The death penalty. Yes or no?

[macdanger2]

I see what you mean Myles but those cases are "kill or be killed" whereas execution is done in the cold light of day.

I wonder what most genuinely guilty offenders feel about it - would they rather spend 50 odd years in jail with no hope of release? Or to just get it over and done with? If the latter, then the death penalty actually gives them an easy way out.

[AZOffaly]

No, I wouldn't be in favour of the death penalty at all, because of the risks to innocent people convicted wrongly. Having a death penalty at all leaves you open to that happening.

In the London lad's case, I wouldn't be sorry for him no matter what happened him, but I'd think hard labour, and imprisonment for the rest of his life would be a fitting punishment. Make him contribute to society as best he can from behind bars, and never let him out.

[muppet]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

Death is an easy way out for him.

[johnneycool]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

Death is an easy way out for him.

He wants to be a martyr so don't make it easy for him.

As for the death penalty its hard to say that some don't deserve it and are just plain evil with no redeeming qualities, but as can be seen from the American legal system, if you can't afford a good lawyer you could be getting some innocent people sitting in electric chairs due to the fact that they couldn't afford decent legal representation and that's wrong too.

Is that a risk we take, I'm not so sure.

[haranguerer]

No 2 is just waffle. Someone breaks into your house to kill your family is it wrong to kill them in self defense. Is it wrong to kill the aggressor  that invades your country. There are times that it is neccessary to take a life and I believe that any one of us would do it if put in particular circumstances.

State execution is neither of those things.

I wasnt saying it was. I was making the case that people who say in a black and white way "its wrong to kill another person no matter what" are full of shit. In certain circumstances it is necessary and I just gave a couple of examples. If you can accept there are some times that it is necessary then perhaps you can begin to accept that a man who rapes and murders an 11 month old baby is a danger to society, a financial drain on society, will never be rehabilitated and will never contribute to society. Execution is perfectly reasonable in this case.

You should look into it more. It costs much more to execute a prisoner than life in prison.

[haranguerer]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

What about the guy in London sending in the jets and killing innocent 'collateral damage' afghans?

[mylestheslasher]

No 2 is just waffle. Someone breaks into your house to kill your family is it wrong to kill them in self defense. Is it wrong to kill the aggressor  that invades your country. There are times that it is neccessary to take a life and I believe that any one of us would do it if put in particular circumstances.

State execution is neither of those things.

I wasnt saying it was. I was making the case that people who say in a black and white way "its wrong to kill another person no matter what" are full of shit. In certain circumstances it is necessary and I just gave a couple of examples. If you can accept there are some times that it is necessary then perhaps you can begin to accept that a man who rapes and murders an 11 month old baby is a danger to society, a financial drain on society, will never be rehabilitated and will never contribute to society. Execution is perfectly reasonable in this case.

You should look into it more. It costs much more to execute a prisoner than life in prison.

Do you really believe it costs more to execute someone than pay for their keep for 30 years. Think about it! The only possible reason for any such statistic is the fact that people are kept on death row for years on appeals and further appeals - i.e. an inefficient system for carrying out the execution.

[mylestheslasher]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

What about the guy in London sending in the jets and killing innocent 'collateral damage' afghans?

What about, what about, what about........

[AZOffaly]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

What about the guy in London sending in the jets and killing innocent 'collateral damage' afghans?

What about, what about, what about........

Em...

[muppet]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

What about the guy in London sending in the jets and killing innocent 'collateral damage' afghans?

What about, what about, what about........

Em...

[haranguerer]

No 2 is just waffle. Someone breaks into your house to kill your family is it wrong to kill them in self defense. Is it wrong to kill the aggressor  that invades your country. There are times that it is neccessary to take a life and I believe that any one of us would do it if put in particular circumstances.

State execution is neither of those things.

I wasnt saying it was. I was making the case that people who say in a black and white way "its wrong to kill another person no matter what" are full of shit. In certain circumstances it is necessary and I just gave a couple of examples. If you can accept there are some times that it is necessary then perhaps you can begin to accept that a man who rapes and murders an 11 month old baby is a danger to society, a financial drain on society, will never be rehabilitated and will never contribute to society. Execution is perfectly reasonable in this case.

You should look into it more. It costs much more to execute a prisoner than life in prison.

Do you really believe it costs more to execute someone than pay for their keep for 30 years. Think about it! The only possible reason for any such statistic is the fact that people are kept on death row for years on appeals and further appeals - i.e. an inefficient system for carrying out the execution.

So you'd deny them the appeals? Its reassuring that we're on opposite sides of this argument.

[mylestheslasher]

As I said, I have no sympathy for this fella if he committed the crime. But having no sympathy for him is not the same as advocating a penalty which may be inhumane, and is certainly responsible for innocent people being executed.

What about the guy in London with the cleaver hacking of a guys head on the street in the name of some God. There is no doubt in that case that he is guilty, would you be against the death penalty for him?

What about the guy in London sending in the jets and killing innocent 'collateral damage' afghans?

What about, what about, what about........

Em...

The guy in London is an example of how you can be 100% sure a person committed a crime. Bringing Tony Blair into it is a whole other story, I'm sure there is a thread somewhere with 100 pages on it.

[mylestheslasher]

No 2 is just waffle. Someone breaks into your house to kill your family is it wrong to kill them in self defense. Is it wrong to kill the aggressor  that invades your country. There are times that it is neccessary to take a life and I believe that any one of us would do it if put in particular circumstances.

State execution is neither of those things.

I wasnt saying it was. I was making the case that people who say in a black and white way "its wrong to kill another person no matter what" are full of shit. In certain circumstances it is necessary and I just gave a couple of examples. If you can accept there are some times that it is necessary then perhaps you can begin to accept that a man who rapes and murders an 11 month old baby is a danger to society, a financial drain on society, will never be rehabilitated and will never contribute to society. Execution is perfectly reasonable in this case.

You should look into it more. It costs much more to execute a prisoner than life in prison.

Do you really believe it costs more to execute someone than pay for their keep for 30 years. Think about it! The only possible reason for any such statistic is the fact that people are kept on death row for years on appeals and further appeals - i.e. an inefficient system for carrying out the execution.

So you'd deny them the appeals? Its reassuring that we're on opposite sides of this argument.

No, but appeals would be heard quickly and not straggle on and on until an election comes up like what happens in the US. So you accept that it is not more expensive then?

[deiseach]

I'm confused. Does the proximity of an election speed up or slow down the appeals process in the US?

[AZOffaly]

In fry 'em states like Texas or Florida an upcoming election for state governor can see a spate of executions. I'm tough on crime y'all.