Jump to content

Capital Punishment


Capital Punishment  

149 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jambomo said:

What are the actual arguments FOR capital punishment though?

If it can be shown (I’m not necessarily saying it has been) that it doesn’t reduce crime, is more expensive than prison and could be used incorrectly against innocent people, why do some people want it reintroduced?

Other than as a revenge punishment does it bring any benefit? Most of the criminals this would be aimed at never got out of jail anyway (Huntley, Brady, Sutcliffe etc).

If there's one thing that's been reinforced in recent years, it's that a decent slice of the general public aren't terribly interested in things like "experts" and "evidence". For some, certain things are just common sense, and that's an end to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hk blues said:

Don't put words in my mouth - that's not what I said.  Killing is never right, then again Capital Punishment isn't killing

Oh, I thought you were just going to use the dictionary definition of "unlawful killing" as being the reason why state-sponsored death isn't murder! This should be even more entertaining!

BRB, popcorn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, hk blues said:

Kinda hard to avoid repeating something in order to put someone right on their mistake.

Don't put words in my mouth - that's not what I said.  Killing is never right, then again Capital Punishment isn't killing

capital punishment
noun
noun: capital punishment
  1. the legally authorised killing of someone as punishment for a crime.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Rugster said:

Deary me. Earlier in the thread you said someone shouldn't be involved in the debate as they saw capital punishment as murder. I don't think you should be involved in the debate because you're clearly a moron.

Capital Punishment isn't murder.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are aware that there have been advances in science I assume.  
The right wing tabloids being thrown in to the mix is an interesting twist, and I'm the one who's basing my reasoning on CSI. :lol:


No I don’t I think science stayed exactly the same since 1965 and that right wing tabloids directing hate and whipping up the public is a loony left wing myth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember capital punishment being enacted, although I wasn't very old when it was abolished, it was only later I read up about what happened regarding the debate - as far as I can recall there were a couple of high profile cases where there was a bit of a public outcry about the death penalty being enacted.

But I seem to recall that if the death penalty was abolished, the sentence for murder would be life, life meaning life , not 10 - 15 years (or less), which seems to be the norm now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

I remember capital punishment being enacted, although I wasn't very old when it was abolished, it was only later I read up about what happened regarding the debate - as far as I can recall there were a couple of high profile cases where there was a bit of a public outcry about the death penalty being enacted.

But I seem to recall that if the death penalty was abolished, the sentence for murder would be life, life meaning life , not 10 - 15 years (or less), which seems to be the norm now.

Following the logic of some here, there should be no minimum sentence - instead they would be released when rehabilitated.   After all,  in an enlightened society prison is not a  punishment, rather a rehabilitation.  It's an interesting, and perhaps valid point.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hk blues said:

No reasonable person would be fine with the odd innocent person being executed, collateral damage if you like.  Just as nobody should be fine with the odd innocent person being imprisoned for 20 years, yet some are trying to place it higher on the scale of acceptability.

I have never stood behind the reasonable doubt argument, it's flawed but do we have anything better?  No.  Can we find a way to make it less flawed?  Yes, we have (DNA for one thing) and we can continue to enhance what we have .  If I'm being picky, I'd say the use of the word "often" is a huge exaggeration, but it's immaterial.    

Correct.

I don't think anyone is "fine" with someone being imprisoned wrongly for 20 years, but it IS higher on the scale of acceptability.

It's wrong, and it's not acceptable, but it's MORE acceptable than killing an innocent person.

Much as you'd likely get a lighter sentence for kidnapping someone than if you murdered them...

59 minutes ago, Randy Giles said:

That "definitely guilty" argument from earlier in the thread is fucking idiotic, given you're not actually supposed to find someone guilty unless you think they're "definitely guilty".

Ex-fucking-xactly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...