LincolnHearts Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 11 minutes ago, Jimmy85 said: It costs less to imprison for life than it does to administer the death penalty. No danger that can be true. I have a mate who was working at Rampton when that sub-human scum Ian Huntlley was sent there. I reckon it cost the taxpayer more in a month than it would to administer the death penalty to someone like him. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 7 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: I've no idea what you mean. You said execution could only be used if there was no doubt. Are you saying that there is an option to jail someone for life if you think they might be guilty? To be honest I'm not sure what's ambiguous, what I'm suggesting is an option. I'm not suggesting for one second that even everyone who commits murder should be a shoe in for the black hanky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Just now, chomp my root said: To be honest I'm not sure what's ambiguous, what I'm suggesting is an option. I'm not suggesting for one second that even everyone who commits murder should be a shoe in for the black hanky. I'll try again. You said if doubt existed, life in prison was an option rather than execution. The burden of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is doubt you can't be convicted. If you aren't convicted they're not supposed to hang or jail you on the off chance you might be guilty after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy85 Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 10 minutes ago, LincolnHearts said: No danger that can be true. It absolutely is true. In actual fact it is significantly more expensive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: I'll try again. You said if doubt existed, life in prison was an option rather than execution. The burden of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is doubt you can't be convicted. If you aren't convicted they're not supposed to hang or jail you on the off chance you might be guilty after all. Best not put anyone in jail then if they reckon they were innocent etc. I'll try again too. It would be an option not the default punishment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Skidmarks Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 18 minutes ago, LincolnHearts said: No danger that can be true. I have a mate who was working at Rampton when that sub-human scum Ian Huntlley was sent there. I reckon it cost the taxpayer more in a month than it would to administer the death penalty to someone like him. Its not that simplistic though. Think about the cost of numerous appeals, additional security and isolation on "death row" all significantly more expensive than life doing porridge. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, chomp my root said: Best not put anyone in jail then if they reckon they were innocent etc. I'll try again too. It would be an option not the default punishment. I hope there is never a referendum on the subject. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Just now, Sergeant Wilson said: I hope there is never a referendum on the subject. I think the 'powers that be' have learned their lesson on referendums, at least for a generation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamthebam Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 6 hours ago, coprolite said: it should be done in a big stadium, entertainingly. The romans had some good ideas, which we could combine with gladiators or takeshi's castle. Wipeout over crocodiles or fighting lions while suspended by a bungee would be quality. Ticket proceeds can be used to compensate victims. Any offence more serious than disturbing the peace would qualify. vote coprolite The last public execution in Edinburgh took place in 1864. Shortly after public executions stopped football became popular. Coincidence? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inanimate Carbon Rod Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 Its not that simplistic though. Think about the cost of numerous appeals, additional security and isolation on "death row" all significantly more expensive than life doing porridge. Yes I think America for example all of the decades of appeals and legal costs im sure some states have spent hundreds of millions.https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/CostsRptFinal.pdf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiefan27 Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 In America, Since 1973, 151 people have been released from death row because they were later found to be innocent. How many more have been executed before innocence can be proven? Quote "The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000... the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison" https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/fbi-overstated-forensic-hair-matches-in-nearly-all-criminal-trials-for-decades/2015/04/18/39c8d8c6-e515-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html?utm_term=.eeda3abec627 Now, the above doesn't mean all of those 14 were innocent, but were they convicted beyond a reasonable doubt? It's all well and good to say it should be an option "only when there's no doubt", but criminal trials are supposed to be beyond a reasonable doubt. If you make a mistake and bang someone up you can release them, if you execute them you've killed an innocent person. I'm not morally opposed to the death penalty - c***s like Breivik could be put down like a dog and I wouldn't bat an eyelid - but the fact is it's impossible to be right 100 per cent of the time. As I said previously, if ONE innocent person is put to death, it's not worth it. You could be right 999 times out of 1000, but if your child, partner, parent, friend were the 1 would you still accept it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 6 minutes ago, killiefan27 said: In America, Since 1973, 151 people have been released from death row because they were later found to be innocent. How many more have been executed before innocence can be proven? Now, the above doesn't mean all of those 14 were innocent, but were they convicted beyond a reasonable doubt? It's all well and good to say it should be an option "only when there's no doubt", but criminal trials are supposed to be beyond a reasonable doubt. If you make a mistake and bang someone up you can release them, if you execute them you've killed an innocent person. I'm not morally opposed to the death penalty - c***s like Breivik could be put down like a dog and I wouldn't bat an eyelid - but the fact is it's impossible to be right 100 per cent of the time. As I said previously, if ONE innocent person is put to death, it's not worth it. You could be right 999 times out of 1000, but if your child, partner, parent, friend were the 1 would you still accept it? I can understand why the comparisons tend to be with the US, and have a historical bias, that doesn't mean the numbers would stack up now. Science has moved on and again, if there's any doubt then you don't automatically have to kill them. I don't think there's a perfect way to deal with criminals (and potential criminals) but we can say what we have isn't working a hundred percent either, who's to say the possibility of a death penalty won't make the difference in a handful of cases (won't someone please think of the children/if it saves one life logic). The logic of cost (in the US) is irrelevant, they tend to dish out death sentences all the time leading to appeals, what works in the US or Saudi Arabia or wherever would and should have no bearing on the UK. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heedthebaa Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 You can’t go around killing people for killing people, we’re supposed to be a civilised country 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killiefan27 Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, chomp my root said: I can understand why the comparisons tend to be with the US, and have a historical bias, that doesn't mean the numbers would stack up now. Science has moved on and again, if there's any doubt then you don't automatically have to kill them. I don't think there's a perfect way to deal with criminals (and potential criminals) but we can say what we have isn't working a hundred percent either, who's to say the possibility of a death penalty won't make the difference in a handful of cases (won't someone please think of the children/if it saves one life logic). The logic of cost (in the US) is irrelevant, they tend to dish out death sentences all the time leading to appeals, what works in the US or Saudi Arabia or wherever would and should have no bearing on the UK. Wouldn't you agree that the US would represent the most apposite comparison to the UK though? Just last year there were five people released from death row. Two were acquitted, two had the charges dropped for false or coerced confessions and one had charges dropped because the pathologist got the cause of death wrong. Those people walked, how confident are you that no-one else with similar stories was put to death? And how sure are you that similar things wouldn't happen here? You say "if there's any doubt then you don't automatically have to kill them", but all five of these people were convicted by a jury, where the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Edited January 11, 2018 by killiefan27 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, killiefan27 said: Wouldn't you agree that the US would represent the most apposite comparison to the UK though? Just last year there were five people released from death row. Two were acquitted, two had the charges dropped for false or coerced confessions and one had charges dropped because the pathologist got the cause of death wrong. Those people walked, how confident are you that no-one else with similar stories was put to death? And how sure are you that similar things wouldn't happen here? You say "if there's any doubt then you don't automatically have to kill them", but all five of these people were convicted by a jury, where the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt". I'd suggest the US is very far from the UK when it comes to crime and punishment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 hour ago, tamthebam said: The last public execution in Edinburgh took place in 1864. Shortly after public executions stopped football became popular. Coincidence? If anyone else puts six past us this season I'll want Lazlo hung in Dundee city centre. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomp my root Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 minute ago, Granny Danger said: If anyone else puts six past us this season I'll want Lazlo hung in Dundee city centre. That kind of thing happens from time to time I'm led to believe. Giving your rivals 7 is a different story though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 1 minute ago, chomp my root said: That kind of thing happens from time to time I'm led to believe. Giving your rivals 7 is a different story though. Hanging Csaba Lazlo in Dundee city centre happens from time to time? News to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Probably a bad thing that this thread reminded me of this album's title: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 15 hours ago, Richey Edwards said: People who want the death penalty re-instated are invariably dribbling morons and Ones For The Watching. The person whose name you have taken for this forum expressed pro-death penalty views at various points. 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.