Death Penalty?

Question

Do you think we should bring back the Death Penalty - on
cases where there is 100% evidence that the person was
guilty of the crime.
Also should return guilty people to their home Country?

Answer 1

Yes - where it is 100% proof, like the Yorkshire Ripper, Huntley etc they will never get out so why pay thousands a week on them to keep them in comfort while our pensioners freeze to death this winter.

Also any immigrants who do a crime should be expelled as soon as and never allowed to come back in. Although I doubt if this would happen, people are coming in all the time without being checked. I think we should close our borders for a while and get ourselves sorted. Any undesirables get a one way ticket.

Answer 2

I maintain that America is proof not why we SHOULD have the death penalty but why we Should NOT.

Firstly, the death penalty is no deterrent to crime. Crime rates don't drop in countries that have the death penalty. At all. Look at the rates in Texas, Missouri and Florida (the 3 biggest death penalty states) and you'll see that all 3 have some of the highest crime rates in the USA (St. Louis,MO and Jacksonville, FL especially!).

Secondly, the death penalty would be implemented in this country in much the same way it has in the USA. Which means countless appeals which would further tie up the courts and in the end cost us more to kill them than keep them locked up forever.

Thirdly, why should we return guilty people to their home country? Why does that matter? In fact it could actually come out badly if we deported people to third world nations where the criminal could play on corrupt justice systems and either get the sentence commuted or worse in some countries, be treated as some kind of hero.

However, if the person serves their full sentence first then yes, if they are a foreign national then they should be sent back. However, unless the crime is treason, we can't strip a UK citizen of nationality and send them away.

We don't need the death penalty. We need prisons where life means life - with nothing but the least life substaining environment, hard labor and no (and I mean none) rights to vote or luxuries. If we did this and publicized it, that would be a deterrent.

Answer 3

This is an age old issue and will always be on people's agendas. We all know the old sayings .. 'a life for a life' ... 'an eye for an eye' ..... etc ..... and in the spirit of the thing, it seems fair to execute someone who killed another human being by design and with full intent. But I suggest that reasonable thinking needs to extend well beyond that simple sentiment. It would certainly be a punishment but a deterrent? Who knows? However, the word 'justice' crops up here and the death penalty, under the conditions you describe, certainly seems to be justice, however rough. You will always get split opinions here I am afraid. Certainly for death by acts of terror, it seems right, even if it does augment martyrdom. The trouble with this is that discussion will always produce doubt ..... and that's why we have no active death penalty in this country. Personally I would feel safer and have more faith in the law if we did have a death penalty. However, it is not a definitive answer and never will be, I am afraid.
As for sending guilty people home .... 100% YES!

Answer 4

Yes, to both. It would save the community of good people,in the U.S., save them grief and heartache. Deporting is the only answer for criminals who think they can come here to do their dastardly deeds. I have ALWAYS been a firm believer in the death penalty. Only problem is, the "justice" system. It gives the criminals all of the rights, and victims none. So, over 30 years of appeals and a huge waste of taxpayer money, these worthless low lifes live like kings and queens, courtesy of us good, law abiding people. I say death to ALL where there is 100% eviidence. ALL! Having said that, the laws need to be changed so as to stop the years of appeals. If the U.S. allowed for Saddam to be executed within 30 days, there is absolutely NO reason why we can't do the same. Super great question.

Answer 5

Absolutely!! why should tax payers money be keeping these people at a phenomenal cost per year when they are 100% guilty? and the prisons are over flowing, apparently they are talking about a 'waiting list' system for prisons now!! . . . .imagine ''We find the defendant guilty m'lud'' judge passes sentence and ''we'll be in touch when we have room for you!! in the meantime please try not to commit any more heanous crimes!!''
It's crazy!! I once met a guy who used to be a phsyci nurse and looked after Ian Brady the moors murderer, apparently that beast, sees no wrong in what he and Myra Hindley did, wants to get out so he can do it again!! and the really scary thing is apparently he is a very, very intelligent 'man'!!!
Shudder to think how much it has cost the tax-payer to keep that beast (he doesn't deserve to be called man) since he was locked up!

Answer 6

I used to think so, but Then I read "The Chamber" By John Grisham.

What constitutes 100% evidence.

I understand that several years ago, a Chicago Law professor set his students a task to look at the cases of about 20 inmates on death row in Illinois. Many of them were proved innocent, and several had their sentence commuted.

This was on the work of STUDENTS.

However i do agree in deportation, and I do believe that a life sentence should be that.

Answer 7

YES, I have lived in Britain when we did have the death penalty, people were more respect full, and abides by the law more, if you killed anyone whilst involved in a crime you hung, if you carry a gun, knife, or weapon designed to kill you plan to use it so its only right you get the max sentence.
Return all guilty parties to there home country in a body bag.

Answer 8

Yes, yes and yes. With DNA the way it is these days it is becoming easier to prove WHO DONE IT....and I don't think that people whose case was not proven should claim for £500,000. Just because the verdict wasn't reached by the jury doesn't mean someone is innocent in my eyes.

Answer 9

yes definatly an eye for an eye etc......bring the birch back also although with the way the country is run it would not matter as you get away with murder now and get treated like customers at the hilton in prison also learn trades when folk outside can hardly make ends meet.

Answer 10

1.Yes and when its 100% proof they should be hanged slowly so there neck doesnt break and they have to endure the pain of there victims. Save us wasting money keeping them in prison.

2. Also yes they should be flogged then sent on there merry way in a cramped hot unsanitary cargo ship to prepare them for arriving home and to help them understand what there going to miss for there crimes.