is a topic for a new poll, isn't it?

[Dr Mordrid]

I agree that the death penalty doesn't serve as well for deterrance as it could. Public executions would be necessary for that.

Still...I'd rather give them a ticket to hell than coexist with them.

And Ghandi was wrong. Only the guilty would go blind.

Dr. Mordrid

[The PIT]

All I know is kids can go round smash your house up and you can do sod all about it. Teachers get beaten up and they can't do anything about it. Then you get someone saying they don't know that they're doing wrong. Bullshit I knew what right or wrong was when I was five possibly earlier. Todays do gooder crap teaches the young that if they do anything wrong theres no come back and if there is daddy will beat the crap out of the person who punished sweet little innocent Johnny.
Going back to the death penatly I could only agree with it if the police were 100% right all the time which they are not.
Now this thread has drifted quite a bit.

[Pneumatic]

I don't think that the term "Prison Overcrowding" should even exist.

I say stack them up like firewood. Make it uncomfortable to be in prison if you want a deterrent.

Oh, I am for the death penalty but only if it is a rock solid case where there is absolutely no doubt who did it. Like O.J.

[Snake-Eyes]

I'm with you 100% there Kindness, on both prisons and on the death penalty.

I mean, prison shouldn't be a pleasant experience. Yes, there should be room to reform the people sent there, but that doesn't mean life needs to be cushy while they're being reformed. Teach them that there are better ways to live life, and to coexist while following the rules that we as a society have set, all while making sure the experience is something they won't want to ever repeat again.

And abolishing the death penalty definitely doesn't give pause to those that are considering heinous crimes. I mean right now they might think twice of committing that crime if there's any chance that they'll be caught (cameras, witnesses, dna, fingerprints, whatever), since the death penalty is pretty much a final closing of their life too. On the other hand, like you said, the death penalty should only be applicable where there is incontrovertable proof of guilt in the crime for which the 'criminal' is convicted (back to cameras, etc.). When they commit crimes like that, they've pretty much told us that it's a part of their own personal standards that it's okay to kill others, so why not apply this to them too, instead of just the victims and their friends/family?

[mdhome]

Oh dear!

Far too many innocent people in Britain get put behind bars for crimes of murder that they did not commit. In some cases the evidence has been fabricated by the Police and in others valid evidence in favour of the acused has been ignored. Until we can the get basic principles of law and justice right then I dont think we in the UK should even contemplate executions.

It also seems that we may have another N Atlantic divide. Anyone care to shed some ideas on why?


regards MD

[Wombat]

Sorry Wombat, but I have to disagree. The assumption that executing somebody may stop another person from committing a crime is nothing but pure speculation - you'll never be able to prove that since you cannot know what would have happened if the executed person would have been left alive. It certainly doesn't justify killing a human being.

Actually, it's not mere speculation. For a period of time, the state of NY had the death penalty for people who knowingly murdered police officers. The phrase "You kill a cop, you get the chair" caused more than one gun to be lowered.

But suppose I didn't have that (anecdotal) evidence to submit. You put forth that taking a murder's life only kills the murderer. I argue that it saves a victim.
If I'm wrong, then I've executed a murderer. If you're wrong, you executed an innocent. If one of us is then wrong, I'd rather have a murderer pay the price than a victim. All people are created equal, but that doesn't mean people can't make themselves greater (or lesser) than their fellow man.