If there was a referendum to bring back the death penalty to the UK for murder which way would you vote?

Question

My own opinion is a HUGE no as I feel it just creates another set of victims, ie the killers family, but I do think for murder life should mean life plus I like the idea of hard labour

Answer 1

I agree with you .these kind of barbaric practises say more about the country and the people who live there than anything else . Even apart from the ethical reason
how many times have people been convicted and locked up for years and then released because it became public knowledge that it was a miscarriage of justice .a couple of examples would be the Irish people who where in jail for decades for terrorism
when if all the evidence had been produced at the trial it would have been obvious it couldn`t have been them (2 separate cases of that ) All the poor women whose babies died from cot death but were given life sentences because of the expert medical witness misleading the courts (the only evidence ) it happens time and time again .

Answer 2

I was pro-death penalty for a long time, but I have changed my stance over the years, for several reasons:

1. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong. Look at all the people who have been released after years of imprisonment because they were exonerated by DNA evidence. Unfortunately, DNA evidence is not available in most cases. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person.

Really, that should be reason enough for most people. If you need more, read on:

2. Because of the extra expense of prosecuting a DP case and the appeals process (which is necessary - see reason #1), it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life.

3. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. In the U.S., violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty states. This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is (Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida – the most active execution state at the time – to carry out his final murder spree). Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. The government becomes the bad parent who says, ‘do as I say, not as I do.’

4. There’s also an argument to be made that death is too good for the worst of our criminals. Let them wake up and go to bed every day of their lives in a prison cell, and think about the freedom they DON’T have, until they rot of old age. When Ted Bundy was finally arrested in 1978, he told the police officer, “I wish you had killed me.”

5. The U.S. government is supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not beget violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, Jesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Answer 3

Stefan Kiszko Even using today's standards of Forensics he would undoubtedly have been hung for the murder of Leslie Molseed, a murder it was later proven that he could never have committed, and for which Ronald Castree was found guilty of just 3 years ago. Stefan died six months after being pardoned for the murder, having spent 16 years in prison and in a secure mental hospital due to the deterioration of his mental health. I don't know how anyone can argue for the death penalty after reading this harrowing story.

Answer 4

No.

There are times I have been in the 'yes' camp, but after thinking about things, I always go back to the 'no' camp.

An example is Ian Huntley. When he was finally done for the murders of Jessica and Holly the evidence was circumstantial. There was no DNA evidence.
In all probablitiy, he raped those girls before murdering them. If anyone deserves to die, he does (in a very slow painful drawn out way). But there would not be enough proof to kill him. There was no conviction about sexual assault on the two girls. So if you can not kill him, what justice would there be in killing others.

With regards to child murders and the like, there are cases where people were sentenced to life for child sex crimes and terrorism only to be released at a later date when other evidence cleared them. You can pardon a corpse, but that is not going to be much use.

Answer 5

No. It has been proven not to be an effective deterrent. Besides, our justice system lacks whatever it will take to enable a flawless conviction in some cases. Guildford Four; Birmingham Six: Two high-profile examples. As long as there can be an element of doubt in any conviction, the death penalty cannot be a reasonable punishment option.

Answer 6

A life for a life? Ok. Bring it back. Give him/her the death penalty. If found later it was a miscarriage then those who voted for the death of that person should be given the death penalty. A life for a life.Thats only fair. Murder is murder.
So I would vote no.

Answer 7

I would hope that people in the UK take a look at the experience of the US with the death penalty:

124 people on death row shown to have been wrongfully convicted

DNA available in less than 10% of all homicides (no guarantee we wont execute innocent people)

Costly and drawn out legal process

We have life without parole in 48 states. It means what it says, costs less than the death penalty

Homicide rates higher in states and regions with the death penalty than in those without it.

Answer 8

No. No. No.

Of course, there may be a majority in favour of stringing them up with piano wire, but a majority also once thought the earth was flat, and they were also wrong. One execution in error is one too many. Could you imagine being the poor mother of Timothy Evans? Once the mistake is realised, a pardon is no good to a corpse.

It just proves you can't always trust the public and the ballot box to reach the right decision.

Answer 9

i wouldnt vote for it. What if someone was put on death row, killed and then evidence pops up to show they are innocent? its happened many times in the past. I say make a life sentence LIFE and make them suffer in prison, bring back bread and water, no tuck shops, no pool tables no TV and good old chaingangs until they die. If only the UK government would rip up the human rights bullsh1t thats been written to cover the backside of every criminal in this country then maybe we could do this.

Answer 10

No to the death penalty. Murder is wrong, even by the state!