Why don't we bring back the death penalty for some crimes?

Question

which would you suggest ?

Answer 1

because liberal are squeamish...we need to get rid of scum who rape children, kill on intent, kill will doing anything associated with illegal drugs, etc...

Answer 2

Interesting answers to this one so far, some making good points, others less so. I particularly enjoyed the dolt who thinks the bible says that an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind and then goes on to berrate people for misquotation. Ghandi said an eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind - the bible sticks with an eye for an eye is fair.

Anyhow, while we can speculate and argue the pros and cons, the actual answer is set in the foundations of law. Laws are not just made on a whim, but there are a set of underlying rules about how they must work - I'm talking English law here, the US just asks Bush what he feels like doing and he flips a coin, I believe.

English Law is based on certain tennets; one being innocent until proven guilty, another being that convictions are made only where the case is beyond all reasonable doubt and another being that it is better for 100 guilty men to go free than for 1 innocent man to be wrongly punished. Whether or not you agree with this is irrelevent; it is fact. The right to appeal remains after conviction, should further evidence come to light - as people have rightly highlighted in cases such as the Birmingham Six.

Once you sentence a person to death, that is the end of the matter. Should further evidence come to light afterwards, you cannot restore life. Therefore, you have removed the right of appeal. The death sentence, when it existed, was at odds with the fundementals of law.

This has been further ingrained into law by international law and European law - the European Court of Appeal now being the highest authority presiding over the UK.

Whether you believe or not, law is subject to God's law in England. That is, God's laws must not be contravened by man's laws. Again, the death penalty was at odds with this underlying tennet of law, because God's commandments include Thou shalt not kill. Given that law is sanctioned in the UK by the Christian faith, only God has the legal right to end a life. In older times, it was believed that the sovereign had this power bestowed upon them by God - but we know better now.

Restoring the death penalty, as well as being questionable in it's effectiveness as a dterrent (as several answers have already stated), would cause a massive legal dilema, placing direct conflict between the UK, Europe and international law, as well as directly conflicting with the underlying spirit under which all English law is based. If this were the case, there would be opportunity for defence counsels to question the authority of practically any English law and could, potentially, tie up the whole legal system for ridiculous periods of time and may even lead to every English law having to be re-written. Obviously, such a situation can never occur, so the death penalty - if it were to return -would have to return on the sly.

Answer 3

I think the reason the death penalty will never be brought back is because the powers that be are all frightened of the possibility of miscarriages of justice. I don't think it has anything to do with morality, it is purely financial. Because the whole country has become a 'compensation state' they are terrified of being sued. As far as I can see, this wouldn't be the case if we only executed the murderers where there is absolutely no doubt as to their guilt. I don't think it matters which method of execution we use. Why worry about making sure they are executed humanely. They weren't concerned with that when they murdered their victims.
I also think that paedophiles and rapists should be castrated. They shouldn't be given the opportunity to re-offend, as so many do, they destroy the lives of too many people.

Answer 4

It would be difficult to restore the death penalty. Where UK law conflicts with EU law, EU law prevails - look it up, sadly it's in the treaty of accession. Until 1997 or 1998 the death penalty was still on the statute books for treason but was then abolished. The EU would take a very dim view of a member state trying to restore it (as Poland's current government has discussed doing - watch that to see what happens).

Answer 5

Think the Birmingham Six, the Guilford Four and numerous other people of Irish origin who had their convictions overturned, it wouldn't have happened if the death penalty had still been in place. Or it would have been a bit late if they had already been hung! The judiciary system is not infallible, and the police are not always honest and squeaky clean. As long as we prevent the state from taking one innocent life then the death penalty should stay in the history books where your views belong!

Answer 6

Where life has been taken, or the most serious crimes against another person or persons, i.e repeated rape, repeated serious paedophile crime, and terrorism, for example and where there is no doubt whatsoever, the law should give this as an option, but the family of the victim or the victim themselves should have a say in the application of such a penalty. The bible does quote "an eye for an eye"

Answer 7

Death penalty should be reinstituted to deter crimes and give the proper penalty to some crimes. Would be criminals will think again to commit a crime if they realized that their act is punishable by death.

Answer 8

I think that it may deter some but on the whole I am against the death penalty simply because killing another human being is wrong.
Even if it is done under that country's law.

If it was up to me i would put them into the army and get tough with them.

Answer 9

The death penalty is obscene and has no place in a civilized society.
No matter how evil an individual may be perceived to be, once incarcerated they are helpless to protect and defend themselves and if the best solution we can come up with is to take their life then society foregoes any right to call itself civilized.
Yes we can hide behind moral outrage, justice, what about the right's of the victims etc, but it strips us all of our humanity and that which we aspire to as human beings and lessens all of us.

Answer 10

Because we are a civilised society (as opposed to the U.S.) and do not do that anymore. Since there is no such thing as a perfect judicial system, then with a death penalty there is no room for mistake - there have been too many judicial mistakes and innocent people have suffered as a result.

Answer 11

Because
a. it doesn't work (countries who have death penalty have the worest crimes)
b. strangely, it makes criminals more audacious, because if the state kills, they feel they have the right to kill
c. it is cruel and against human rights, even for criminals
d. many people have been condemned without being guilty, and it can't be corrected
e. Would you be an executioner? Because that's what everyone is when the state executes someone on his behalf. I wouldn't be one, so I don't accept the state doing it for me.
f. What I would accept is to acquit parents of tortured, raped and killed children if they kill the person who did that to their child.