Cut their hands and cocks off would be better than instant death.....let the fcukers spend the fest of their lives in jail with their own kind.....Thats what i call punishment for ****s...
Off Topic Death Penalty
- Thread starter trundles left foot
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I'm sure your wrong about that , we could take a survey and I'm sure you'd be ok .......but let's not ...lolIm always hung drawn and quartered on here roof....i have had so many reprieves i have lost count......
The Lostprophets singer, Ian Watkins - he should be killed in my opinion. What he did was depraved. I'm not happy at the amount of money that will be spent keeping him locked up. I don't like knowing he gets fed and watered, and it's our taxes covering the cost. In his case he is 100% guilty. So I'm happy for him to be put down.
I certainly think any decisions made would have to be case by case.
I certainly think any decisions made would have to be case by case.
As a person who has worked in criminal justice (now retired) I've always been against the death penalty. I've heard all the arguments. "What would you say if it was your wife he murdered?" etc etc. The answer is I'd want the perpetrator executed of course. However, the question isn't that. It's actually, "What should the State do in cases or murder?" and I maintain that the State should not kill its own people. Throw in the numerous mistakes that have been made in our Judicial system and the answer is clear. What do you say to a hanged man's wife when evidence is unearthed years later that he was innocent? Oops? This has happened thousands of times in the U.S.
*****philes are sick individuals and most social workers and psychiatrists will tell you that they cannot ever be cured. Scandinavian countries adopt a system of chemical castration that works well. Failing that, lock them up for as long as it takes to protect the public. If it's life then it's life. I have zero sympathy for *****philes but I have serious issues with executing someone who is mentally ill.
BUT......recent events have got me thinking. I genuinely believe that acts of terror perpetrated on civilians deserve the death penalty. It's indiscriminate and attacks the State's own people without a care who gets killed or maimed. In those circumstances, anyone found guilty of terrorism or even planning it should be put in front of a firing squad. A fast track appeal system should be incorporated so that it doesn't drag on for years. The big problem with this depsite most Brits being in favour of it? Our membership of the EU and the supremacy of the ECHR.
*****philes are sick individuals and most social workers and psychiatrists will tell you that they cannot ever be cured. Scandinavian countries adopt a system of chemical castration that works well. Failing that, lock them up for as long as it takes to protect the public. If it's life then it's life. I have zero sympathy for *****philes but I have serious issues with executing someone who is mentally ill.
BUT......recent events have got me thinking. I genuinely believe that acts of terror perpetrated on civilians deserve the death penalty. It's indiscriminate and attacks the State's own people without a care who gets killed or maimed. In those circumstances, anyone found guilty of terrorism or even planning it should be put in front of a firing squad. A fast track appeal system should be incorporated so that it doesn't drag on for years. The big problem with this depsite most Brits being in favour of it? Our membership of the EU and the supremacy of the ECHR.
Give an already corrupt system the power to execute people? Sounds like a fantastic idea. Why not give them the power to bomb the living daylights out the middle east as well? Whoops, already done that... Moral of the story, don't give more power to despots... It fuels them.
and yes, I think Cameron is a despot. Just as Blair before
and yes, I think Cameron is a despot. Just as Blair before
No. You need to look up the definition of 'despot'. Whether you agree with both, neither, or one of them, both were elected politicians and their actions were approved by Parliament. That's democracy, the polar opposite of despotism. Saying that, I hope that the Chillcot Inquiry will slam Blair.
I maintain that terrorism should be made a special case for the death penalty and it would definitely get overwhelming support from the public.
I maintain that terrorism should be made a special case for the death penalty and it would definitely get overwhelming support from the public.
Even better how about for entertainment `ala` ancient Rome times put the ****`s and terrorist scum on an island to give our SAS and other special forces real time live seek n destroy training ! it would be better than all the **** reality tv shows and serve a multitude of other purposes. Spare body parts, betting, deterrent etc....
Like in the USA, do you mean? I don't think it would act as a deterrent, mate, as most murders are impulsive, anyways. Murders that are planned are generally done by career criminals, who frankly, don't give a damn what the consequences are regardless.
I doubt it mate the poor f uckers are dead.
Do you now? I'd rather somebody who sexually abuses children, die before a terrorist is executed.
You have also contradicted yourself too. You earlier said that you were against the death penalty because of the amount of people wrongly executed and that some people might be mentally ill. Does that mean nobody could be wrongly accused of terrorism charges? Does that mean terrorists cannot have mental health issues?
No, of course it doesn't it doesn't but I think that the deterrent factor comes into play because of the amount of planning that goes into these attacks. Also, the extent of the crimes (maiming and killing hundreds of people, including children, indiscriminately) is so grave that it should be an exception - even allowing for the other factors I've mentioned.
These animals affect every single one of us every day. From going through an airport, to being apprehensive travelling on the tube - I was in London a few days after 7/7 and was very, very nervous. People looked scared everywhere I went. ISIS and their ilk want to kill all of us if we don't submit ourselves to their 'religion' and extreme measures I think are called for.
Just my opinion and I understand why others would disagree. However, I think you'll find the vast majority of the public would support my view.
These animals affect every single one of us every day. From going through an airport, to being apprehensive travelling on the tube - I was in London a few days after 7/7 and was very, very nervous. People looked scared everywhere I went. ISIS and their ilk want to kill all of us if we don't submit ourselves to their 'religion' and extreme measures I think are called for.
Just my opinion and I understand why others would disagree. However, I think you'll find the vast majority of the public would support my view.
I get it, the terrorists have beaten you...
I still hate *****philes more than terrorists, that might just be because I'm a Dad though and I worry more about my children (*****philia), more than I worry about myself (terrorism).
You still haven't stated why you think it's ok for the state to execute terrorists but not offenders of other crimes? The reason you gave for not wanting the death sentence, is people are wrongly convicted and then executed. How will that be different for terrorism charges?
The vast majority of the public will support your view of executing terrorists, just as the vast majority will support any views of executing rapists, *****philes and murderers...
It's nothing to do with terrorists 'beating' anyone. But to imply that their activities don't have any effect on our lives is nonsense.
Your reasoning regarding *****philes vs terrorists is curious. Nobody gets on a plane concerned about *****philes. Nobody travels to the Middle East and is concerned about *****philes. It's not *****philes that murdered over a hundred people in Paris. It's not *****philes that cause armed police to be deployed across Europe because of public safety concerns.
I am not considering myself nor my immediate family and what I would want if they were hurt in any way and I made that plain in my earlier post. I am merely discussing the wider picture of what the State should do in cases of grave crimes.
I maintain my opposition to the death penalty in general for the reasons I've given. I am not in any way sympathetic to *****philes at all - you don't have a monopoly in having children. However, they don't wake up one day and choose to be *****philes, and remember that *****philia is classed as a psychiatric disorder. It is that reason that sets them apart from the vast majority of terrorists, as well as the fact that they don't murder large numbers of people indiscriminately (regardless of how awful their crimes are). *****philia fortunately affects few people in their daily lives. Terrorist activities affect all of us, and any one of us could be a victim tomorrow.
If a lawyer was to prove to a court that his terrorist client was suffering from a mental disorder then that safeguard should remain so that the State does not put to death mentally ill individuals. I never suggested that principle should be removed.
As for miscarriages of justice, well yes that does concern me, but as I stated (though you seem to have missed this), for me the greater public good trumps that, such is the extent of the threat we face - particularly as the deterrent effect would be great for many on the fringes, considering the amount of pre-planning that takes place. Yes, there are always those fanatics who don't care and would love to martyr themselves but you're never going to deter them anyway.
Hope that's cleared things up for you.
Your reasoning regarding *****philes vs terrorists is curious. Nobody gets on a plane concerned about *****philes. Nobody travels to the Middle East and is concerned about *****philes. It's not *****philes that murdered over a hundred people in Paris. It's not *****philes that cause armed police to be deployed across Europe because of public safety concerns.
I am not considering myself nor my immediate family and what I would want if they were hurt in any way and I made that plain in my earlier post. I am merely discussing the wider picture of what the State should do in cases of grave crimes.
I maintain my opposition to the death penalty in general for the reasons I've given. I am not in any way sympathetic to *****philes at all - you don't have a monopoly in having children. However, they don't wake up one day and choose to be *****philes, and remember that *****philia is classed as a psychiatric disorder. It is that reason that sets them apart from the vast majority of terrorists, as well as the fact that they don't murder large numbers of people indiscriminately (regardless of how awful their crimes are). *****philia fortunately affects few people in their daily lives. Terrorist activities affect all of us, and any one of us could be a victim tomorrow.
If a lawyer was to prove to a court that his terrorist client was suffering from a mental disorder then that safeguard should remain so that the State does not put to death mentally ill individuals. I never suggested that principle should be removed.
As for miscarriages of justice, well yes that does concern me, but as I stated (though you seem to have missed this), for me the greater public good trumps that, such is the extent of the threat we face - particularly as the deterrent effect would be great for many on the fringes, considering the amount of pre-planning that takes place. Yes, there are always those fanatics who don't care and would love to martyr themselves but you're never going to deter them anyway.
Hope that's cleared things up for you.