2006-09-22 05:41:54 · 50 answers · asked by vinspitfire 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
it should be introduced everywhere since we have DNA testing then we can prove beyond a resonable doubt who a criminal is.
2006-09-22 05:45:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I would think that capital punishment has no place in an enlighten country. It is not a deterrent, countries that maintain capital punishment always have people on death row and in most cases the people that are sentenced to death are the people that could not afford or find a decent defence. America for example has a large amount of black people on death row something like 90% ,of which the majority killed a white person, but America sentences very few white people to death that have killed black people. If it was to to used in an unbiased punishment for the people that have commit ed the worse crimes then i would not have many objections to it being reintroduced
2006-09-22 06:02:57 · answer #2 · answered by citalopraming 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Capitol punishment? Does this mean making all convicted criminals work at the heart of the US government? Don't you think they have enough crooks there already?
I don't believe in CAPITAL punishment either, but do believe in life meaning life, and without the scale of comforts currently available to long term prisoners in the UK.
basic diet, hard work and continuous incarceration. You forfeit your rights as a citizen by stepping outside society.
2006-09-22 08:27:29 · answer #3 · answered by intelligent_observer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You shall not kill.
But how about putting vile murderers on public display - with an admission charge for people who want to pelt bad eggs and stuff at them, so earning their State keep? Or administering regular doses of punishment, physical pain, well-publicised? Or actively encouraging their do-it-yourself deaths, unpublicised?
(It was Caesar who was killed in the Capitol, capital provision for the bloke, by the way).
2006-09-22 06:28:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. What about the Bermingham Six and the Guilford Four. They would have been executed had capital punishment existed in UK at the time of their "conviction". Yet they were all innocent. Just victims of British (in)justice!
2006-09-22 12:10:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The simple answer to this question is NO. Reason, is because when we had the death penalty in UK lots of innocent people got hanged when later better evidence or lack thereof proved their innocence. Also, I am old enough to remember that last woman, Ruth Ellis, being hanged at Holloway Prison. If you have a death penalty, this means that ultimately someone's mother is going to get hanged. I say NO to a return of the death penalty.
2006-09-22 05:49:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
YES; giving some thug five years for killing two people, then he comes out in two years and is free to kill again, and again, and again..........LIFe should not mean four years, or six years, or eight years, with time off for "good behaviour"; life should mean UNTIL YOU DIE. Killing someones child on her way to school when you are still drunk from the night before should not be a "suspended" sentence, or "community service"- it should mean an irrevocable DEATH. Theres NO punishment for murder in this country; three meals a day, warm room, clean bed, gym, degree courses etc; that should be what all decent citizens should have, not what is handed to criminals and scum.
2006-09-22 05:54:02 · answer #7 · answered by k0005kat@btinternet.com 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Capitol is the seat of the US Government, so I suspect that it has no power to introduce any policies in the UK.
You need to know, however, that capital punishment is banned by European law and by the European Convention on Human Rights, which is now enshrined in UK law.
However, there are far too many criminals alive who should have been executed. And, despite what many will have you believe, many of the so-called miscarriages of justice for murder were merely technically miscarriages - the right people had been convicted, but with errors in law.
James Hanratty's family waged a campaign for over 30 years in his defence until DNA finally proved him to be guilty.
What truly amazes me is that those who rant and rave about execution being inhuman or of dubious value quite happily allow doctors, every single day, to rip perfectly viable and undoubtedly innocent human beings from their mothers' wombs and allow them to die slowly in the sluice merely because the woman (or her man) failed to take precautions to avoid pregnancy.
2006-09-22 06:03:46 · answer #8 · answered by Essex Ron 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think so.
These days forensics can prove a case. If all the evidence can prove without a doubt that a person is guilty then, yes - they should recieve just punishment for their crime.
Many people are worried about false accusations, but I think that with todays science that happens less and less.
If people know that they could die as a result of their crime maybe they will think twice before committing it....
2006-09-22 05:52:06 · answer #9 · answered by sammi 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
NO! I can't be bothered to rehearse the arguments yet again. But, how do you tell innocent people that you are sorry, and why do people given genuine life sentences, so often want to commit suicide? What if it was you or a member of your own family, could you personally carry it out? Getting scary now isn't it?
2006-09-23 07:37:42 · answer #10 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes... If we can be sure that the person we are convicting did the crime and the crime it self is serious enough to warrant capital punishment (like murder, rape and anything to do with children) Some people don't deserve to live!
Plus prison's are over crowding and criminals are let out early just to re-commit again! So many murders and rapist have been let out of jail just to rape and murder again!
Jails are to easy and are not a real form of punishment anymore!
2006-09-22 05:49:38 · answer #11 · answered by Jennifer 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋