- Feedback
- View
I haven't ridiculed the views of others. Just stated my own.
For more minor offences you could have a totting up system as with driving now.
For more minor offences you could have a totting up system as with driving now.
Death penalty in the UK, yes or no???
- Thread starter Grannygrinder
- Start date
- Status
Well here in the States we have the death penalty so maybe a few observations:
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
the governor ordered all death row inmates to be DNA tested to compare with the evidence in their cases and 19 were exonerated. The governor, who had been a strident supporter of the death penalty, immediately suspended all executions in the state and changed his personal opinion on the matter.
Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
the governor ordered all death row inmates to be DNA tested to compare with the evidence in their cases and 19 were exonerated. The governor, who had been a strident supporter of the death penalty, immediately suspended all executions in the state and changed his personal opinion on the matter.Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
lewisfoto":3k4lw0fy said:Well here in the States we have the death penalty so maybe a few observations:
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
Cogent points - there's the rub - by any measure, it's not particularly effective. But it suits the blood lust, or the views of some, and some subverted perspective of appeasement for victims.
Thing is, the justice system has never concerned itself with the appeasment of victims.
And the comparison with war fails - the motivation for war isn't purely to kill people, it's to win a battle of wills. Killing is an unfortunate means to an end, not an end in it's own right, as per capital punishment.
careful now
Retro Guru
I think we should have it for fat people 
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-S_W_mWT9c[/youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-S_W_mWT9c[/youtube]
- Feedback
- View
Capital punishment is a means to an end, but not and end in it own right. It is to win a battle of wills of what popular opinion think is right/wrong.Neil":3qls6kss said:lewisfoto":3qls6kss said:Well here in the States we have the death penalty so maybe a few observations:
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
Cogent points - there's the rub - by any measure, it's not particularly effective. But it suits the blood lust, or the views of some, and some subverted perspective of appeasement for victims.
Thing is, the justice system has never concerned itself with the appeasment of victims.
And the comparison with war fails - the motivation for war isn't purely to kill people, it's to win a battle of wills. Killing is an unfortunate means to an end, not an end in it's own right, as per capital punishment.
Chap/chapess gets killed in the war on crime. Crime might/might not end but that chap/chapess will not be able to do it again.
Same difference, just different scale. Why differentiate.
We should go the showbiz route like you mention, do a text/phone vote on it. Live or die?
Everyone can judge, just like it should be.. Monkeys of society count too, not just the learnered types.
- Feedback
- View
All valid points.
But, if an individual calously carves up another indiviual in broad daylight in front of camera phone wielding onlookers and goes on to inform said onlookers of why he/she has carried out this act, as somesort of justification, showing no signs of remorse whatsoever he/she does not deserve to continue to live in a morally balanced society, or live fullstop for that matter.
Just my opinion.
But, if an individual calously carves up another indiviual in broad daylight in front of camera phone wielding onlookers and goes on to inform said onlookers of why he/she has carried out this act, as somesort of justification, showing no signs of remorse whatsoever he/she does not deserve to continue to live in a morally balanced society, or live fullstop for that matter.
Just my opinion.
FluffyChicken":19u5iu1k said:Capital punishment is a means to an end, but not and end in it own right. Chap/chapess gets killed in the war on crime.Neil":19u5iu1k said:lewisfoto":19u5iu1k said:Well here in the States we have the death penalty so maybe a few observations:
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
Cogent points - there's the rub - by any measure, it's not particularly effective. But it suits the blood lust, or the views of some, and some subverted perspective of appeasement for victims.
Thing is, the justice system has never concerned itself with the appeasment of victims.
And the comparison with war fails - the motivation for war isn't purely to kill people, it's to win a battle of wills. Killing is an unfortunate means to an end, not an end in it's own right, as per capital punishment.
Same difference, just different scale. Why differentiate.
Why differentiate? Because they are different.
If we could wage war without the expense, and a gentlemens argreement that the first one to cry after being swipped across the face with a rotten halibut, that would probably do.
FluffyChicken":19u5iu1k said:
This kinda touches on why modern governments in England wouldn't put this to the vote / referendum. Because en-masse, people are idiots - they'll gladly dismiss reason, rationale, logic and evidence, in favour of their opinion or gut feeling.
It's for this reason, that governments don't put every single policy or option for a popularity vote, because en-masse the public can't be trusted to be anything other than idiotic or reactionary.
If a political party wanted to wage a (political) war on single-policy politics, I doubt they'd get in - because whilst people may like the single proposition, many of the populace still wouldn't get off their arse to vote, and many others wouldn't be convinced such a party could actually run the country.
Grannygrinder":2bpbzyx2 said:
Thing is - martyrdom is appealling for many of these groups.
And surely it's beholden on civilisation and the justice system to be above that which the abhorrent do - you know, look somebody in the eye, and say "I'm doing this for effect", and coldly kill somebody.
M-Power
Old School Grand Master
lewisfoto":1ig1txyu said:Well here in the States we have the death penalty so maybe a few observations:
First, as was noted above, you can never be 100% sure that the conviction is correct so there is always doubt. Recently in Michigan (I think it was 200
Second the death penalty is extremely expensive. Here in California the average convicted killer spends over 20 years on death row during which time his/her case is in a state of constant appeal. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, California spends $137 million per year on executions. In contrast a system where lifetime incarceration is the maximum sentence would cost $11 million, according to the center.
Third repeated studies have shown that the death penalty is not a significant deterrent, at the same time that overall violent crime rates in California have fallen.
On the reverse side of the issue the families of victims, in some cases but not all, do seem to get some kind of deserved retribution from a death sentence. Would their feeling of justice be more or less if the convicted were behind bars for life?
Quite frankly I do not know...
Steven
Well I got schooled. Good points made. Our justice system is a joke in the UK, with crazy liberal judges making a mockery of sentencing and upholding the rites of some truly abhorrent people, probably just to gain notoriety. Prisons aren't a deterrent for most repeat offenders ( sorry Alison ) as they can carry on their habits inside, network and learn new criminal practices.
Prison should be an almost unbearable existence for the very worst offenders (Siberian Gulag style) , convicted by non circumstantial evidence.
Just my 2p
- Status
