I'm always a bit sceptical about these polls. They never mention what question(s) were asked or who they were directed to. Asking if "Should terrorists face the death penalty?" in the week following a major terrorist attack hardly leads to a objective response from most people.
I agree, however this was not a poll as such. It was a guest who said it when talking about how much of a democracy we were at times. He was quickly moved on to another subject. I am trying to find it with no luck This petition thing thats going around is not a new thing apparently
A civilized society does not kill its prisoners. What we should do is make prison life so harsh, the prisoners kill themselves.
Then you would have prisoners moaning about human rights, even though I believe that if you infringe on someone else's human rights you shoulf forfeit your own in the eyes of the law.
I have always believed the ultimate crime should have the ultimate punishment. The Death Penalty will never be reintroduced though, firstly because it would not be allowed by Europe. Secondly, even if it was reintroduced no one would ever be sentenced to death because there are too many soft-hearted twats sitting on juries who live life in a vacuum. If we relied on a unanimous verdict to apply the death penalty then there will always be one dozy **** (at least) who would refuse to find the defendant guilty. It sucks, there are people in prison now who should have been snuffed out years ago, but i'm not going to lose any sleep over worrying about something that is outwith my control.
I say every night, the prisoner should be provided with chair, piece of rope , and a book with clear instructions on how to tie a hangs mans noose... oh yeah , hook on the ceiling. That way the scum hang themselves, and the liberal elite and keep their hands clean, while forgetting about all those cilvlians and soliders our armed forces kill every year. If one innocent life is wrong, then never, funny how that does not seem to apply to wear, when its your cowardly arse on the line.
I don't think that any person should be made to die because of their actions, no matter how serious. If anything, being left to rot in a prison is a worse punishment for some than death, e.g. if an Islamist is sentenced to death they could be seen as a martyr, a person to rally around. Also, by introducing the death penalty, you would have to therefore pay somebody to kill people. You can't shake your head at a murderer, then do exactly the same as he did and sink to his level!
Yes it is, it's also VERY expensive. There are too many criminals laughing their arses off in 'jail' with their colour tv's, dvd's, x-box etc etc costing this country a ****ing fortune. There is no place in the world for cold-blooded murderers, kiddy fiddlers etc and it's about time there was some serious action taken to make them at least think about things before they do it. Like others have mentioned, each case still needs to be scrutinised carefully to see the particular scenario but I don't think you can excuse mental illness as a reason to keep a killer alive. If they are a danger to the public and have already taken a life then they be removed from the life that they have no respect for.
Think of the many people that have went through years upon years in prison only to be aquitted. What do you do then? Like people have said, we don't need to execute people as a form of punishment, rather strip them of some of the liberties they have in jail. Watching programs about UK jails looks mad compared to the ones about American jails. People sitting around laughing and joking with pals, playing pool and watching TV.
But the death penalty is also very expensive. The amount of money used up in court appeals alone runs into the thousands.
That is a different debate really A lot (not all) of those cases could have been avoided. The simple fix would be that if a person is to be hanged/injected then the evidence has to be there If (as in some of the cases of acquittal) it comes to light that the police covered up the evidence or whatever, then that would be classed as murder and the copper(s) involved be given the death penalty too
There was a fella that lived beside a mate of mine who plunged 2 knives into the chest of a fella after a dispute. He was only about 14 at the time and served I think 6 or 7 years. His brother told my mate that it was a breeze for the wee fella and all he did was play ps2 and watch TV all day.
Only by people who pervert the religion to justify murder. They think that by killing the infidels they will secure a place in Paradise but in reality Allah condemns murderers and these people will never get into Paradise. As I have said before some people are too evil to be allowed to exist in this world like some of the most infamous serial murderers in history. You cannot deny that the world would be a better place without them.
Like this case where the evidence was backed up against the fella. http://www.innocenceproject.org/Con...rongfully_Convicted_and_Executed_in_Texas.php
Doesnt really give an insight into the 'evidence' I do think the same rule applies, those who cocked up or fixed the evidence, should be bought before the courts Thing is though in this case it seems the evidence was questioned and someone ignored it. to me that constitutes manslaughter at the least and that person should be punished
The problem with religious extremists is that they will always exist, death penalty or no death penalty. Nutters will always be nutters, and if a terrorist is executed here, propaganda in that country will almost certainly spin it so that the poor, brave soldier was mercilessly killed, how dare they kill our people. And the sad thing is, people will believe this, which will turn the minds of more benign people into extremists.
The problem here is in the definition. Remember Nelson Mandela was implicated in blowing up a bus but now is man of the millenium or something Its again manipulation to get us to 'toe the line' one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter
