Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We could join Belarus and be the only countries in Europe with the death penalty. It’s been 56 years nearly since the last hanging ad it’s never going to be reinstated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lharman7 said:

Where in my post did I mention innocent people will be murdered? 

I thought the topic was about terrorists killing innocent people.

Again, zero tolerance!

I think it was you that widened the discussion to include child killers and paedophiles. 

But if you want to stick to terrorists, what about the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4? That's 10 people you would quite happily have murdered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, lharman7 said:

Absolute tosh. Some people definitely deserve it. Capitol punishment needs to be reintroduced, martyr or no martyr. I wonder if you share the same views towards paedophiles and child murderers? There should be zero tolerance with no second chances.

As is often the case, prevention is better than cure. Identify the risk and stop it from happening in the first place. There are no circumstances where I feel capital punishment is justified, even for paedophiles or child killers. If they can be rehabilitated then they should be, if they are mentally unstable then they should be dealt with appropriately, by which I mean give them the help that they obviously need whilst protecting society from them.

5 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

Just No. It is not the fault of society. It is the fault of the terrorist who has taken a conscious decision to commit an act of murder against innocent people. Don't shift the blame onto society. And let the perpetrators know there will be serious consequences for their actions.

 

Whenever a life is taken then there is a failing somewhere along the line, be it a failure to identify/protect the vulnerable, a failure to properly deal with an identified risk, a failure in education or on a grander scale a failure in global politics. This is not absolving the perpetrator of responsibility as it is them who has ultimately carried out the deed, but as increasingly becomes apparent there are usually opportunities to avoid this kind of thing that have been missed. As is also becoming increasingly apparent prison is not a deterrent so instead use the time and resources in a more meaningful way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is no good rehabilitating a terrorist after the event. For every crime, there has to be a measure of punishment. And the measure of the crime should determine the punishment. And the deliberate taking of a life or many lives, because your God told you to, has no defence and I do believe incarceration for whole of life is justified.

Prisons are full and full for the wrong reasons. Premeditated killers should face loss of liberty for life. But there has to be a better way to punish and then educate thieves etc. Restoring your respect with the rest of humanity by performing public duties might be a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

It is no good rehabilitating a terrorist after the event. For every crime, there has to be a measure of punishment. And the measure of the crime should determine the punishment. And the deliberate taking of a life or many lives, because your God told you to, has no defence and I do believe incarceration for whole of life is justified.

Prisons are full and full for the wrong reasons. Premeditated killers should face loss of liberty for life. But there has to be a better way to punish and then educate thieves etc. Restoring your respect with the rest of humanity by performing public duties might be a way.

Whilst I agree that once they have acted it is too late, however, in the two most recent cases they have been identified, locked up and then released before committing the attacks. That is plenty of time to have rehabilitated. And even if one is locked up for life, you can still rehabilitate, then they might actually understand their punishment and instead of radicalising or magnifying the opinions of those that haven't yet commited an act they could instead work to moderate and mitigate future risk (not just terrorist, but across the spectrum). Prison is not a deterrent to any but white collar criminals.

The problem is we need to almost remove religion from our thinking about this kind of act. The same applies to any type of radical adherent to a cause, be this religious, ideological or political.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lharman7 said:

Cheers, I'll keep that in mind.

Still, I wouldn't like to be mistaken for a terrorist, paedophile, murderer sympathizer either! 

First who cares if a word is spelt right or wrong everyone knows  what was meant. Didn’t think it would be long before the do Gooders on this board 
 

would side with the terrorists . These people  play the system in prison,  tell the Parole Board what they want to hear and you’re out. Convert to Islam and the cell doors will be on permanent unlock so you can pray etc.  The Death Penalty might no stop the radicals but its one less on the streets to murder and main U.K. citizens 

Edited by daly
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Let’s hope you’re never a victim of a miscarriage of justice or you’ll end up looking a little silly.

So you think Lee Rigbys killers, Steve Wright,  Levi Bellfield, Pete Sutcliffe  deserve a second chance. With today’s DNA mistakes are impossible plus why should us tax payers have to pay around £1000 a week to keep them in luxury with 24 hour round the clock health care 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, daly said:

So you think Lee Rigbys killers, Steve Wright,  Levi Bellfield, Pete Sutcliffe  deserve a second chance. With today’s DNA mistakes are impossible plus why should us tax payers have to pay around £1000 a week to keep them in luxury with 24 hour round the clock health care 

I think everyone should have a chance of redemption, BUT that doesn’t mean letting them out of jail, unless and until a system of trained and experienced people has reviewed their case thoroughly and decided it is deserved and there is no risk or public concern in doing so.

On DNA, every infallible system is infallible until proven otherwise. Even DNA needs some corroborating evidence. 

If you think prison is luxury, you need to be a little more critical of what you read. If that’s the case, why do prisoners want to get out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cornish sam said:

Whilst I agree that once they have acted it is too late, however, in the two most recent cases they have been identified, locked up and then released before committing the attacks. That is plenty of time to have rehabilitated. And even if one is locked up for life, you can still rehabilitate, then they might actually understand their punishment and instead of radicalising or magnifying the opinions of those that haven't yet commited an act they could instead work to moderate and mitigate future risk (not just terrorist, but across the spectrum). Prison is not a deterrent to any but white collar criminals.

The problem is we need to almost remove religion from our thinking about this kind of act. The same applies to any type of radical adherent to a cause, be this religious, ideological or political.

I'm not sure what your meaning is when you say ' we need to almost remove religion from our thinking about this kind of act'. Religion is at the very heart of this act and if you remove it from your thinking then you will never understand the nature of the problem. Don't remove it from your thinking - but put it at the forefront of your thinking because that's what the terrorist does. For example, you have described this problem as a long litany of failures that led us to this position. If you look at the problem from the viewpoint of the terrorist then for him or her this is not a failure, but a great victory. And describing it as a failure is, once again, shifting the blame back onto society, as though we are the on's doing something wrong to get to this situation.

Jack Merritt and Saskia Jones were two fine young people who believed in rehabilitation and were murdered outside Fishmonger Hall by the poster boy for rehabilitation, Usama Khan. You can't rehabilitate people who don't want to be rehabilitated. Sudesh Amman didn't go to his death thinking he'd made a mistake, he lived, breathed and eventually died as a successful terrorist. 

He was under surveillance by twenty undercover policemen, yet still managed to attack innocent bystanders. By our legal system those officers could do nothing until he attacked someone. He had been under constant surveillance since his release from prison ten days previously. What is the cost to us just to watch him?. There are 23,000 other potential jihadis in the UK, 3,000 under close scrutiny and 20,000 on an extended watch list according to 2017 figures. It is simply unfeasible to allow that many potential terrorists out on the streets and the costs of maintaining close surveillance of them is enormous. The only solution, if you don't reimpose the death penalty for terrorism, is to take them off the street until they are very frail old men.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think Lee Rigbys killers, Steve Wright,  Levi Bellfield, Pete Sutcliffe  deserve a second chance. With today’s DNA mistakes are impossible plus why should us tax payers have to pay around £1000 a week to keep them in luxury with 24 hour round the clock health care 

Apparently, in the USA, it invariably costs more to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I think it was you that widened the discussion to include child killers and paedophiles. 

But if you want to stick to terrorists, what about the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4? That's 10 people you would quite happily have murdered

We are talking about the here and now not the 70's. Forensic investigations have technically come along way since those times and without glancing at the percentages I'll bet that false convictions have dropped dramatically. DNA profiling has helped immensely. 

As for these terrorist scum, most of the attacks are usually caught in plain sight of cctv cameras so for them the answer is extremely easy! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cornish sam said:

As is often the case, prevention is better than cure. Identify the risk and stop it from happening in the first place. There are no circumstances where I feel capital punishment is justified, even for paedophiles or child killers. If they can be rehabilitated then they should be, if they are mentally unstable then they should be dealt with appropriately, by which I mean give them the help that they obviously need whilst protecting society from them.

 

Sorry but you reek of being a sympathizer. 

You offer no solution to identify potential risk and I fail to believe you can. There are a lot of cases where there is no reason to believe a person is at risk of harming others yet out of the blue they do just that.

Offering terrorists, paedophiles and child murderers a second chance and rehabilitation just downright disgusts me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

I think everyone should have a chance of redemption, BUT that doesn’t mean letting them out of jail, unless and until a system of trained and experienced people has reviewed their case thoroughly and decided it is deserved and there is no risk or public concern in doing so.

On DNA, every infallible system is infallible until proven otherwise. Even DNA needs some corroborating evidence. 

If you think prison is luxury, you need to be a little more critical of what you read. If that’s the case, why do prisoners want to get out?

What you propose costs a lot of money.

As a tax payer, are you ok with footing the bill to help terrorists, paedophiles and child murderers gain rehabilitation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

How about stopping them entering the country in the first place? Problem then doesn't occur. And because they are mostly the second generation that becomes radicalised, then stop them at the first generation from coming unless they commit to integration and assimilation.

errrrr, English!! They don’t ALL come into the country as terrorists!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This prison is a holiday camp myth needs to stop for starters. Suicides are through the roof. People are coming OUT with drug problems. Violence has surged. 23 hour lock up. 

Please have a conversation about this but don't rely on rubbish you have read in the press. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Fuzzar said:

Yup, it's dilemma. The above spelling puts me in a really difficult situation.

I was in a dilemma too. I wondered if we were about to sign Dilemna ? Presumably from a lower league German side ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, lharman7 said:

What you propose costs a lot of money.

As a tax payer, are you ok with footing the bill to help terrorists, paedophiles and child murderers gain rehabilitation?

It’s debatable whether it does cost more in the long run. If rehabilitation is effective, it can stop the reoffending cycle which obviously imposed costs not just reimprisoning, but investigating and prosecuting crime, as well as the impact on the victim. 
 

Framing an argument in terms of extremes   (“help terrorists, paedophiles and child murderers”) doesn’t help calm and rational debate, which is in short supply these days. What matters is what is effective without being unrealistic. Trying to inflame emotions suggests that the agenda is something other than trying to find the best overall solution.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/02/2020 at 00:36, lharman7 said:

We are talking about the here and now not the 70's. Forensic investigations have technically come along way since those times and without glancing at the percentages I'll bet that false convictions have dropped dramatically. DNA profiling has helped immensely. 

As for these terrorist scum, most of the attacks are usually caught in plain sight of cctv cameras so for them the answer is extremely easy! 

1) Today’s technology always looks like it’s the best possible tool - until the next innovation. I would bet that police forces in the 50s thought their methods were cutting edge.

2) Have you seen “The Capture” on the BBC? I know it’s fiction, but it shows how forces who think they know better than the government use video faking technology to achieve what they think is for the best, sacrificing an innocent soldier along the way. Deep fake videos aren’t that far away from what it portrays.

Edited by Nuff Said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the death penalty in the USA, it’s not fair to say it doesn’t work out there. You won’t stop everyone whatever the sentence. I guess the point I’m making is, I wonder how many deaths the threat of the chair actually prevents. It’s a huge country, the murder rate etc could, and I’m sure would, be far higher. Though I’m not saying the electric chair etc is the answer, but would stronger sentences across the board in this country reduce crime? I would imagine so, almost certainly. Interestingly, in Belarus, where they have the death penalty, the crime rate is very low indeed. Minsk is almost trouble free, even their ‘rough’ area you can walk through safely late at night. Very unusual for a city. Not sure if there’s any correlation there, but it makes me wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

Regarding the death penalty in the USA, it’s not fair to say it doesn’t work out there. You won’t stop everyone whatever the sentence. I guess the point I’m making is, I wonder how many deaths the threat of the chair actually prevents. It’s a huge country, the murder rate etc could, and I’m sure would, be far higher. Though I’m not saying the electric chair etc is the answer, but would stronger sentences across the board in this country reduce crime? I would imagine so, almost certainly. Interestingly, in Belarus, where they have the death penalty, the crime rate is very low indeed. Minsk is almost trouble free, even their ‘rough’ area you can walk through safely late at night. Very unusual for a city. Not sure if there’s any correlation there, but it makes me wonder.

Devil's advocate time  -

If you pull a gun or knife and start hurting people in the States, chances are someone will pull out a bigger gun and take you out.

The NRA would probably suggest that it is a bigger deterrent than the electric chair. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

It’s debatable whether it does cost more in the long run. If rehabilitation is effective, it can stop the reoffending cycle which obviously imposed costs not just reimprisoning, but investigating and prosecuting crime, as well as the impact on the victim. 
 

Framing an argument in terms of extremes   (“help terrorists, paedophiles and child murderers”) doesn’t help calm and rational debate, which is in short supply these days. What matters is what is effective without being unrealistic. Trying to inflame emotions suggests that the agenda is something other than trying to find the best overall solution.

You didn't answer the question! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lharman7 said:

You didn't answer the question! 

OK, you tell me if you've stopped beating your wife and I'll answer the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex Moss said:

Regarding the death penalty in the USA, it’s not fair to say it doesn’t work out there. You won’t stop everyone whatever the sentence. I guess the point I’m making is, I wonder how many deaths the threat of the chair actually prevents. It’s a huge country, the murder rate etc could, and I’m sure would, be far higher. Though I’m not saying the electric chair etc is the answer, but would stronger sentences across the board in this country reduce crime? I would imagine so, almost certainly. Interestingly, in Belarus, where they have the death penalty, the crime rate is very low indeed. Minsk is almost trouble free, even their ‘rough’ area you can walk through safely late at night. Very unusual for a city. Not sure if there’s any correlation there, but it makes me wonder.

Correlation is not the same as causation.

 

image.png.dfaa49c659834ed220ff948039ea3e3b.png

 

Loads of this sort of thing here: https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

So you think Lee Rigbys killers, Steve Wright,  Levi Bellfield, Pete Sutcliffe  deserve a second chance. With today’s DNA mistakes are impossible plus why should us tax payers have to pay around £1000 a week to keep them in luxury with 24 hour round the clock health care 

Apparently, in the USA, it invariably costs more to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life.

That statement sounds like something Diane Abbott would come up with. Don’t doubt the facts but probably 90% of that money is going to lawyers milking the system. As was said before we will never know how much of a deterrent the Death Penalty would make to gang violence, terrorism etc but sure if a survey was taken of individuals put to them that would the death sentence deter you from killing someone then I’m sure the reinstatement of it would win hands down. This is obviously not going to happen and stabbings, shootings, terrorism is only going to increase and now the liberals will oppose prison sentences as being to harsh or being an intrusion of their civil rights. It’s a no win situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should be asking if the colossal cuts to the prison, policing and justice systems have any blame for the rise in crime and criminal cases, Daily. Just a thought. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, daly said:

That statement sounds like something Diane Abbott would come up with. Don’t doubt the facts but probably 90% of that money is going to lawyers milking the system. As was said before we will never know how much of a deterrent the Death Penalty would make to gang violence, terrorism etc but sure if a survey was taken of individuals put to them that would the death sentence deter you from killing someone then I’m sure the reinstatement of it would win hands down. This is obviously not going to happen and stabbings, shootings, terrorism is only going to increase and now the liberals will oppose prison sentences as being to harsh or being an intrusion of their civil rights. It’s a no win situation.

I've tried to highlight every assumption you've made in your post.

 

It seems like your gut reaction to violence in society is along the lines of "lock then up and throw away the key" and I can understand that, I react in the same way to some cases. But our gut reaction is not necessarily always right. What matters is what the evidence shows and what works. We had the death penalty for thousands of years, did that stop violent crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuff said I grew up in the 50s 60’s when a murder made the newspaper headlines now it’s not even reported by the media unless it’s in London or terrorist related. There’s more murders now in a week than we had in a year. Women in general could walk the streets without fear of being attacked, kids could play outside. There’s always going to be exceptions to above but in general those days were 100% safer than now. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That statement sounds like something Diane Abbott would come up with. Don’t doubt the facts but probably 90% of that money is going to lawyers milking the system. As was said before we will never know how much of a deterrent the Death Penalty would make to gang violence, terrorism etc but sure if a survey was taken of individuals put to them that would the death sentence deter you from killing someone then I’m sure the reinstatement of it would win hands down. This is obviously not going to happen and stabbings, shootings, terrorism is only going to increase and now the liberals will oppose prison sentences as being to harsh or being an intrusion of their civil rights. It’s a no win situation.

The point several of us are trying to make is that nothing deters crime if you inclined to be a criminal. We don't have the answer but the system we have used for so long isn't working. And we like to think their is a better way. I worry about capital punishment and the wrong person is put to death. Yet I would happily have put a bullet through the head of the killers of Lee Rigby, and also child killers like Ian Huntley and Brady. And I guess we have all assumed someone is guilty until proven innocent.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

OK, you tell me if you've stopped beating your wife and I'll answer the question.

Wtf are you on about?

You can't give a straight answer and you sound like a sympathizer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/02/2020 at 07:21, Graham Paddons Beard said:

I was in a dilemma too. I wondered if we were about to sign Dilemna ? Presumably from a lower league German side ? 

Just who do you think you are GPB? 

Coming on here, talking about football, like some lunatic.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...