Ian Watkins

[1320Lichtie]

That'll be why there's no murders in America*.

*states with the death penalty.

Think the easy access to guns over there has a lot to do with it. But then again my point still stands, if somebody purposely kills someone ala Lee Rigby case then they deserve to die too.

[Mr. Brightside]

I would say each case would merit an individual judgemnt ,it's a very dangerous road to go down with sweeping sentences especially in the case of the death penalty.

That's why it is a ridiculously outdated practice which is totally unwarranted in what we call our "civilised society".

[Co.Down Hibee]

So we've established then that it really is just about satisfying your personal need for revenge then. Glad we cleared that up.

Put it this way, I'd never want the great British public to be in charge of deciding whether I should live or die.

Actually it isn't a personal need for revenge,I'm afraid I just don't worry myself with the rights of a guy like Ian Watkins,

[Sweet Pete]

Think the easy access to guns over there has a lot to do with it. But then again my point still stands, if somebody purposely kills someone ala Lee Rigby case then they deserve to die too.

And here it is again, a random punter making a sweeping statement about who deserves life and who deserves death. If I turned around right now and said that you don't deserve to live I'd be (rightly) ostracised, but in this very thread we have people telling others that people who commit certain crimes "deserve death". Mental.

[Mr. Brightside]

Think the easy access to guns over there has a lot to do with it. But then again my point still stands, if somebody purposely kills someone ala Lee Rigby case then they deserve to die too.

They clearly don't, this isn't biblical times with an eye for an eye and all that. Society has moved on, and quite rightly would try and find the reason why this person killed another, and try to rehabilitate them.

[Sweet Pete]

Actually it isn't a personal need for revenge,I'm afraid I just don't worry myself with the rights of a guy like Ian Watkins,

But therein lies the problem; we need to worry about the rights of everyone, even the bad ones, in order to maintain a civilised society. If we don't then we are nothing more than a nice veneer over a macabre regime. A sick pantomime.

[1320Lichtie]

That's chilling. At least you admit to your own barbaric instincts, but I really truly hope you don't honestly believe our own bloodthirsty rhetoric. What would you have done to him in yours and everyone else's name? Thumbscrews? Waterboarding? Public flogging?

You'll find the United Arab Emirates to be more to your tastes if that's your style.

Its a pretty awful thing to say but what does somebody actually have to do before people think that he should no longer deserve to live?

Sickos aren't going to think twice. Threat of the death penalty isn't a deterrent.

Very true, but maybe just me thinking that it will maybe stop the ones on the verge from offending, although thats probably wishful thinking on my part.

[Mr. Brightside]

Actually it isn't a personal need for revenge,I'm afraid I just don't worry myself with the rights of a guy like Ian Watkins,

So he doesn't/shouldn't have any rights?

[Sweet Pete]

Its a pretty awful thing to say but what does somebody actually have to do before people think that he should no longer deserve to live?

Very true, but maybe just me thinking that it will maybe stop the ones on the verge from offending, although thats probably wishful thinking on my part.

It's not up to you, or me to decide who deserves life.

Your second statement is just plain mental.

[1320Lichtie]

They clearly don't, this isn't biblical times with an eye for an eye and all that. Society has moved on, and quite rightly would try and find the reason why this person killed another, and try to rehabilitate them.

Do you honestly think Ian Watkins will be able to be rehabilitated? Or what about the 2 that killed Lee Rigby? Or the countless number of American cases where the criminal have gone and shot up loads of innocent schoolschildren?

Do you seriously belive that these people should be able to get their lifes back on track after the terrible terrible things they have done to other peoples lifes?

[Sweet Pete]

Do you honestly think Ian Watkins will be able to be rehabilitated? Or what about the 2 that killed Lee Rigby? Or the countless number of American cases where the criminal have gone and shot up loads of innocent schoolschildren?

Do you seriously belive that these people should be able to get their lifes back on track after the terrible terrible things they have done to other peoples lifes?

Maybe just by you thinking about them not doing it they won't do it anymore

[Mr. Brightside]

Do you honestly think Ian Watkins will be able to be rehabilitated? Or what about the 2 that killed Lee Rigby? Or the countless number of American cases where the criminal have gone and shot up loads of innocent schoolschildren?

Do you seriously belive that these people should be able to get their lifes back on track after the terrible terrible things they have done to other peoples lifes?

I don't know, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Yes, if they show remorse, and that have been rehabilitated and are no longer a danger to society, then absolutely yes,

Judging by your posts you seem to think people are animals that can just be put down, you seem like you'd have the death penalty for quite a lot of things and I find it genuinely disconcerting that you are so callus about the taking of a human life, something which you're saying is deserving of the death penalty.

[yoda]

Where do we draw the line on capital punishment? Do we kill all sex offenders (even those who have been wrongly convicted)? Or do we hold a national vote to determine which criminal is killed?

I'm interested to see how the foaming at the mouth right-wingers believe the death penalty should be utilised.

[Mr. Brightside]

Where do we draw the line on capital punishment? Do we kill all sex offenders (even those who have been wrongly convicted)? Or do we hold a national vote to determine which criminal is killed?

I'm interested to see how the foaming at the mouth right-wingers believe the death penalty should be utilised.

The only answer is a Britain's Got Talent type situation where the criminals perform for us and give us a weepy back-story, then it goes to a public vote and the loser is killed live on TV.

[yoda]

The only answer is a Britain's Got Talent type situation where the criminals perform for us and give us a weepy back-story, then it goes to a public vote and the loser is killed live on TV.

I'm liking this. I'm liking this a lot.

Those who end up in the "sing-off" have to take part in Running Man style challenges, with full-time mummys and other nutters taking the place of Sub Zero et al.

[Mr. Brightside]

I'm liking this. I'm liking this a lot.

Those who end up in the "sing-off" have to take part in Running Man style challenges, with full-time mummys and other nutters taking the place of Sub Zero et al.

Well, I'm sold. Best TV show ever IMO.

[Co.Down Hibee]

So he doesn't/shouldn't have any rights?

Answer me this question, if you turned on to a news channel right now and saw that Ian Watkins had been stabbed to death in prison, would you really give a toss? my first reaction would be f**k him hopes he rots in hell to be honest, as it would have been for Ian Brady, Peter Sutcliffe and others, Sweet Pete made the point that he has the basic right to life,he does and what he has done with that life is sickening,his welfare isn't really something that would concern me in the slightest to be honest, what rights do you think he should have? 24 hour suicide watch?A personal guard? He had the right to be defended in a trial which he quite rightly got,

[Sweet Pete]

Answer me this question, if you turned on to a news channel right now and saw that Ian Watkins had been stabbed to death in prison, would you really give a toss? my first reaction would be f**k him hopes he rots in hell to be honest, as it would have been for Ian Brady, Peter Sutcliffe and others, Sweet Pete made the point that he has the basic right to life,he does and what he has done with that life is sickening,his welfare isn't really something that would concern me in the slightest to be honest, what rights do you think he should have? 24 hour suicide watch?A personal guard? He had the right to be defended in a trial which he quite rightly got,

Once more though, everything you're saying here is purely borne of outrage at his crime. I, too, am outraged at his crime, but I just can't let my emotions rule me like that and shout "f**k his Human Rights, kill him!".

[Sloop John B]

The death penalty as a deterrent has no proof of actually being there, the USA's crime rate hasn't exactly been the lowest even in the states that allow it, in addition it would be us and other great holders of fundamental human rights such as North Korea, China and Saudi Arabia who allow it. Also the ECHR would make us pay a lot in compensation for breaching Article 2, every country in Europe (excluding belarus) doesn't have the death penalty.

I'm liking this. I'm liking this a lot.

Those who end up in the "sing-off" have to take part in Running Man style challenges, with full-time mummys and other nutters taking the place of Sub Zero et al.

I'm thinking like that kids game show, 50/50 where the crims are ramdomy chosen from 50 convicts and then have to do a series of inflatable obstacles in front of a crowd of full time mums and the loser gets executed after working on a gulag. while the winner gets time in our revolving door prison system where he gets human rights and other luxuries that the Daily Mail is outraged by.

[1320Lichtie]

I don't know, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Yes, if they show remorse, and that have been rehabilitated and are no longer a danger to society, then absolutely yes,

Judging by your posts you seem to think people are animals that can just be put down, you seem like you'd have the death penalty for quite a lot of things and I find it genuinely disconcerting that you are so callus about the taking of a human life, something which you're saying is deserving of the death penalty.

I don't know, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

Yes, if they show remorse, and that have been rehabilitated and are no longer a danger to society, then absolutely yes,

Judging by your posts you seem to think people are animals that can just be put down, you seem like you'd have the death penalty for quite a lot of things and I find it genuinely disconcerting that you are so callus about the taking of a human life, something which you're saying is deserving of the death penalty.

Well maybe I am sounding more barbaric than I thought I was judging by that reply from you there. But I genuinely feel that for the more severe cases like the Lee Rigby one and any murderous rampage there should be much more severe punishments. Maybe the death penalty is harsh but suppose you would never properly know until it affected you first hand as either a victim or an offender.