Menzel Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 No surprises whatsoever as to who has 'leftfield' ideas and is all over this thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Keep it simple - in cases where the crime is considered heinous enough (not for Joe Public to determine this) and the likelihood of rehabilitation is considered (by the experts - yes, I know) to be zero then Capital Punishment it is. Why would anyone argue against this? On the basis that mistakes can be made? Yes, they can but that's the beauty of our legal system - beyond all reasonable doubt which, these days, is a pretty firm test. Those who use the "mistakes can be made" argument are therefore saying it's OK to lock someone up for 20 years by mistake because you can let them out when the mistake is uncovered - that's not a compelling argument for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy85 Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Literally nobody is saying it’s ok to incorrectly lock someone up for 20 years. What an absurd suggestion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, Jimmy85 said: Literally nobody is saying it’s ok to incorrectly lock someone up for 20 years. What an absurd suggestion. Hardly absurd. A perfectly reasonable assumption to make. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Hardly absurd. A perfectly reasonable assumption to make. It’s absolute nonsense. Locking them up incorrectly for 20 years is preferable to killing them, that’s not the same as being ok. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy85 Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, hk blues said: A perfectly reasonable assumption to make. If you’re a complete moron. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Just now, oneteaminglasgow said: It’s absolute nonsense. Locking them up incorrectly for 20 years is preferable to killing them, that’s not the same as being ok. So you think it's acceptable? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Jimmy85 said: If you’re a complete moron. A perfectly reasoned response that leaves plenty of room for intelligent debate and discussion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 So you think it's acceptable? Can you read? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, oneteaminglasgow said: Can you read? Yes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Yes. Thought it would be obvious then.Just for the avoidance of doubt, neither the death penalty or locking someone up incorrectly for 20 years are acceptable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 minute ago, oneteaminglasgow said: Thought it would be obvious then. Just for the avoidance of doubt, neither the death penalty or locking someone up incorrectly for 20 years are acceptable. I agree. which is why I find the suggestion that we shouldn't impose Capital Punishment because mistakes can be made uncompelling; the same mistakes can be made under the current system but there is no suggestion to abolish it. I don't think my assumption is at all unreasonable or absurd. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 I don't read the Daily Mail and I'm not an arsehole, so it's a "no" from me. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Just now, Bully Wee Villa said: I don't read the Daily Mail and I'm not an arsehole, so it's a "no", from me. One of those might well be a fact, the other is opinion. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Rumbled... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oneteaminglasgow Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 I agree. which is why I find the suggestion that we shouldn't impose Capital Punishment because mistakes can be made uncompelling; the same mistakes can be made under the current system but there is no suggestion to abolish it. I don't think my assumption is at all unreasonable or absurd. If someone has been in prison for 20 years and are later found to be innocent, then they can be released, and some attempt to make amends can be made.If they’ve been put to death and are later found to be innocent, then that’s that. I’d say the first option is far preferable.That does not mean that it should be acceptable that mistaken convictions happen, but they do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiefan27 Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 hour ago, hk blues said: Keep it simple - in cases where the crime is considered heinous enough (not for Joe Public to determine this) and the likelihood of rehabilitation is considered (by the experts - yes, I know) to be zero then Capital Punishment it is. Why would anyone argue against this? On the basis that mistakes can be made? Yes, they can but that's the beauty of our legal system - beyond all reasonable doubt which, these days, is a pretty firm test. Those who use the "mistakes can be made" argument are therefore saying it's OK to lock someone up for 20 years by mistake because you can let them out when the mistake is uncovered - that's not a compelling argument for me. So your argument basically boils down to "yeah mistakes can be made, but being locked up wrongly is also bad so, y'know, f**k it"? Literally no-one thinks it's ok to wrongly lock someone up for 20 years, it's just preferable to murdering them. The "beyond all reasonable doubt" point is, frankly, a stupid one and I don't understand why people keep making it. The standard for criminal trials is "beyond a reasonable doubt" already. People are still wrongly imprisoned. The only difference if we had the death penalty would be that we wouldn't be able to let them out, compensate them etc. Your first argument is actually a better one. If you're willing to let innocent people die to see terrorists or whoever hang then just say so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 hk blues is at it. Nobody can be that obtuse, surely. I'm surprised nobody's brought up the idea of limiting appeals to save money and avoid the US-style Death Row scenario, where folk can sit rotting away for decades until the state murders them. That's always a popular argument among folk who like to break humans lives down into dollars and cents. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk blues Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, killiefan27 said: So your argument basically boils down to "yeah mistakes can be made, but being locked up wrongly is also bad so, y'know, f**k it"? Literally no-one thinks it's ok to wrongly lock someone up for 20 years, it's just preferable to murdering them. The "beyond all reasonable doubt" point is, frankly, a stupid one and I don't understand why people keep making it. The standard for criminal trials is "beyond a reasonable doubt" already. People are still wrongly imprisoned. The only difference if we had the death penalty would be that we wouldn't be able to let them out, compensate them etc. Your first argument is actually a better one. If you're willing to let innocent people die to see terrorists or whoever hang then just say so. Your first sentence is rather simplistic and assumes everything is black or white - with no grey areas. Beyond All Reasonable Doubt is a tried and tested legal principle - that might be why people keep referring to it, hardly stupid. People are still wrongly imprisoned, that's not being disputed. But I don't accept it as being the point at which all discussion or debate on Capital Punishment comes to an end with no further discussion encouraged. You've made a huge leap with that last sentence - and fallen on your arse! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 hour ago, hk blues said: So you think it's acceptable? It's not acceptable, but you can let them out. Digging dead people up is a bit futile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.