2006-10-17 05:44:00 · 18 answers · asked by lickylum 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Death Penalty no, corporal punishment yes. I say publically whip the theifs, cane bad school children, water torture others and send terrorists to Cuba and for get about them.
2006-10-17 05:56:04 · answer #1 · answered by PChill1 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. Firstly, you can never be sure if a guilty verdict is 100% correct. Also, how can you teach society that taking another person's life is wrong by taking another person's life? I'm not saying that we should be lenient on all the murderers but when imposing a life sentence, life should mean life. For example - I think it was the Birmingham 6 who were locked up for however many years for an IRA bombing but it was later discovered that they were innocent after it was reported that they were forced into a confession by brutal police methods and so on. How many people were calling for the death penalty when they were first arrested and sent to jail? Good job they weren't 'accidentally' hung - "sorry" wouldn't really cover it for their families would it? Nothing is ever 100%. These guys had signed confessions and they were still innocent. You can never be too careful and I know I certainly wouldn't want another man's death on my conscience, no matter what they had done or were supposed to have done. If a person close to me was killed by some maniac I would want him locked up, but I wouldn't be calling for the death penalty. I don't think it would give me the closure that people seem to think it would give. It wouldn't bring that person back. A friend of mine was raped a couple of years ago and she was of the opinion that something like the death penalty wouldn't make her magically and suddenly become un-raped. (He was eventually punished though.) That's why people need to think harder about what would help them move on with their lives after experiencing a tradgey or loss of a loved one at the hands of another.
2006-10-17 16:52:57 · answer #2 · answered by Helen B 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, because you can never be 100% sure of someone's guilt. Mistakes have been made and the death penalty was abolished because an innocent man went to the gallows for a crime he didn't commit.
The judge in the Guildford Four case, the trial of four innocent people who were found guilty of an IRA bombing, said: "I only wish I had the death penalty at my disposal as I would have no hesitation in imposing it upon you." If he had, those four innocent people would be dead right now, instead of walking around freely after a miscarriage of justice. That's why we don't need the death penatly back.
2006-10-17 05:53:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It wouldn't make any difference . Ask the authorities in America or better yet Saudi Arabia.
In Saudi you are caught today, tried tomorrow, and dead before lunchtime prayers on Friday?
And how many executed for murder in Saudi this year? Last time I checked , which was way back in May it was 46!!
And that in a land that is mainly desert not populated.
In America Death Rows are overflowing.
Yehr, the Death Penalty really works!!! Not!
2006-10-17 06:03:32 · answer #4 · answered by Christine H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we could introduce a system where there was no doubt of guilt, then "YES."
Murder One (First Degree) could refer to murder where the perpetrator was caught in the act, caught by undeniable evidence (DNA) or admitted guilt. This could be punishable by death.
Murder Two (Second Degree) would refer to all other cases of murder and would carry life sentences.
The biggest argument against death sentences seems to be "What if we get the wrong person" and quite rightly so.
This kind of system takes the argument away.
2006-10-17 05:59:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have heard a country in the Carribean reintroduced whipping with a cat-o'nine-tails. I have also head that it is a good deterrent for keeping people from re-offending.
2006-10-17 05:56:04 · answer #6 · answered by Kharm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely for paedophiles and murderers.The law is to soft so it just encourages these kind of scum to do it.A guy round my way pleaded guilty of child molesting at his first hearing,so what did he get...bail, so he can go out and do it again its disgusting.
But if we took the law into our own hands then we would get a bigger sentence than them.
We could do it on ppv and give the money to charity, I know I'd pay to see the likes of ian huntley swinging by his neck
2006-10-17 06:01:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It didn't work throughout the middle ages,, probably would not work now. Society has always had and always will have a certain,,,,,"criminal element."
I think death penalties should only apply to a few crimes,, pedophilia, rape, and cold blooded murder.
2006-10-17 05:54:05 · answer #8 · answered by landerscott 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regrettably it does not work sufficiently as a deterrent, also any miscarriage of judgement is or would be final in a capital case.
This country is supposed to be Christian, therefore we should heed the bible when it says, "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord".
2006-10-17 06:01:51 · answer #9 · answered by scrambulls 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am all for public hanging and stricter laws- instead of having the repeat offenders in and out - or supporting their butts for the rest of their lives in prison!! D
2006-10-17 05:54:21 · answer #10 · answered by Debby B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋