Do you think that capital punishment should be considered now, for rapists, murderers, and paedophiles?

Answer 1

I agree, we are far to easy on young offenders etc, when you see people getting less than 2 years for murder it makes the justice system a bit of a mockery. We need to toughener up on punishment - why should tax payers pay for crimes!

I don't think it is fair when I see people let out after a short service only to committ more crimes.

Answer 2

No...but only because D.N.A can be flawed, as people on here have said...and has already been proved in quite a few country's to date...were D.N.A to be 100% accurate however--then yes, most definately. I fervently believe though that in the absence of 100% D.N.A accuracy that rapists, paedo's and murderers should have a LIFE sentence, WITHOUT the possibility of a parole system with regards their heinous crime's. I am sure that a few 75 year minimum sentences--without parole--handed down by a strict judge--(ON THE SIDE OF LAW AND THE VICTIM'S FOR ONCE!)--would go some way to halting these crimes. The younger people convicted now would be so old when they come out of jail, that they wouldn't be able to do anything without the aid of a zimmer frame and a carer, and the older ones there now would die before parole is considered. Another post to your question mentioned the easy life prisoner's get nowaday's--this should be stopped also--if we must, we should go back to the draconian methods of penal servitude--good old fashioned PUNISHMENT--where life with hard labour MEANT life with hard labour, it meant serving your sentence...not playing about on playstation's and the like--that's not what a prison is about! The law lords must make the very idea of prison, the knowledge that if you take someone's life away--(for the offences mentioned)--that your's WILL be forfeit for AT LEAST 75 years--locked up 23 hours out of 24, so utterly distasteful to people that they would not even consider breaking the law...this is the only way.

Answer 3

Capital punishment is not a deterent to crime so it solves nothing other than saving taxpayers the burden of costs related to long-term inmates. How many inmates on Death Row gave their heinous crimes a second thought on contemplation that should they be caught, they too might lose their life?

However, I do believe that the phrasing of the US Constitution warning against cruel and unusual punishment is redundant. Afterall, should punishment not be cruel and unusual in order to deter repeat offences? For example; you have a puppy that pees on your living room carpet. Do you simply tell it not to do it again in the hope that it will listen to you or do you spank it and rub it's nose in it's mess? If you do the later the puppy will soon realise that pissing on the carpet brings pain and temporary suffering but if you merely talk to it the puppy is simply going to do it again. Therefore, the punishment of Offenders should carry with it a form of punishment that is painful, degrading and humilitating but at the same time it should incorporate an element of reform. The dog that needs to pee will beg to be let out to pee when it needs to go because his behaviour has been reformed.

Now I am sure that many liberals and in particular the crackpot spokeswoman, sorry "spokesperson", of Liberty, Shami Chakribati, will argue against what I am saying. However, I do not believe in sadistic forms of punishment, as attractive as castration of rapists is appealing, it is still unjust; but I believe that society as a whole has worsened since corpral punishment was outlawed in schools. Therefore, the prison regime should be made tougher. Do away with the recreation activities and force the prisoners to work for their keep but at the same time give them the opportunity to learn skills that would benefit themselves and society on their release. Also, Restorative Justice is useful tool to help the Offender to realise the effect their actions have on their victims as hopefully this goes someway toward redemption but it should never be used instead of custodial sentencing as is so popular among our liberal elite in the current judiciary.

Answer 4

We certainly need a national debate on capital punishment. Society is breaking down because of a lack of respect for the law and a lack of fear of breaking the law. Perhaps now is the time to redress the balance and put serious criminals in fear of law abiding society instead of the other way around.

Answer 5

I think YES as long as the proof is without question, as others have said there have been miscarriages of justice, there have been some who have got off because of a slight technicality, even though they admitted they did it !! Also there have been those offenders who have been let out of jail after 10yrs and committed the same offence !!! there are some like the Jamie Bulger case, they Will soon be released, given new identity and will be relocated to Australia. what kind of punishment is that, they should have hung for what they did.

Answer 6

Who was it who said "It is better that three innocent men die than for one guilty man to go free"?
serious now capital punishment needs bringing back, child killers can never be made better a proven fact, also other classes of killers when banged to rights by the old bill with not the slightest chance of a mistake should also get the chop

Answer 7

The death penalty is not conducive to a civilized society for numerous reasons:
1) There's a commandment that strongly states in no uncertain terms: "THOU SHALT NOT KILL". It doesn't "Thou shalt not kill unless...."
2) There is always the very real possibility that the wrong person might have been convicted and sentenced to death. It happens all the time; and who in his right mind wants that kind of blemish on his conscience?
3) This is supposed to be a civilized society wherein the inhumanity of killing another person should most certainly be questioned. As hard as it might be to 'forgive' such a vile and evil act, it should define the character of our culture and prove to the universe that we are not a murderous, bloodthirsty global society.
4) While it is hard to fathom, killing rapists, murderers and pedophiles might result in our society losing some of the best and most brilliant minds who might even be able to help us cure their respective criminality. Rapists, murderers and pedophiles are, by their very nature, cunning and extremely intelligent people in many instances.
5) Who are we to play "God"? Whether you believe in an intelligent designer, a 'big-bang' theory that created our world and universe by sheer accident, a spiritual being who is omnipresent and all-knowing, or a Satan who rules the world and fills it with its evils, we are but mere mortals, certainly not intellectually and morally advanced enough to justify our control of the universe or any of its millions of inhabitants.
6) If we condemn all rapists, murderers and pedophiles to death, what's to prevent a future generation to demand the death penalty for all Jews, blacks, Muslims, obese people, Catholics, gypsies, corrupt politicians, tax cheats, or those who default on their credit card debts??
7) There's a Biblical saying that says, 'Judge not lest ye be judged'. While there is certainly a need for law and order in any society, who among us (policemen, judges, jury members, lawyers, executioners, or the commanlity within our social structure) have the right - or the power - to hold another human being's life in our hands? We are not perfect - no more perfect than the rapist, murderer, or pedophile. And, thus, we should allow "God" - or some superior being - decree the final judgment. -RKO-

Answer 8

There are too many miscarriages of justice and corrupt police to contemplate bringing back capital punishment, remember that it was abolished for a reason.
There is no evidence that it is a crime deterent.
There is also a large number of relatives and victims of crime who prefer life sentences to the idea of execution as they feel it is a greater punishment (think of the amount of convicts who try to commit suicide in prison) and they also don't want to degrade themselves to the level of the criminal by acting in a calculated and violent way which would make us a society of hypocrites. How could we preach civility to other countries if we can't rise above such behaviour?

Answer 9

Where murders are concerned why not!! Everyone going on about equal rights all the time, whats equal about murdering someone then getting a term in jail, only to get early parole, life for a life i say!!!!

Answer 10

yes, considered, and dismissed. we have a nice colony in teh middle of the atlantic ocean called las malvinas... oh no, that was teh argie name, its the falklands...

bugger all there bar a few thousand sheep and a garrison...and a military airstrip... and escape would be nigh on impossible... argentina is 2000 miles away... and thats the closest port...

ship em out, for a life of hard labour and a gruelling slow miserable existence... we did it in australia, so why not the falkland islands?