Should the death penalty be reintroduced in the UK?

[MickiQ]

Haven't we flogged this particular horse to death (pun not intended) on other threads? The answer is still no though. Great idea in theory falls down in practice.
Also bit irrelevant, so long as we remain in the ECHR then there is no possibility it could be re-introduced in this country, zilch nada zip and despite the mad rantings from the likes of Frog Lord and that ilk we ain't leaving the ECHR.

 

[Aaronf]

I'd say only for people like the Southport murderer and also the person who murdered Sarah Everard. It's not the ethical or human answer I know but they way they committed their crimes and with indisputable evidence - why do they deserve to live?

 

[weltweit]

It is easy to think that for example that 17 year old that stabbed all those children killing three deserves to be put to death.

Then how about if he wasn't mentally competent?

And how about if we introduced the death penalty to execute people like this, but then some innocent person was executed along with the proper guilty ones?

So, yes the death penalty for those that deserve it, but no because it would be impossible to get it right.

So on balance no.

 

[hash tag]

In that sense, perhaps this thread can serve a purpose. Where the topic is brought up on other threads, the posters in question can be respectfully redirected to this one.

In fact, I'm going to start doing exactly this.

People should read the other threads to read how it is not equal, can be political, the methods of execution, the differences between America, china, Japan Saudi etc
But it is just wrong.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

I'd be up for bringing back the breaking wheel for the crime of having the middle name De Pfeffel.

Otherwise no.

 

[chilango]

No.

 

[ska invita]

Yes



Sorry I meant no.
Fuck it's too late

Meta

 

[NoXion]

I'm not against it in principle. There are certain people who by their actions establish that there is no hope of remorse and rehabilitation, and who should therefore be permanently removed from society.

Practically speaking however, I have negligible confidence in the current apparatus to do the job right at various stages in the process. From initial prosecution to final execution, we can look to the USA to find real-life demonstrations of how things can go wrong. So I have voted "no", and would do the same in any plebiscite.

Mind you, I'm not terribly fond of imprisonment either, or at the very least I intensely despise the way it can form a kind of parallel society that, due to its carceral basis, has its own inherent brutality that ends up seeping into the wider population within which it resides.

I'd like to see sincere and full-throated work to address the root causes of crime, such as poverty and alienation, as well as efforts in similarly good faith to reform the prisons. If we can pull that off as a society, maybe then we can have a proper discussion about whether there is a place for capital sentencing.

 

[farmerbarleymow]

We're such a bunch of bleeding heart liberals.

 

[MickiQ]

We're such a bunch of bleeding heart liberals.

View attachment 461068

Is there a prize for guessing who voted Yes?

 

[planetgeli]

Fwiw, this topic has been done to death ( sorry) in many ways and many other threads from Pritti Patel, to Japan and many threads about the whys and wherefores in the States.

Haven't we flogged this particular horse to death (pun not intended) on other threads?

It was done because it was fucking up another thread. I thought Spy might be in the mood.

Definitely a good idea to get the discussion out of that thread.

 

[planetgeli]

Is there a prize for guessing who voted Yes?

I'm betting Smokeandsteam

 

[Spymaster]

It was done because it was fucking up another thread. I thought Spy might be in the mood.

Worth mentioning that it wasn't me discussing it on the other thread.

 

[planetgeli]

Yes



Sorry I meant no.
Fuck it's too late

Meta

I deliberately left 'change your vote' in for the hard of clicking.

 

[not a trot]

Never.

 

[HeAthen]

Is there a prize for guessing who voted Yes?

If you click on the number of votes the option has it'll open up and show you who voted what (not sure that's a great idea tbh, shouldn't polls be anonymous?)

 

[Aaronf]

I think I mentioned it first, metaphorically holds hands up. That thread wasn't the place for this but I didn't think or forsee how it might unfold being a newer member.

It is interesting how it has been stated the debate has already been done countless times, even as said newer member and not having taken part in those - I can appreciate people thinking maybe "not again".

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

It was done because it was fucking up another thread. I thought Spy might be in the mood.

At 6pm? Try 930, he'll be in the mood by then, as in the mood as a newt.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

It is interesting how it has been stated the debate has already been done countless times, even as said newer member and not having taken part in those - I can appreciate people thinking maybe "not again".

Yeah it's not really one of those where the debate has moved on or anyone's going to come up with anything new is it.

 

[danny la rouge]

shouldn't polls be anonymous?

No. We should kill those who voted yes.

 

[Aaronf]

Yeah it's not really one of those where the debate has moved on or anyone's going to come up with anything new is it.

You're right, I must admit people discussing it here rather than a poll on the whole Internet has made me realise it's far more in favour of no than than yes. It's too easy to anonymously click yes if there's no comeback or request to explain your vote or opinion. I do think it's interesting though hearing people's reasons why they do believe it should be brought back.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'd say only for people like the Southport murderer and also the person who murdered Sarah Everard. It's not the ethical or human answer I know but they way they committed their crimes and with indisputable evidence - why do they deserve to live?

No, you need to explain why they deserve to die

 

[SpookyFrank]

Even if someone does 'deserve' to die, the state should never get to make that call.

 

[Aaronf]

No, you need to explain why they deserve to die

They've taken someone else's life in the most cold blooded circumstances so they've revoked their right to carry on experiencing what they snatched away from another human being.

 

[Serge Forward]

I voted no. Always have been against giving the State power to end someone's life, even if someone has done truly awful things. I'm not against the idea of killing someone who is a direct threat and needs stopping but that is different to "cold light of day" premeditated judicial killing. Also if someone is stopped from committing any further heinous acts, why the need to kill them? It's worth remembering that countries where they do have the death penalty also happen to be some of the most reactionary and authoritarian governments on the planet. Fuck that mad shit.

 

[souljacker]

I need to be in the mood. Maybe later.

Is your man running late?

 

[ska invita]

I deliberately left 'change your vote' in for the hard of clicking.

well that ruins my point :grrr:

you cant rewind time once the death switch has been switched

 

[danny la rouge]

They've taken someone else's life in the most cold blooded circumstances so they've revoked their right to carry on experiencing what they snatched away from another human being.

I don’t see how that follows. It seems the opposite of obvious. Isn’t taking their life also cold-blooded?

 

[Aaronf]

I don’t see how that follows. It seems the opposite of obvious. Isn’t taking their life also cold-blooded?

Yes I guess it is, I'm struggling to interpret how I feel about what they've done deserving what punishment.

 

[Red Cat]

The discussion serves a function in other threads because we don't know how to make sense of this kind of thing.

Nobody is really interested in having the same conversation again about the death penalty.