Does UK abolishing the death penalty mean?

Question

Lets just say if I was raped and killed by a mad man and the same thing was to happen to a women in Texas America, my murdurer would get life in prison (Approx 15 years) But the women in America's murdurer would get the lethal injection.

Does this mean that her life was worth more than mine?

Or is it just that america are living in the dark ages??

I don't whether to agree or disagree with the death penalty!

I have also seen somewhere on the internet that executing someone costs the tax payer more money than leaving someone in prison for the rest of their life! (I REALLY DONT KNOW IF THIS TRUE)

Answer 1

The person above, sloane_ff said
"Every human being's life is worth the same Emma"
So why is a murderers life worth less?
If you're a religious person, shouldn't you believe they'll get their punishment at the other end?
And if you're not (I'm not religious) why do we have the right to take someones life? We're as bad as the murderer, all we're doing is taken someone's life away "legally" instead.
The much better thing to do is to toughen up sentencing...
And not every murderer in the world deserves a life sentence. Maybe you won't agree, though, so I'll explain.
If you got raped and killed in cold blood by a psycho, they deserve life imprisonment, no question.
But what about if you murdered a boyfriend/girlfriend who'd been abusing you and you couldn't escape, and you knew if you didn't do it soon you'd be killed yourself? Technically that's murder, although if you're lucky you could probably get away with justified homicide or something.
The second person is not a cold blooded killer, just a very desperate person. They don't deserve the same sentences, although it's still murder and they deserve a long time in jail...

Answer 2

I certainly think so. Even ONE wrongful death is too many. In practice, since 1973 in the U.S. over 140 people have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence. These are ALL people who had been found guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." A life sentence is reversible. An execution is not. If that weren't enough reason to abolish it, there are many others: - Cost - because of the legal apparatus designed to minimize wrongful executions (and the enormous expense of maintaining death row facilities), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute someone than to imprison them for life. - It is not a deterrent - violent crime rates are consistently HIGHER in death penalty jurisdictions. - It is inconsistently and arbitrarily applied. - Because the U.S. is one of the last remaining nations with capital punishment, many other countries refuse to extradite known criminals who should be standing trial here. - It fosters a culture of violence by asserting that killing is an acceptable solution to a problem. - Jesus was against it (see Matthew 5:7 & 5:38-39, James 4:12, Romans 12:17-21, John 8:7, and James 1:20). - Life without parole (LWOP) is on the books in most states now (all except Alaska), and it means what it says. People who get this sentence are taken off the streets. For good. - As Voltaire once wrote, "let the punishments of criminals be useful. A hanged man is good for nothing; a man condemned to public works still serves the country, and is a living lesson." - Whether you’re a hardened criminal or a government representing the people, killing an unarmed human being is wrong. Period. “He did it first” is not a valid excuse.

Answer 3

If you consider things from a murderer's point of view; once convicted, his/her life is effectively over insofar as the least he/she can expect is many years of incarceration. Even in a British prison, where life is much more orderly and peaceful than in an average American prison, the punishment element remains - total loss of freedom and independence alongside a requirement to obey without question those set in authority ;over you. If you were the one who had just been convicted, would you choose fifteen or twenty years of the conditions I've just outlined along with the endless daily routine (each day exactly like the one before and the one that will follow) OR would you choose the easy instant release that execution offers. However, the Justice system is NOT infallible and mistakes are inevitable. In an instance of a wrongful conviction, you can release a prisoner and offer him compensation for his wrongful imprisonment but you cannot bring an executed person back to life. The British government released such a prisoner a few years ago - innocent man wrongly convicted - but instead of offering him compensation for his wrongful imprisonment, they presented him with an enormous bill (food and accommodation) for the years he had spent in prison

Answer 4

Not as simple as you may think, prisoners on death row spend more time in jail than they would do if it was just a jail sentance not death sentance. I think we should have the death penalty for some crimes such as child abuse and rape ect. Most countries dont have the death penalty as it is seen as modern and does not effect their human right to life. It should be a public vote I think in each country to choose. I don't think 1 way or the other is bad just have my opinion. In the uk your sentance is reduced to half autromaticly so in your case they would get 15 years say so its down to 7.5 years then if they were a model prisoner they could apply for parole after 5 years and be out in less than 6. Not much is it. I remember years ago a joy rider lost control of their stolen car ran over a mother and baby and killed the baby... he got 3 years so half it and if they played it right they would be out in a year to 2 years, how much was that baby's life worth in my opionion a LOT more than that!

Answer 5

no-ones life is worth more than anothers in my view, and i am in favour of the reintroduction of capital punishment as it is a deterrent and I dont care what anybody says. The year before abolition in the UK London suffered only 2 armed robberies involving firearms, the year after abolition 53 armed robberies involving firearms occurred. I dont think America is living in the dark ages. If they had things like confessions by torutre, maybe. The Peoples Republic of China have the death penalty and a very low crime rate. The Soviet Union had the death penalty and a very low crime rate. Singapore has the death penalty and a very low crime rate. One of the arguments I am always hearing is 'but executing people isnt the mark of a civilised nation' yet I see people drinking, fighting, p***ing and s***ting in the street, crowds of yobs gathering around and kicking the head of somebody lay helpless on the ground, teenagers assaulting people at random and filming it on their mobile phones, etc etc and I think 'who are these people kidding thinking that this is a civilised country?'

Answer 6

This debate could go on for ever but my feeling is that once an execution has been carried out there is no going back. There have been a number of recent cases where a person has been convicted of murder and after a number of years have been found to be totally innocent. If they had been put to death then that would be too late to restore things to as they were. Also, if you look back the death penalty did not stop murder etc so it did not act as too much of a deterrent.

Answer 7

I suppose it depends on your attitude - you'd be dead and nothing would change that, so what difference does it make if your murderer dies?
People do things for all sorts of reasons, and there are many possible motivations. For example, say your killer murdered you (let's just forget the rape part for now) because you looked like his mother who kept him in the cellar since he was born and treated him like an animal, frequently torturing and abusing him. Now while it's not your fault that this happened to him, it wouldn't be his fault either that he'd been psychologically abused as a child and thus was a total nutter. Would he deserve to die, or would he deserve to get some help while in prison to sort his head out? Obviously society should be protected from dangerous criminals, but the reasons that they're criminals in the first place aren't always straight forward or simple.

Answer 8

The abolition of the death penalty in the UK was effected by lawyers wishing to boost their income at tax payers' expense.

Once hanged, a criminal offers little opportunity for lawyers to earn further fees. Abolition of the death penalty has both increased the murder rate in the UK and created many more prisoners who's convictions and sentences may be subject to lucrative appeals and reviews. In the US there is a prolonged system of automatic appeals that generates several years of income for lawyers before the criminal is finally put to death.

Only an American (especially in the Department of Defence) would think that a Yank's life is worth more than a Brit's.

Answer 9

The death penalty is supposed to be a deterent, but as you can see in America this does not work!
They do not get the death sentence immediately and can spend many years on death row before they are eventually put to death, by which time the prisoner is probably grateful to be put out of his/her misery
These criminals should be sent to prison and put in solitary confinement until the day they die, and only given basic amenities, then they will have suffered for the consequences of their crime.

Answer 10

The law of the land I suppose but I do think that it depends. Some people are just beyound all help and need to be kept away from society. I do not see why you feel the need to compare, but you have a piont about America, I think that there methods are extreme at times for a so called civilised society.I want it and I want it now and I shall have it, if it does not work don't try to fix it just get rid of it, see what I mean?