How refreshing to read the views of someone who isn\'t simply writing for cheap headlines and shock factors. The tabloids coverage of the Mary-Ann case were full of "bring back the death penalty" nonsense. It was a sickening, tragic case but probation is essential in any civilised nation.
I disagree. Why should we collectively spend hundreds of thousaand of pounds keeping scum like this alive when we can solve the problem once and for all (with no chance of repeat offences destroying more innocent lives) by hanging them?
I agree with Craggy. Hang them once - job done.
Because, Craggy, if you look at America (the only western democracy with a legal system similar to the UK to have the death penalty) then a) it costs more in trials and appeals to execute someone than keep them in prison. b) it is not a deterrant; murder / rape rates are higher in states that have it than those that don't c) violence against the police rises as if a perpetrator realises that he will be executed if caught there's practically an incentive to kill the arresting officer in an attempt to escape.
But the practicalities that you manifestly havent researched aside, in exactly which logical sphere do you affirm that it's intrinsically wrong to kill and the penalty is death?
Because Pete the USA is ridiculously over libral in its approach to death row prisoners. Quite simply where a repeat offender of this nature is in question what point is there in keeping him alive? You shoot mad dogs don't you? What possible gain is there to society in any form? None. And the logical sphere is that of unjustified murder (i.e. not accidental, in self defence or the defence of others) but deliberate, intentional and with malice aforethought (i.e.the carrying of offensive weapons proscribed by law). You also fail in your defense to mention the impact of the gun laws in the USA which quite obviously negate any comparison between crime rates in the two countries. As for murderers using violence in escape attempts due to the death penalty what exactly would you have a civilised society do? look the other way when a girl is raped or an elderly person mugged because we lack any backbone to defend ourselves?
I don't consider it 'overly liberal' to ensure that due process of law has been enacted it you are intending to undertake judicial murder. The alternative is a system like that of Singapore, which has an atrocious record of human and civil rights. So no. As for 'shooting mad dogs', that misses the point by a nautical mile, given that the entire basis of the death penalty in a civilised system states that you DO NOT execute the mentally unfit (or do you support euthanasia for the disabled as well?) The 'value to society' since you ask, is that it is a society that values the sanctity of human life, and one that does no consider it within it's power to take life from its citizens. As for gun laws, they are comparable in the US to Canada, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. And are you REALLY suggesting that capital punishment should be introduced for mugging pensioners? Don't play the emotional card. We can all get hot and bothered about the victims of crime, doesnt mean for a second that capital punishment a) is effective or b)is justified. Yes, if it were my daughter I'd feel a revenge impulse, yes, I also recognise that the law must be impartial. No, the death penalty doesn't work, and no, you can't state that you have the right to decide whether you can take away someone's life. Who made you God?