|
Post by DarkcelticLion on Mar 25, 2006 0:08:01 GMT
I've been ill this week, so when not sleeping i've caught the news programmes throughout the day. Aside from gettin the impression i'm turning into a grumpy ole git, i find my views becoming more extreme when it comes to punishments regarding crime.
Case in point. This week a group of men are on trial over a plot(another one) to bomb various locations in london and around the UK. So far the evidence doesnt seem good, but not my point. Guilty or not isnt for me to judge(but they look it). My point is, folks like this obviously have no regard for human life, theirs or anyones. So should we??.
A large number of high court judges are now calling for a level system to the sentencing for crimes of murder, similar to the USA degrees of muder. With extreme violent crime on the increase(ignore the stats,they are crap) should we now perhaps reconsider the death penalty in these cases, where no regard for life has been shown. Murder, terrorism, child rape, murder etc?. An extreme view i know, but the crimes are becoming more extreme and the punishments, if you really can call them that are no longer a deterant. With forensics as advanced as they are, the likelyhood of errors are, day by day becoming far less likely.
Over to you. Are you fully against the idea?. In part see my point?. Agree or think i'm a total nutter,lol??.
Lion
|
|
|
Post by janetree on Mar 25, 2006 0:24:28 GMT
I sway back and forth on this issue. When I hear about a particularly nasty crime I wish they'd bring back the death penalty, however when I consider the number of mistrials of people even with good forensics and prima facae (sp) evidence I feel opposed to death penalty reintroduction.
As a sword waving heathen I say 'kill 'em', as a sensible (stop laughing) responsible (I said stop laughing) adult I say not.............
Not like me to sit on the fence but this is one area in which my backside is firmly nailed to it!
|
|
|
Post by DarkcelticLion on Mar 25, 2006 0:39:54 GMT
My question was from a sensible view point, so why would i laugh at ya.
To me it is perhaps the most sensible way to go. Looking at the penal system, lack of harsh sentencing and blatant letting off of many that should be locked up without ever seeing daylight again.
Oh, and i reffer to the lethal injection as the penalty. The other methods arent as reliable i feel.
Lion
|
|
|
Post by janetree on Mar 25, 2006 0:45:41 GMT
On the pro Death Penalty I have to say it makes me sick that it costs us as tax payers so much money to lock these reprobates up. It's cheaper to educate a child than lock up most criminals.
But I shall remain on the fence, for as long as there are grave miscarrages of justice!
|
|
|
Post by elswyth on Mar 25, 2006 23:11:43 GMT
I'm all for bringing back the death penalty for people like paedophiles and terrorists, child killers and all those other crimes where you really wonder about the humanity of the person commiting them. But their guilt has to have been proven beyond all shadow of a doubt. I had a friend that is in jail for murder. He kicked a paedophile to death. I think he should have got a bloody medal.
I want tougher penalties for rapists. That 15yr old bastard who raped those 4 primary school girls only got 4 years in jail. So that's the going penalty for raping kids now is it? 1 year per shag? Fucking disgusting. I'd love to get that judge in a room and rip him a new arsehole and I'd love to just hand that 15year old over to the families of the victims - same would go for that lad who raped that little girl in Sainsburys - sick fucker. I want rapes to be considered as not being predominantly up to the women to prevent - how a woman was dressed and where she was and if she was alone are still taken into account when rape is being tried. The unspoken accusation of 'Did she deserve it?'. My arse she deserved it!! She wasn't asking for it and there is no fucking excuse and the penalty should involve two bricks and some very sensitive areas of the male anatomy at the very least.
|
|
|
Post by janetree on Mar 26, 2006 11:34:28 GMT
I agree on the rape issue. I read last week that the people who examine sentencing are actually saying that time in jail for rape should be reduced! When you consider the appalingly low conviction rate for rape you wonder which planet this people live on, cos it isn't the one I am on!
If you want to rip someone a new arsehole - I suggest you start with them. ;D
The Rape Crisis charity has hit back hard at them but it just ain't enough.
The justice system is in need of some severe overhauling in my opinion!
|
|
|
Post by axeman on Mar 26, 2006 21:54:12 GMT
Okay - you're not going to like this.
I agree that these people need to be removed from society when they've been caught (or hopefully before), but I don't agree with the death penalty.
Much of the time the people involved actually ask for chemical castration, or similar, because they know what they've done, and will do given the chance, and they hate themselves.
My belief is that certain people have brain imbalances and basically they can't help themselves.
I know that sounds very wishy-washy liberal, and I guess there's people out there with no morals at all, but bang them up. Don't kill them.
I just had this discussion with Jane and the one point that came up was that it's all well and good so long as it wasn't one of our kids.
It gets personal then.
Would I be so lenient if it was one of our children that got abused?
Probably not.
It's a very difficult subject.
I'm not going to condemn someone for a brain imbalance that isn't their fault.
Unless it's my kid involved.
It's a tough one.
|
|
|
Post by DarkcelticLion on Mar 26, 2006 22:16:18 GMT
I'm with u on the chemical inbalance thing, i've always said more research is needed to understand just how we can be affected by even the slightest inbalance. But then u have to look at it this way. If they do have inbalances, those may not be treatable n so locking them up negates that as they WILL do it again upon release.
If anyone were to harm one of mine i would galdly hunt them down myself probly beat them to within an inch of death then hand them over to the police.
Nowt wrong with liberal views, but seriously take a look at the alarming rise in extreme offences and the total lack of any deterant. ASBO's, counciling, schooling and any other method you can name do not work on a large scale. So a complete overhaul of the justice system and penalties is needed n now.
Lion
|
|
|
Post by arthor on Apr 24, 2008 17:41:19 GMT
Me again. responding to a thread that I wasn't around for. There are a few issues here. 1) Deterrent 2)Punishment 3)Protecting society 4) Cost 5) Strength of the case 1)From a deterrent point of view, I am not sure the US model works but I think that may be due to the fact that the appeals process is a mess. People sentenced to death often spend more time on death row than some of our people serve as a "life" sentence. It doesn't seem to deter that many either. Specially if they are whacked out on drugs. 2)Punishment fitting the crime. Life for life?? I think it varies depending upon who has been killed, raped etc 3)Our government has removed every possibility of us being allowed to protect ourselves, our families or our property. This makes it encumbent upon them to protect us. If that means removing forever the possibility of someone murdering me then that is what they should do. They cannot ensure that a murderer will not reoffend. 4) It is frightening how much money is spent on prisoners. We either bring the death penalty back in or make it cheaper to keep them. A skip with a cage welded over it is quite cheap. 5) Oh dear. The stumbling block. Plod have not got the best record on this one.
How about a deserted island somewhere (preferrably cold and wet). Zero contact. Just drop them off after surgically implanting a tracker device and leave them to it. Monitored at all times. If by way of an unfortunate accident a few child molesters were to get slung off a cliff then that is how their "micro society" has seen fit to deal with them. Cost to the taxpayer would be fairly low but I think it would address the other issues as well.
|
|
|
Post by kalanac on Apr 24, 2008 20:05:17 GMT
I've always thought that if someone breaks a law, they should no longer be protected by that law. You steel stuff, the courts finds you guilty of said act, people can nick your stuff. You obviously didn't like that law to begin with as you broke it.
|
|
|
Post by cymro on Oct 19, 2008 12:21:46 GMT
Hm, interesting thread, caught my eye as at the mo we have a very nasty character causing probs in our village (violent wife-beater, alcoholic, complete bloody animal ) I was bemoaning the lack of natural justice to my dad, who's on the receiving end of this maniac's ravings and death threats. I remember the good old days when the village peadophile and the violent junkies were run out of town by the local lads, and the old bill left us all to it. Worked perfectly! Now, we all have to live under a cloud as the plod, courts etc grind on... Nothing gets done! If anything did happen to my family because of this, I really would take it into my own hands. Grrrr. Done ranting now.
|
|
|
Post by slvrvalkyrie on Nov 2, 2008 4:59:46 GMT
As a Swedish-American and native of California, a State where lethal injection is the preferred form of the death penalty, I felt obligated to chime in.
1) I'm only in favor of the death penalty in extreme conditions and usually for the leaders, not the followers. I'm disgusted that Charles Manson is alive by legal fluke and is in lifetime 'protective' isolation because other inmates would gain prestige by killing the 70-something year old psycho. the Family that did the actual killings deserve to rot (and are! one of the Mason gals has a brain tumor and is consistently denied parole to die outside of jail).
2) arthor has it 110% right. the US appeals system is a nightmare. it is one of the main rebuttals to the death penalty as a deterrent... lifers have a worse life than death row inmates, who lavish for decades on end in nice accommodations at no personal effort, and even the possibility to getting off in the end. the cost is astronomical... and don't even get me started on the born-again conversion phenomenon and prison-brides of death row convicts.
3) yes, chemical imbalance is a problem. so is brainwashing and police evidence planting. unfortunately, once the death penalty is on the table all these issues transform into defense arguments. i think evidence planting (as an excuse), +$$$, +fame = O.J. Simpson determined 'not guilty' for the brutal stabbing of his wife and Ronald Goldman.
4) the Californian supreme court has looked into how humane lethal injection actually is. apparently there are failures in the automatic injection system, allergic reactions, needles that fall out, etc. and to be honest, the other methods aren't much better in terms of consistency. but then again you're trying to find a standardized form of putting down human monsters… there is always going to be a problem somewhere along the line.
5) i really really like the isolated desert island concept - the more conditions simulate the early conditions of the American drama, Lost, the better.
there you are - i'm done.
|
|