|
Post by scfc73 on Aug 13, 2024 16:43:01 GMT
State sanctioned murder is the sign of a society going backwards. In general I agree, I also agree with suedehead in that if you take a life it shouldn't automatically mean you lose yours there can often be a lot of different circumstances involved. But I think there are definitely cases that merit it. As Nelly said, child murderers & terrorists who commit acts of terror that result in the loss of multiple lives. Serial killers too. What is the point of keeping someone who has made a choice to snuff out multiple innocent lives in confinement for the rest of their lives at great expense to the taxpayer. These are people who decided to take away from society, will never re-join society yet will cost hundreds of thousands to keep incarcerated.
|
|
|
Post by nelly on Aug 13, 2024 16:44:16 GMT
If you've got two pencils up your nose and a pair of underpants on your head you're as mad as a box of frogs. Wibble 🪈🪈👃🩲
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Aug 13, 2024 16:59:54 GMT
For someone like him, the Arena bomber's brother, I agree that just let a firing squad loose on him is a satisfactory outcome Don’t want to muddy the waters too much, but a death sentence for an Islamist is probably a shortcut to Paradise as far as they’re concerned…
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Aug 13, 2024 17:02:06 GMT
I've always said capital punishment for child killers and terrorists. I'm 100% opposed to the state killing people it's a massive step backwards but I fear it's the next issue for the likes of Braverman and Badenoch in their leadership battle, Reform will also push for it if they haven't already. What if the child who was killed was an asylum seeker in a small boat that was being machinegunned by a “patriot”? /s
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by Mozzer on Aug 13, 2024 17:07:40 GMT
State sanctioned murder is the sign of a society going backwards. In general I agree, I also agree with suedehead in that if you take a life it shouldn't automatically mean you lose yours there can often be a lot of different circumstances involved. But I think there are definitely cases that merit it. As Nelly said, child murderers & terrorists who commit acts of terror that result in the loss of multiple lives. Serial killers too. What is the point of keeping someone who has made a choice to snuff out multiple innocent lives in confinement for the rest of their lives at great expense to the taxpayer. These are people who decided to take away from society, will never re-join society yet will cost hundreds of thousands to keep incarcerated. Murdering by the state is morally weak. It is the actions of a state that has nothing but revenge left. Aside from the fact that it is extremely difficult to write a law which says 'these crimes in these circumstances should be punishable by death', one miscarriage of justice has the left the state as a murderer. Where does that leave the state? In any event, it is very arguable that it is a greater punishment to have to live a lifetime in prison than it is to be killed quickly. The death penalty is not much of a deterrent anyway, so all you're left with is exacting revenge. For the avoidance of doubt I am not saying the crimes referred to are not abhorrent, whether or not the perpetrators have mental issues. And I am not saying I am against whole life punishments. But if we go back to killing people it will be a(nother) step backwards for a country that has been regressing for some time.
|
|
|
Post by scfc73 on Aug 13, 2024 17:27:18 GMT
In general I agree, I also agree with suedehead in that if you take a life it shouldn't automatically mean you lose yours there can often be a lot of different circumstances involved. But I think there are definitely cases that merit it. As Nelly said, child murderers & terrorists who commit acts of terror that result in the loss of multiple lives. Serial killers too. What is the point of keeping someone who has made a choice to snuff out multiple innocent lives in confinement for the rest of their lives at great expense to the taxpayer. These are people who decided to take away from society, will never re-join society yet will cost hundreds of thousands to keep incarcerated. Murdering by the state is morally weak. It is the actions of a state that has nothing but revenge left. Aside from the fact that it is extremely difficult to write a law which says 'these crimes in these circumstances should be punishable by death', one miscarriage of justice has the left the state as a murderer. Where does that leave the state? In any event, it is very arguable that it is a greater punishment to have to live a lifetime in prison than it is to be killed quickly. The death penalty is not much of a deterrent anyway, so all you're left with is exacting revenge. For the avoidance of doubt I am not saying the crimes referred to are not abhorrent, whether or not the perpetrators have mental issues. And I am not saying I am against whole life punishments. But if we go back to killing people it will be a(nother) step backwards for a country that has been regressing for some time. It's not about exacting revenge it's about wasting substantial amounts of money on people who have committed heinous crimes & are never going to be or never should be re-admitted to society. That a amount of money would be better spent on someone who has committed a lesser crime who can be rehabilitated or on services that deal with prevention.
|
|
Mozzer
Contributor
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by Mozzer on Aug 13, 2024 17:52:55 GMT
If you're going to start killing people because they've nothing to offer society* you're on a slippery slope.
* And perhaps they do, like helping to understand how to prevent their actions being repeated, but you'll never know, because the state murdered them.
|
|
Fez
Contributor
Posts: 568
|
Post by Fez on Aug 13, 2024 18:03:37 GMT
Just one name does it for me. Timothy Evans. Yes does it for me too. With DNA profiling today it should be almost impossible to convict the wrong person though. Absolutely. It *should* be, yes. But there are still too many malicious prosecutions coming to light, and cases where DNA evidence was not available or was even undisclosed. Also, too many convictions that have relied on eye-witness testimony and identification, which has been shown to be unreliable. Thank goodness for outfits like The Innocence Project.
|
|
Fez
Contributor
Posts: 568
|
Post by Fez on Aug 13, 2024 18:12:46 GMT
Murdering by the state is morally weak. It is the actions of a state that has nothing but revenge left. Aside from the fact that it is extremely difficult to write a law which says 'these crimes in these circumstances should be punishable by death', one miscarriage of justice has the left the state as a murderer. Where does that leave the state? In any event, it is very arguable that it is a greater punishment to have to live a lifetime in prison than it is to be killed quickly. The death penalty is not much of a deterrent anyway, so all you're left with is exacting revenge. For the avoidance of doubt I am not saying the crimes referred to are not abhorrent, whether or not the perpetrators have mental issues. And I am not saying I am against whole life punishments. But if we go back to killing people it will be a(nother) step backwards for a country that has been regressing for some time. It's not about exacting revenge it's about wasting substantial amounts of money on people who have committed heinous crimes & are never going to be or never should be re-admitted to society. That a amount of money would be better spent on someone who has committed a lesser crime who can be rehabilitated or on services that deal with prevention. I don't personally consider keeping the worst in society away from the rest of us a waste of money. And even if cost is the overriding factor then a death penalty sentence, contrary though it sounds, is in fact more expensive than life without parole. Granted, that's the case in the US but it's some of the closest evidence we have, and you'd think that there would be similar practicalities. deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs/summary-of-states-death-penalty
|
|
|
Post by bigmartin on Aug 13, 2024 18:54:44 GMT
It's not about exacting revenge it's about wasting substantial amounts of money on people who have committed heinous crimes & are never going to be or never should be re-admitted to society. That a amount of money would be better spent on someone who has committed a lesser crime who can be rehabilitated or on services that deal with prevention. I don't personally consider keeping the worst in society away from the rest of us a waste of money. And even if cost is the overriding factor then a death penalty sentence, contrary though it sounds, is in fact more expensive than life without parole. Granted, that's the case in the US but it's some of the closest evidence we have, and you'd think that there would be similar practicalities. deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs/summary-of-states-death-penaltyIn other news I see that "genius businessman, no-body does business like I do business" Trump's brain finally died. (For those that aren't aware) he created a fictional story about being in a helicopter with Willie Brown and "Willie told him some really bad stuff about Kamala Harris". Trump's supporters lapped it up. But it's now come out that Willie Brown never rode in a helicopter with him and Trump has mistaken him for a guy called Nate Holden, a black guy. Who he did share a helicopter with. but who probably didn't tell him any stories about his ex, because she's not HIS ex. And, in a fresh moment of corporate genius, by rejoining X/Twitter (direct competition to Truth Social) he's crashed his own share price. Every day I swear, every day without fail, this guy does something completely crackers.
|
|
|
Post by vicar on Aug 13, 2024 19:31:13 GMT
In other news I see that "genius businessman, no-body does business like I do business" Trump's brain finally died. (For those that aren't aware) he created a fictional story about being in a helicopter with Willie Brown and "Willie told him some really bad stuff about Kamala Harris". Trump's supporters lapped it up. But it's now come out that Willie Brown never rode in a helicopter with him and Trump has mistaken him for a guy called Nate Holden, a black guy. Who he did share a helicopter with. but who probably didn't tell him any stories about his ex, because she's not HIS ex. And, in a fresh moment of corporate genius, by rejoining X/Twitter (direct competition to Truth Social) he's crashed his own share price. Every day I swear, every day without fail, this guy does something completely crackers. That clip is hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by Bilby on Aug 14, 2024 4:29:46 GMT
I’d agree, *if* our profit-driven, privatised steel industry weren’t winding down the capability to produce virgin steel, which was the supposed market for the mine. Remind me who first brought in the policy of selling off our nation’s heavy industry…? I can't imagine. It was probably Starmer though. I get that by the way. It would be better to maintain a steel industry of course. But even if the coal mine was capable of good profit by exporting it's production I think it's something that they should proceed with. It's good for the area's development. Jobs, money, etc. And modern coal mines are not anywhere near as devastating to the local area as they used to be. We're looking at potentially moving to Whitehaven next year. So I'm getting quite invested in the politics of the area. FYI Martin
I'd think long and hard
As a native born Cumbrian we occasionally used to go over to Seascale just south, in the late 50's and get the sun in the dunes there close to Windscale (Sellafield) always guaranteed a tan there!
|
|
tvor
Frequenter
Posts: 185
|
Post by tvor on Aug 14, 2024 7:33:22 GMT
What an excellent interview. Well worth watching and considering, irrespective of whether you are far right, far left or just like me straight down the middle
|
|
|
Post by herbiedumplings on Aug 14, 2024 7:39:27 GMT
What an excellent interview. Well worth watching and considering, irrespective of whether you are far right, far left or just like me straight down the middle What it revealed to me is that Richard Tice believes you can determine someone’s age through palmistry. I wonder if he subscribed to the bleach remedy for the “China Virus” also? [edit:] OK, the palmistry bit was a sarcastic dig, but see here for an objective analysis of Mr Tice’s supposedly irrefutable test: www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428644-300-with-no-paper-trail-can-science-determine-age/
|
|
tvor
Frequenter
Posts: 185
|
Post by tvor on Aug 14, 2024 7:52:19 GMT
What an excellent interview. Well worth watching and considering, irrespective of whether you are far right, far left or just like me straight down the middle What it revealed to me is that Richard Tice believes you can determine someone’s age through palmistry. I wonder if he subscribed to the bleach remedy for the “China Virus” also? [edit:] OK, the palmistry bit was a sarcastic dig, but see here for an objective analysis of Mr Tice’s supposedly irrefutable test: www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428644-300-with-no-paper-trail-can-science-determine-age/Herbie, you could have at least watched the fifteen minute video before commenting on it within ten minutes
|
|