Should we bring back the DEATH PENALTY in the UK ?

Question

For murderers, rapists, and Pedophiles?

Whats the point in keeping these people alive in prison which costs the tax payers money? If you kill someone you have no right to live I say!

Anyone agree? Thoughts?

If they can be proven 100% guilty they should face the death penalty. If they are unsure then they should just be locked up!

Answer 1

Yes I agree 100%. They should never have stopped it. Those sort of people don't deserve the privilege of living on this planet.

Answer 2

Tiny point - they should only be convicted in the first place if the jury is 100% certain. If the jury is unsure, they should be found not guilty. That's how English law works.

Yet we still wrongly convict people of murder. The Guildford Four, Judith Ward, the Darvell brothers, the Cardiff Three, Danny McNamee, the M25 Three, the Bridgewater Four, Sally Clark, Angela Cannings. You would happily have seen them all hang. Juries were 100% sure that they were guilty of murder.

That's why we should never bring back the death penalty.

Having the death penalty for rapists and child sex offenders would encourage the criminal to also kill their victim - if they would face no harsher penalty for the murder, it would make sense to get rid of the main witness to the crime. This would put vulnerable people in more danger.

The death penalty seems like an attractive solution, until you actually think about it. It does not deter, if used on crimes less than murder it puts people in danger, and you can't make recompense to those wrongly convicted.

Before you thumbs down me, please stop and think about this one.

Answer 3

In my opinion, life imprisonment is far worse than death. That's the reason why thousands of prisoners attempt to commit suicide every year. They cannot live with the thought of being incarcerated in a prison for years. So for that reason alone I am against the death penalty. They should suffer and live with the consequences.

Having the death penalty for rape will cause alot of problems.

How could you be so sure that the accused is not innocent?

How many women cry rape every year for no reason?

The majority of cases for rape turn out to be completely false.


One final point:

Mr Sceptic: "Having the death penalty for rapists and child sex offenders would encourage the criminal to also kill their victim - if they would face no harsher penalty for the murder, it would make sense to get rid of the main witness to the crime. This would put vulnerable people in more danger."

I completely agree.

Answer 4

Before you make up your mind, you should check out the facts about the death penalty system in the United States. Here are just a few, all sourced below.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison. The extra costs comes from the legal process, which is prolonged.

The death penalty risks executing innocent people (124 already exonerated) and DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides. It is not a guarantee against the execution of innocent people.

Many of the 124 exonerees had spent well over a decade before being found innocent. A speeded up process willguarantee the execution of an innocent person.

No reputable study has shown the death penalty to be a deterrent. In fact, homicide rates are higher in states with the death penalty. To be a deterrent, a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither.

Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure and speedy and rarely appealed. It costs much less than the death penalty.

The death penalty can be very hard on families of murder victims. Many murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn- out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

The death penalty does not apply to the worst of the worst. It applies to defendants with the worst lawyers.

48% of Americans prefer life without parole and 47% prefer the death penalty. We are learning. Eye for an eye judgments may sound good but they do not make sense.

Answer 5

With the jury system there can be no 100% guilty as we have seen over the past 10 years. A number of people found guilty have subsequently been released so as there is so much doubt then killing is not an option. The death penalty also did not stop murders happening anyway. I also think that to kill is wrong what ever the reason given.

Answer 6

What!! you want the death penalty brought back you want the government to kill people(Human Beings) in our name after putting on a trial to try to convince everyone it's Justice their giving us. Killing somebody will only give the person being executed alot more publicity than they would usually get. Also the Death penalty DOES NOT act as deterrent to the crimes the people are being executed for. It's a proven fact because of the US crime rates despite them continuing to kill alot of people, I mean look at Texas you think criminals in that state would have gotten the message by now. Still it's crime rates aren't affected at all. Also they'd probably use the so called merciful type of execution designed by a doctor close to Hitler that in some cases isn't that merciful. Also it would ruin the careers and reputations of politician who would have brought it back politicians don't want to lose their whole career because bringing back the death penalty will do the job nicely for them.

Answer 7

I used to be very much against the death penalty as a detterent, but I think I'm changing my mind.

What right have these people got to prey on the innocents, and what right have we not to give them our best and full protection, and make the perpetrator pay for their crimes.

Sometimes I think we just haven't got the bottle to make the hard decisions needed.

Only thing is if we kill people, we've got to be prepared to live with some errors of justice.

""An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. It adds to death a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death. Capital punishment is the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life."



Albert Camus---"Reflections on the Guillotine, Resistance, Rebellion & Death" (1966)."

Answer 8

They have got it wrong in the past , but with today's modern DNA it is more accurate than ever,so in answer to your question, yes, The death penalty will not be brought back so if we have to keep these animals (I shouldn't use the word animal because that's putting them in the same league as my dog, but I can't print what I would call them) locked up they should not have a life, only an existence until they die maybe send them to the likes of Devils Island for the rest of their lives

Answer 9

As someone whose mother was murdered, I used say that capital punishment should be brought back, but all too often we hear of people wrongly imprisoned, and if those people were to have been executed, what then? The only time I agree with the death penalty is if there is 100% proof that the suspect committed the crime (DNA etc) with no room for error. personally, I think it's an easy way out for them, they don't suffer enough.

I think, in all honestly that those who commit the worst crimes (murder, rape, child abuse etc..) should serve life in prison, with no chance of parole.

My mothers killer killed two people that day, he got 8 years and served 4, for a premeditated cold blooded killing, the justice system in the UK is shameful

Answer 10

The Death Penalty should be a World Wide Standard.

Answer 11

No.

First, innocent people are convicted of all those crimes. If you execute those convicted, you will be killing some innocent people. Now, who among YOUR loved ones would you volunteer to be killed for a crime they didn't commit?

Second, justice is not about vengeance. When we assume it is, and we revell in it, we do all sorts of other foolish things as well. For example, we start beating up people who *look* suspicious or who do controversial things.

Third, killing those imprisoned and contained is not necessary. In other words, it is killing without NEED. To kill without need is murder.

Fourth, having the death penalty does not reduce crime. It does not un-do any damage. All it does is kill people.

Fifth, all this effort to get the government to kill more human beings would be better spent going after the causes of such crimes, and/or catching those responsible.

Sixth, of all the possible reasons to kill another human being, "to save money" is surely not a valid one. To be sure, there are valid reasons for doing so, but that cannot be one of them.