Is it time to bring back hanging???

Question

I've just read this article on yahoo news http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070618/tuk-uk-britain-paedophiles-fa6b408.html . i'm not nieve enough to think that these sickening acts dont take place , but the scale and audacity has left me shocked and sickened, isnt it about time we as citizens ( were ever we live ) stand up and demand our governments stop treating these vile and inhuman scum with kid gloves , and string them up

I agree you have to protect the innocent ( thats the whole point right ) we have the technology to prove in some cases absolute guilt , also these people provide there own evidence ( video's etc ) and i think that 10/15/20 years in jail doesnt touch what they have done( when they get out its a case of absence makes the heart grow fonder ) , even a life sentance why should we have to look after these animals , castrating them wont do any good as its proven its in the mind . These people are wired up to hunt out , and attack

Answer 1

today i watched jeremy kyle (i'm ill off work). it had a man although i use the term loosely who had been convicted of raping his own SIX yr old daughter plus sleeping with numerous fifteen yr olds. he was moaning because society wants him monitored. he says it infringes upon his life and isnt fair since he's done his time. (three yrs) he met a woman who knew about his crimes who then went on to give up her child and one that was born to both of them to be with him. her reasoning? we wont reoffend. he says he wont because when he went on a few courses he was role playing the victim of sexual abuse!!!!!!!!!!! he showed no remorse and she didnt think he or she did anything wrong! i dont believe they can be rehabilitated. why should they be able to keep their life when they have wrecked so many childrens? i have first hand experience of abuse and you do not get over it. you learn to live with it. its not just physical its mental abuse. the guilt and shame live on forever. i believe in clear cut cases the death penalty should be reintroduced. they are monsters and it is part of their psyche to offend in this way. therefore they cannot be successfully rehabilitated. the need/want is just suppressed. it will return. we are doing a great disservice to the children in this country.

Answer 2

I think the punishment should fit the crime!

For example, I was recently on a train and briefly closed my eyes. Someone stole my carry on bag, which carried a new pair of prescription glasses ($500), a tape recorder I can never replace, and worst of all, a very special key that is also irreplacable that has great sentimental value. It is a horrible feeling when something you value is irrevocably lost.

If they caught the guy who did it, they'd slap him with a small fine. The law doesn't care how much grief and aggravation a thief like this causes. Therefore, we should start getting inventive with our punishments:

1) For abusing children, the offender will have to watch gut wrenching videos of abused children crying, and be shown the results of their crimes, such as case studies of how abused children had their lives ruined, how it deeply affected them emotionally, and the entire aftermath of the abuse (drug use, prostitution, emotional scars, etc.)

2) Thieves will have to wear handcuffs every day for a year. The handcuffs will be wide enough apart so he can type or do other work, but not drive (that would be dangerous). Repeat offenders will get five years. The thief will have to make every possible effort to retrieve your possessions, even if it means spending night and day searching pawn shops and dangerous parts of town. It's his fault your valuables are gone, he has to fix the problem.

3) Repeat drunk driver offenders will forever be restricted to driving special "shame cars". They will be underpowered compact cars, so vindictively ugly that onlookers will point and laugh. These drunk drivers will be required to listen to stories of people whose lives have been ruined or permanently diminished by a drunk driver, including all the people who get rear ended, and have lifetime back problems.

Doesn't this sound better than sticking the guy in prison and wasting an average of $50,000 to incarcerate him every year?

Answer 3

Its the ultimate irony for someone to kill another person but then be killed by our government. What gives them the right some people say. Well one problem is the fact that our jail system costs about 50 dollars per day per immate. It basically costs more for taxpayers to give someone a life sentence than to "hang" them or give them the chair. So at an economic standpoint I would say go for it.

On the other hand, consider that a large amount of the prison population is made up of people who are at a lower socioeconomic level. These people did not get the privlege of having equal representation. In order for their public pretender to get that round in of golf they convince their clients to take a plea bargen which might not be understood by the client. The defendant takes the plea and now is going to serve a life sentence at the expence of our frail justice system.

Another thing to consider is how someone is convicted of a crime. Considering the above paragraph what happens when someone is given the death sentence for something they didn't do just because they are poor. Some people might say that nothing is fair but what truly gives our government the right to kill someone wrongfully?

Since this issue is so hard to talk about since people are so mixed up with their opinions I would say that the only grounds for giving a death sentence is if the person is without a doubt guilty!

Answer 4

years ago before science had advanced as much as it has there were indeed miscarriages of justice. However now we have so much more accuracy I think we should bring back Hanging - better to have it and not use it than not have it. I don't know about the rest of you but I think the expense of keeping people in maximum security with 3 meals a day, exercise and tv is getting beyond a joke. Also it is becoming more prevalent to accept lessr crimes - which is wrong - and so people go on to do more serious crime -- because they can!

Answer 5

No. You know the arguments about the number of innocents convicted of murder.

But consider this - vile though these offences and other offences of molesting children are, there are worse crimes. These people could go on to murder their victims, too.

If they believed they might receive the death penalty for the sexual abuse crime, might it not be safer to remove the only witness to the crime, by killing the victim? Surely this would make conviction less likely, and if convicted the punishment would be the same.

So, hanging child sex abusers would actually put children at more risk not less. There is no evidence that the capital penalty would deter, but it might just force abusers to murder their victims to escape detection.

Removing these people from the planet seems a nice idea, but it's an idea which comes from the wrong direction.

It is driven by a justifiable loathing of these criminals, when policy should put protecting children before allowing adults to exact revenge,

Answer 6

I used to be pro-hanging but a TV programme put me off it.

The programme interviewed all the people who were present at the last UK hanging, there are quite a few people who have to be there (two prison warders, the prison chief, a chaplain and a doctor plus of course the hang man). All, bar the hang man, were still disturbed by what they saw 40 years ago, some had nightmares every night.
I have no right to expect someone to go through this on my behalf, so it is down to me and I know I could not do it.

Then there is all the people put away on "expert" opinion and have turned out to be innocent (or at least there is sufficient grounds for doubt).

Answer 7

I have the perfect answer to rid this country of Paedophiles for good

its simple we take people like Timothy Cox and especially these organised paedophile rings and put them one by one on the centre spot at wembley

then fill it with parents @ £20 each

live on sky pay-per-view @ £10 for the day
then when the whistle blows he/she/it can leave

if they make it out of the grounds alive they go free

you've only gotta do it once and i guarantee every paedophile will head for the ports, air ports, sea ports i don't care

As far as I'm concerned the natural instinct of the human being is procreation and protection of our young
paedophiles don't have this instinct and as such are not human and deserve NO human rights

BE WARNED

all your worst nightmares will be realised if any of you go anywhere near my kids. and when i go to court for doing it to you i bet i have an alibi from a hundred parents saying i was somewhere else

MY GANG'S BIGGER THAN YOURS

(I'm sure you know but these last comments are not aimed at the people here)

Answer 8

I'd like to see this question put to the vote at myverdict.net. It seems that judicial killing is acceptable if the police think somebody may be about to do something but not if they have been convicted beyond reasonable doubt. We frequently hear that a majority are in favour of capital punishment. I'd like to see the actual results of a vote.

Answer 9

i think the families of the injured parties should be allowed to inflict whatever punishment they feel necessary. if the families were actually involved in the punishment i think a lot of criminals would be shot or hung! then those with moral convictions and believe that g-d has the final say can let the perpetrators live.
although~public hanging were huge events in the middle-ages and might be good for local economies!

Answer 10

Have not read the article, and do not intend to.

My thoughts are that hanging is not something a civilized nation indulges in. It puts us in the same category as the nations we are castigating.

I do, however, believe, that there are some crimes that are so horrific that they should carry life imprisonment which means life imprisonment.

The recent increase of murder on police officers shows the need to introduce life = life for the murder of a police officer. There are other cases.

I stopped working in the Crown Courts after 15 years of listening to High Court Judges announcing.... There is only one sentence for murder, and that is life imprisonment. I recommend that you spend a minimum of 9 years in prison.

Life imprisonment. Or 9 years? When will Parliament - who set down the law under which judges work - be honest?