Your views on the death penalty

[Scanger]

If u think about it the number of deaths in ie texas could be reduced without the death penalty.
if 200 people commeted murder in texas and were all convicted that 400 deaths.
Wheres the need for that?

[C4talyst]

I think the death penalty is meant to discourage criminals from committing the ultimate crime. With no death penalty, perhaps more people would commit murder knowing that they would not be put to death. That being said, if someone is going to kill another, probably no law in existence is going to stop them. I have mixed feelings on the death penalty mainly because it's been proven that many people have been wrongly convicted and then executed, only to find out later that they were innocent.

As a citizen I don't really need the death penalty. If someone committed an atrocity against a family member of mine, which resulted in their death, I would have no problem "settling" the issue outside of the courts.

[BritishBulldog1]

I am in favour of the death penalty, providing certain conditions are met. First degree murder where it is planned, or if it's a member of the police or if it's a child should carry the death penalty IF there is supporting DNA and other forensic evidence to prove conclusively that this person committed the crime.

In the case of a spur of the moment situation where something happens in the "heat of the moment" then no, I don't believe the death penalty should be applied

We have had too many incidents in the UK where murderers gain parole and then go on to kill again. With the death penalty that cannot happen and they don't become a drain on society having to support them in prison either.

BB1

[JonnyNuemonic]

I have to say I would in most ways support the penalty of death under some rigourous evidence being brougth forward in relation to the case before any dicision would be made and a date set so to speak......

Reason being I've seen alot of things in my line of work and had to deal with them on the spot.....shootings, stabbings, murder, arson, ****, assaults....and at first u think and in resepct tp yourself somewhat know who was in the wrong until at some stage you learn more facts and all of a sudden a new ligth shines on the situation....

but as i said...its a yes from me under very rigourous investigation...

And I'd have to agree with yea Cyber, if anyone harmed a member of my family, they would deal with me first before they got to deal with the courts (thats if they made it to court)

[Fighter falcon]

i think that for things liek stealing, shootings, drugs, that stuff, some jail time is enough but i think the jail time should be longer then the laws permit right now. i think death penalty should only be for extreme circumstances, such as crimes to humanity, mass murder, and serial killing.

[imported_Aesir]

The death penalty should only ever be used if it has been proven that the person being executed actually comitted the crime, and if said crime was something inhumane, such as torture, paedophilia, ****, serial murder etc. For "smaller" crimes such as theft, extortion, fraud, drug dealing etc, a jail term should be used in my opinion. Of course over here in Australia we don't use the death penalty so that may have formed my opinion on the matter.

[Scanger]

Originally posted by JonnyNuemonic@Sep 26 2005, 06:33 PM
I have to say I would in most ways support the penalty of death under some rigourous evidence being brougth forward in relation to the case before any dicision would be made and a date set so to speak......

Reason being I've seen alot of things in my line of work and had to deal with them on the spot.....shootings, stabbings, murder, arson, ****, assaults....and at first u think and in resepct tp yourself somewhat know who was in the wrong until at some stage you learn more facts and all of a sudden a new ligth shines on the situation....

but as i said...its a yes from me under very rigourous investigation...

And I'd have to agree with yea Cyber, if anyone harmed a member of my family, they would deal with me first before they got to deal with the courts (thats if they made it to court)
Quoted post


i agree unless there is some substantial evidence it should not b done

[imported_Aesir]

no offense or anything, but you really should learn to spell and double check for mistakes in your posts. :blink:

[Scanger]

im 14 gimme a break and i was in a rush anyway its fixed now

[private diapers]

Its useful for the criminals who really desrve it. and by that I mean murder, severe ****, or some other deep crime. The only problem with the death penalty is that the family will often sue for it happening or quoting its "too cruel"

[Vector7]

I don't think death penalty is right under any circumstances. State sponsored murder is still murder, no matter who's being killed.

[larry]

Hang'em high, hang'em on a sour apple tree, just hang'em... :evil:

They're wasting my oxygen... :angry:

Thats if they deserve that is... :tweet:

[BritishBulldog1]

Unfortunately, Vector7, it is that attitude that not only ends up getting capital punishment banned, but it then gets watered down so that life ends up as 30 years or less, then they get parole, then they go and murder someone else. No, once they have been executed, they cannot then re commit the crime. Note, this IS a generalisation. The fact that it has happened here in the UK not just once, but many times, is sufficient for me to say bring it back. Tempered with laws for certain "crimes of passion" perhaps.

BB1

[Ives]

Im all for the death penalty to some extent.
For examply they would have to make sure that the person is 100% guilty. Also only for really bad crimes not for just killing 1 person maybe 3 or more.

[Sandy]

***** yes, I support the death penalty. Crime should be intolerable and the death penalty should be considered even for non-murderers. People should value their life beyond their urge to commit crime.

[Sandy]

***** yes, I support the death penalty. Crime should be intolerable and the death penalty should be considered even for non-murderers. People should value their life beyond their urge to commit crime.

[GeneralTarget]

I am in favor of the death penalty. I agree that it has been used on "innocent" people before, But you have to weigh the pro's and con's. I believe that its intention of deterrence for certain crimes is a resource that we shouldnt have to lose. Maybe a little reform in its practice and application are in order. But its intention and Final punishment are in my opinion, a needed aspect of our judicial system.

Mike

[GeneralTarget]

I am in favor of the death penalty. I agree that it has been used on "innocent" people before, But you have to weigh the pro's and con's. I believe that its intention of deterrence for certain crimes is a resource that we shouldnt have to lose. Maybe a little reform in its practice and application are in order. But its intention and Final punishment are in my opinion, a needed aspect of our judicial system.

Mike

[fitr_jt_man]

I'm all for it. People who commit the ultimate crime should pay the ultimate price. Down here in FL, in my area actually, a man killed a woman. they gave him a few years in jail (like 10 or something like that) and then he came back and raped and killed a girl (minor).

Now, i ask you, if he had gotten the death penalty, wouldn't that girl would still be alive, and with her family?

[fitr_jt_man]

I'm all for it. People who commit the ultimate crime should pay the ultimate price. Down here in FL, in my area actually, a man killed a woman. they gave him a few years in jail (like 10 or something like that) and then he came back and raped and killed a girl (minor).

Now, i ask you, if he had gotten the death penalty, wouldn't that girl would still be alive, and with her family?

[mess]

Look at the amount of violence in the cities with the death penalty- the death penalty is not an effective deterent. If thta were the case, there would be no pre meditated murder. The decision to take another's life is permanent, and unless the legal system was absolutely flawless (which it is clearly not,) we cannot execute convicted felons with clean hands. And to those who argue that prisoner's cost too much to keep in prison, that's absolutely ridiculous. Putting a price on a life? That is an abhorable moral abomination. People on welfare drain my dollars through taxes, let's just kill them because they are an inconvenience. fitr_jt_man, that girl wouldn't have died if we had actual life sentences as we should.

[Alpha_Pasta]

There is no point even debating it in England, because its just not going to come back.

[BritishBulldog1]

Unfortunately mess, since the abolition of the death penalty in the UK, murder rates have gone up fairly dramatically, so your reasoning is flawed. Not only that, gun crime has gone up horrifically, why? The answer is quite simple, if they do happen to shoot someone and that person dies, they get life, which with good behaviour and parole = about 10 years. **** and the murder of the victim has also gone up. fitr is right. Once executed, they can't be released to commit the same or worse heinous crime again.

BB1

[GeneralTarget]

Exactly right BB1, they cant repeat. Also, here is a fact. It actually "overall" costs more money to execute someone than to have them serve a life sentence.

[larry]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mess @ Nov 26 2005, 11:29 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Look at the amount of violence in the cities with the death penalty- the death penalty is not an effective deterent.[/b][/quote]

Thats because they're not executed fast enough...If the process was faster you'd see these bastards think twice about popping someone off...look at the USA...it sometimes takes years to execute someone with the appeals process and all... style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/angry.gif

[Alpha_Pasta]

I'm leaving this debate. I'm WAY out of my 14 year old depth.

[Sgt Slipper]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BritishBulldog1 @ Sep 26 2005, 12:53 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I am in favour of the death penalty, providing certain conditions are met. First degree murder where it is planned, or if it's a member of the police or if it's a child should carry the death penalty IF there is supporting DNA and other forensic evidence to prove conclusively that this person committed the crime.

In the case of a spur of the moment situation where something happens in the "heat of the moment" then no, I don't believe the death penalty should be applied

We have had too many incidents in the UK where murderers gain parole and then go on to kill again. With the death penalty that cannot happen and they don't become a drain on society having to support them in prison either.

BB1
[/b][/quote]
Exactly! well said, that sums it up really! i totaly agree.
Sgt. S

[MFKR]

Eye for an eye.

[Maxiez]

In my country, England, there is no death penalty, but I think it would be sensible to have one. But not a straight-off thing, there should be a warning system, say someone killed someone in a serious accident, it would be unfair on them if the court decided to put them to death would't it? But if say someone comminted a mass murder on the street the numbeof lives they've taken, in my opinion, warrants loss of their life. They just don't deserve to live.

I think that the reason they don't have the death penalty in England is because they don't beleive that any deed is bad enough to deserve a purposeful death, because if the government were putting criminals to the death they are themselves commiting murder and as some would say, "Sinking as low as the criminals themselves".

This is a good post scranger, and the issue needs to be disussed.

[Mig]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BritishBulldog1 @ Sep 26 2005, 06:53 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I am in favour of the death penalty, providing certain conditions are met. First degree murder where it is planned, or if it's a member of the police or if it's a child should carry the death penalty IF there is supporting DNA and other forensic evidence to prove conclusively that this person committed the crime.

In the case of a spur of the moment situation where something happens in the "heat of the moment" then no, I don't believe the death penalty should be applied

We have had too many incidents in the UK where murderers gain parole and then go on to kill again. With the death penalty that cannot happen and they don't become a drain on society having to support them in prison either.

BB1
[/b][/quote]
I think I agree with this view.