Liverpool FC Forum

[Woollyback]

Right, here's a thread GUARANTEED to not end up in a political argument and slanging match after half a page  

With all the recent stories about suicide bombers, racist murderers in Huyton, Hoodie-wearing thugs on the buses there's been a lot of focus on how to combat Britain's cluture of street violence and also what to do with extremist terrorist murderers

Maybe a re-think on the death penalty would deter some of these attacks?

Personally I DON'T think it should be brought back, for a number of reasons. The obvious is that we can never be 100% cast-iron guaranteed that the right person was found guilty of the crime, and we cannot have a society whereby innocent individuals can be killed by the government in the name of justice. Secondly it punishes not so much the offender, but the offender's family are given a life-sentence of grieving, which seems obviously flawed to me. I also fully agree with PUNISHMENT for crime. Serious offenders (murderers, bombers etc) should be made to serve long prison sentences, and in prisons where there are no luxuries. It's all well and good to talk about rehabilitation but that can be done after the offender has done his penance

Lastly, in the case of these attempted suicide bombers and other islamist extremists they would be seen as martyrs and would love the thought of dying for their cause as they have been brainwashed into believing a life of luxury with 40 virgins awaits. Don't give them the satisfaction of allowing them to become martyrs, lock them up and make the f*ckers suffer

Your thoughts amigos?

[Woollyback]

PS, there was meant to be a "?" after the topic title

[Cool Hand Luke]

I have always advocated the use of the death penalty. The only dilemma is that we can hardly ever be 100% certain that someone is guilty, some will say that a few innocent lives are worth sacrificing in order to save many others and to punish the evil, but it is a moral dilemma that I sadly don't have the answer to.

I find the British legal system shocking sometimes, rapists and paedophiles can walk down the same street were the committed there crime a few months later, not even years. And these people who preach hatred in and against this country are being banned from there ‘home’ countries and Britain is welcoming them with open arms and paying for them and there 19 children to live her, does that sound right to you?

[Alonso14]

Slightly off topic... But i think we should go with a no tollerance law like they did in new york. This obvisouly has its flaws as do most laws but the statistics dont lie and i dont know the exact figure but crimes have come down a huge percentage.

[66-1120597113]

It's a really dodgy subject it's so easy to say yes bring it back,but when u start to think about it,the subject opens many others!The first in my mind being,how can we ever be 100% sure of guilt,just look at the news and we see people getting released on appeals regularly for crimes they did'nt commit!In a way the death penalty is hipocritical,condem a man to death then is the executioner as bad as he is?In my mind,no,but i can understand the view that its equally as bad!As for terrorists who are prepared to blow themselves up well they would'nt be afraid to recieve the death penalty obviously as they would still believe they were dying for they're warped cause anyway!But why should innocent people suffer?Say for example your brother killed someone,you just dont stop loving your family regardless of what they have done!It would wreck familys to watch theyre loved ones executed and breed more hate also!
Also and probably most importantly,any person capable of murdering another obviously is not thinking rationally enough to think about the consequences of theyre actions,therefore i dont think it would deter many murders!
Life in jail though should mean life and jail life should be a bit more miserable than 3 squares a day,gyms,televisions,dvds,computers and the rest!

[JBG]

I have some experience/knowledge of these matters from my own particular trade (yes, I'm a black hooded guillotinist ).

In America, it is well known that there have been numerous miscarraiges of justice involving the death penalty. Most criminals in the US are dirt poor and receive Public Defenders, the equivalent of free legal aid in the UK. I remember reading a report last year that the average person on trial in the US (for any sort of crime) who obtains a Public Defender only gets on average 5 minutes consultation time with their lawyer before the trial begins. This means that they can only give their lawyer the most basic and simplest of instructions, often resulting in them not being defended correctly and being convicted for crimes they didn't commit. Public Defender lawyers in the US are normally youngsters just out of law school trying to get their foot on the legal ladder. Many are very talented but are very poorly paid, inexperienced and have a huge work load.

As a result, many petty criminals in the US, particularly in the South, get stitched up for murders and rapes they did not commit as the police over there are under extreme pressure to get a conviciton.

I know this as I know people who worked on the Innocence Project in the US which is basically a pro bono private project run by Barry Levienstein (OJ's old lawyer) which asks lawyers and law students to help prepare appeals for people on Death Row. Many of these people have been convicted on the flimsiest of evidence and I know of some people who have had their convictions over turned on the basis of purported DNA evidence being used against them in court being bogus.

The concept behind the death penalty is two fold as I see it. The first is a purported deterrent effect, in that it is hoped that the existence of the death penalty will deter criminals from commiting serious crimes. However, as can be seen in the US, where the crime rate is among the highest in the Western World, the death penalty actually has little deterrent effect. In fact, in the 1960s they fried far more people in the US than they do nowadays yet the crime rate was far higher then than it is now.

The second purported logic behind that of the death penalty is some sort of quasi vengeance paradigm, where the family, or even society in general, exacts some sort of retribution for the crime committed. However, from my own studies, it is often the case that the execution of the convict is of little real comfort to the family of the victim, as it doesn't bring their beloved back from the dead. As for society getting retribution, I think we are getting into scary territory here. My understanding of a democracy is that, amongst other things, it should uphold tolerance and compassion. Killing people, for me, is not the answer. How civilised is our society where we can institionise murder, by rationalising it by saying that the convict is wrong for taking another person's life yet it is alright for a group civil servants to pronounce a death sentence on another person and carry out that sentence.

I can possibly see an arguement for the death penalty in extreme situations such as where the country is at war where a the death penalty might have a deterrent effect, but I envisage that in wars such as the Great War or World War Two. Given the spin Blair and Bush put on the War on Terrorism nowadays this is dangerous territory as the war arguement could be used to bring the death penalty back in through the back door.

While I'm not in favour of the death penalty - because it doesn't work and as a society we are better than that - I do feel that the rule of law should be more vigourously upheld. I'm very much in favour that criminals should be punished for their crimes, and to me, a life sentence must mean life.

[76-1115222408]

F.ucking hell JBG great post, dont really think much needs to be added, apart from the fact that, as most have already - THAT LIFE SHOULD MEAN LIFE!!!!

[Ola Mr Benitez]

fu.ck em...  we should hang the terrorists we have just caught...  tw.ats don't deserve to live

[66-1120597113]

Such a change in tone since u officially got shat on!

[76-1115222408]

Oh I see your problem Barry, JBG's post came after yours, so yours paled into insignificance.

Haha oh well...................

[Dalglish]

Not much point bringing back the death penalty for suicide bombers is there !

[Lando_Griffin]

The death penalty isn't the answer as you lot have said. I think that the comments on "life meaning life" and that prisons should be more crushing than cushie are spot on. I seriously doubt "Chazza the Chav" would be quite as keen to stab someone for "lookin' at mi da wong way, yeah. Innit" if he realised that he'd spend the rest of his life smacking a hammer against a rock for 18 hours a day, eating stale bread, drinking toilet water, and sniffing his own sweaty pits to drown out the reek of stale vomit and man-poo. I know it'd deter me.

[LFC #1]

harsher punishments are definitley needed thats for sure.

The axe murderers in the recent case in Liverpool should be in maximum security prison the rest of their lives, and their lives should be made a living hell. After a while they will be either begging for the death penalty or will kill themselves in their cell, either way they are no loss to society.

The death penalty in some cases is an easier way out than spending the rest of your life in prision, where your life is a living hell. Some criminals don't deserve to be treated like human beings for the heinous crimes they committ. Toughen up the penalties I say.

Although perhaps those axe murderers shoudl be killed in the same way they killed thier victim? You could guarantee no one would ever do it again if that was the punishment.

[matrix]

Not much point bringing back the death penalty for suicide bombers is there !

thats a good one dalglish  those cun.ts who kill should be taken to a consantration camp death is to good for those fuc.king scumbags, our own soldiers get treated worse than these cockroaches...

[Lando_Griffin]

You can also guarantee the human rights brigade would have a field day! Bast*rds.