2006-12-23 05:28:35 · 43 answers · asked by big bird 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
to DAVID F my nannan was raped and murdered 23 years ago, she was found by my mum. dont tell me to get a grip!, if you found your loved one like that you would want the bast*rd strung up!!!!.no one can judge until they have lost someone. im just asking this question to see what people really think and was wondering if anyone had lost a loved one ....AR*E HOLE!!
2006-12-23 06:40:21 · update #1
I was abused as a child from the age of 4 until i was 11, it only cam light when the abuser started on his own children and then i came forward (he was a family member) He was on remand for 18 months, and this was taken into account when he was sentenced, he did approx 6 months in total! I gave a very lengthy statement on the understanding that should he be convicted he wasn't allowed to return to the town that i lived in. He did, he had rights!!! Makes you laugh doesn't it, he has rights, i also had rights not to be violated by a trusted adult but that didn't warrant for anything.
Death sentence, harsh but hey we have come along way with DNA and why should they be allowed to be in prison claiming tax credits, better health care than you or i would ever have, three meals a day and no bills. Whats the new thing they are allowed to do no? VOTE!!! have you ever, this is political correctness gone mad!
Why is sentencing not immediate, how many have you heard where someone has convisted and they will pass sentence in three weeks, get done and dusted in one hit! But then look at America also where they sit on death row for upteen years, or they don't die quickly as in one case reported whereby it was death by lethal injection (And theres another question about that too, why do they use sterilised needles for that?) and he died inhumanely....have you ever heard such a statement.
It would save the tax payer a few quid. As is Dubai caught thieving they chop your hand off harsh YES but lets look at there crime rate, not very high!
But a law has been passed where it will NEVER be reintroduced.
Arethere special exceptions to the rule...i am not sure there is answer of YES to that question.
Bring it back then perhaps it will be a deterant in this country because we have little else going for us
2006-12-23 11:09:20 · answer #1 · answered by untanuta 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
interior the Christian Bible you will discover arguments the two for and against capital punishment (as is authentic with maximum matters). there are a number of passages interior the previous testomony that help capital punishment, usually for extremely easy offenses: - Adultery (Leviticus 20:10) - Blasphemy (Leviticus 24:sixteen) - Breaking the Sabbath (Exodus 31:14 & 15) - Disobedient toddlers (Exodus 21:15 & 17; Leviticus 20:9) - Homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13) - no longer being a virgin on your wedding ceremony evening (yet on condition which you're a woman - Deuteronomy 22:20-21) however, the hot testomony (starring Jesus) is basically ANTI-dying penalty. as an occasion: - Matthew 5:7 (Jesus praises mercy) - Matthew 5:38-39 (Jesus rejects "a look ahead to a watch") - James 4:12 (GOD is the only one that could take a existence interior the call of justice) - Romans 12:17-21 (do no longer answer evil with evil; God will see to justice interior the afterlife) - John 8:7 (all people are imperfect, and as a result unqualified to settle on whether somebody lives or dies) - James a million:20 (my own widespread: "For the wrath of guy worketh no longer the righteousness of God.") there are a number of, many useful problems with capital punishment (that I won't get into here), yet in basic terms from a ethical attitude, that's enormously sparkling that Jesus did no longer help it. authentic CHRISTians shouldn’t, the two.
2016-10-18 22:13:41 · answer #2 · answered by ranford 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe in capitol punishment under any circumstances. I never have, I don't understand how one person found guilty of murder, and then be put to death at the hands of another person, and that person isn't guilty of murder. It just doesn't make any sense.
There have also been cases that the person convicted of the crime, and then put to death, was later found to have been innocent.
There is no justifying the taking of anothers life under any circumstances. I have seen where politicians want to enact laws, that certain crimes such as the killing of a police officer be made to be an automatic death sentence, I don't agree, there is no person who's life has more value than another. All should be equal.
It is unfortuante that we have people who don't value the lives of others, and they take them. They should be locked in prison without the chance of ever being released into society again, not put to death. This can be viewed two ways, some might say the killer is getting off easy, others might disagree.
2006-12-23 05:58:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yeah David F was completely out of line on this. I'm not saying that for the points either give them to someone else..I believe in capitol punishment. I think in cases if a person is found guilty and that punishment is reccommended that the jury should not have the right to impose it. The family of the victim should. If it were me I would want the son-of-a-chik to rot everday of his life away in prison thinking about what he did. lot of the documentaries I have watched about prisoners on deathrow showed interviews with them where they said they would rather die and get it over with. So I think a better punishment would be making them live with it but ultimatley it should be the family to say wether or not they should be executed wether it's based on emotions or whatever. He didn't control his emotions or care about your nanna's when he killed her so why should we decide his fate without emotion.
2006-12-23 13:41:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is wrong in all circumstances. For those of us who have believed this all our lives and have actively campaigned for abolition there are no exceptions. Personally I was revolted as a child at the prurient interest in the execution of convicted criminals. There were some terrible injustices in the post war years and some stories that were utterly heartbreaking. Timothy Evans was wrongly convicted of the Rillington Place murders and hanged. Ruth Ellis committed a Crime Passionnel under extreme provocation. Today she would probably have been put on probation. In 1955 she was hanged.
The arguments against Capital Punishment are almost too numerous to mention but for me the clincher (if one was needed) is the certainty that innocents will be wrongly executed. The moral argument is beyond challenge – nothing so demeans a man as to take the life of another in cold blood. And that is what used to happen in Britain. Not just the hangman but the legal system as a whole was complicit in these obscenities – and injustices.
In most of the western world judicial execution has been consigned to history. The United States is a terrible exception to this rule. To all my American friends I beg you to think again about your support for capital punishment. And the place to begin is to join me and thousands of others in seeking the commutation of Saddam Hussein’s death sentence. As I said at the beginning judicial execution is wrong in ALL circumstances. No exceptions. Even with Saddam!
2006-12-23 05:52:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's something I would never agree with in any circumstance. I don't believe that any human being has the right to determine who deserves to live and who doesn't. I think the question is is our government and legal system 100% perfect? If it isn't then we can not put human life in their hands. The death penalty leaves no room for mistakes, and many an innocent man has been executed or falsely imprisoned. In terms of punishment I think life imprisonment is more severe than execution. If someone does wrong they should pay for it. A dead man cannot suffer anymore. Think of all of the killers that have tried to, or have committed suicide (Ian Brady, Ian Huntley, Fred West, Harold Shipman) They would actually prefer to die - why give them what they want?
2006-12-23 05:48:45 · answer #6 · answered by * * Princess * * 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't believe it is a deterrent, and personally I'm not in favour of its re-introduction. It's too easy to make mistakes, it's impossible to undo when mistakes are made and taking another life does not make any restitution for the original crime.
I'm sorry to hear of your family's tragedy and I'm sure that I would feel exactly the same as you in the same position. But you are wrong when you say that unless you have suffered directly from such a crime you are not in a position to judge. The people who decide on the appropriate punishment for such crimes should do so coldly and logically, and not based on an emotional response.
2006-12-23 08:36:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Totally agree with it! Forensics and DNA have been established since it was abolished so there should be no question of guilt these days. It may not be a deterrent but why should their life continue when they have cruelly taken someone elses away?
Locking them up for life is just a drain on the tax payers money.
2006-12-23 07:04:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
There have been too many miscarriages of justice to ever bring it back, Like David F Says "get a grip!" It's knee jerk reactionaries like you that make a mockery of the law.
2006-12-23 07:51:50 · answer #9 · answered by quartzstar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i have always been for bring it back to the UK. It should be a life for a life. But then again others so say that two wrongs do not make a right.Also look at the miscarriages of Justice, Derek Bentley for example he was hanged through saying the words let him have it.
2006-12-23 07:08:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋