Lee Rigby Killer

Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
It is obscene and they were found guilty and sentenced according to our laws. We don't have the death penalty. You can't pick and choose who dies just because of the level of horror of a certain incident.
Click to expand...

I'm not picking and choosing who dies. I'm just hoping he dies.

Spot the difference.

Withdrawal of treatment is not the death penalty and that sadly won't happen anyway.
 
The Prison Service has a duty of care to the inmates. No if's, no but's, it is the law. Withdrawal of treatment would be unlawful.

Hoping that somebody dies may be just your personal opinion sixthswan but it is just plain wrong and does you no credit. Lee Rigby's killers this week, maybe Emily Jones' killer next week.

I could go on but this view is simply a rather uncomfortable form of virtue signalling, of the 'I care so much I'm hoping he dies' kind.

Not a good look.
 
No I care so little about scum, that I don't care if they die - but I hope they do.

The woman who slit Emily's throat can die too.

I'm very comfortable with thinking that.
 
sixthswan said:
No I care so little about scum, that I don't care if they die - but I hope they do.

The woman who slit Emily's throat can die too.

I'm very comfortable with thinking that.
Click to expand...
You clearly do. All wishful thinking and quite useless.

You need to do something about it, even advocating doing something would be a start.
 
AFCDorset said:
The Prison Service has a duty of care to the inmates. No if's, no but's, it is the law. Withdrawal of treatment would be unlawful.

Hoping that somebody dies may be just your personal opinion sixthswan but it is just plain wrong and does you no credit. Lee Rigby's killers this week, maybe Emily Jones' killer next week.

I could go on but this view is simply a rather uncomfortable form of virtue signalling, of the 'I care so much I'm hoping he dies' kind.

Not a good look.
Click to expand...
Yes it does as I know all to well....but if covid gets him it'll be no loss
 
I do not think Capital punishment would reduce crimes of murder or Terrorism but it would certainly stop people being released and killing again. We have to accept that some people will not change whatever treatment they receive in prison so maybe bringing back capital punishment should be voted on again?
 
Running Fox said:
maybe bringing back capital punishment should be voted on again?
Click to expand...
We're back into this debate. IMHO we should not have capital punishment as there are too many miscarriages of justice. People's lives have been ruined due to being incorrectly convicted, but at least they are still alive to be released. What good is a posthumous pardon?
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
We're back into this debate. IMHO we should not have capital punishment as there are too many miscarriages of justice. People's lives have been ruined due to being incorrectly convicted, but at least they are still alive to be released. What good is a posthumous pardon?
Click to expand...
Tell that to the families of those murdered after the release of a convicted killer.
 
Running Fox said:
Tell that to the families of those murdered after the release of a convicted killer.
Click to expand...
How do you think that conversation would go. ‘You know that person who killed your loved one? The one we executed. Just to let you know that we’ve now realised they were innocent.’
How do you think that family would feel?
Too many miscarriages of justice over the years.
 
OK. It is, to me, fundamentally wrong for the state to execute it's citizens. Simple as that.

It is wrong on a philosophical and ethical level and corrupting of both the state and it's citizens.

It is also wrong on a practical level, miscarriages of justice say, or 'mission creep' by the state among other things.


If you accept that, then you need a criminal justice system that can deal with violent criminals of this type. We have no such thing.

We need root and branch reform, a police force actually set up to deter criminal behaviour and catch real criminals, changes to the law and the court system to make conviction of violent offenders more likely and a sentencing system and prison service that can handle the worst offenders and put them away for life.

More to it than that of course, that is just the barest outline.
 
AFCDorset said:
OK. It is, to me, fundamentally wrong for the state to execute it's citizens. Simple as that.

It is wrong on a philosophical and ethical level and corrupting of both the state and it's citizens.

It is also wrong on a practical level, miscarriages of justice say, or 'mission creep' by the state among other things.


If you accept that, then you need a criminal justice system that can deal with violent criminals of this type. We have no such thing.

We need root and branch reform, a police force actually set up to deter criminal behaviour and catch real criminals, changes to the law and the court system to make conviction of violent offenders more likely and a sentencing system and prison service that can handle the worst offenders and put them away for life.

More to it than that of course, that is just the barest outline.
Click to expand...
I'm actually finding myself more or less in complete agreement with one of your posts AFCD. First time for everything.
 
AFCDorset said:
OK. It is, to me, fundamentally wrong for the state to execute it's citizens. Simple as that.

It is wrong on a philosophical and ethical level and corrupting of both the state and it's citizens.

It is also wrong on a practical level, miscarriages of justice say, or 'mission creep' by the state among other things.


If you accept that, then you need a criminal justice system that can deal with violent criminals of this type. We have no such thing.

We need root and branch reform, a police force actually set up to deter criminal behaviour and catch real criminals, changes to the law and the court system to make conviction of violent offenders more likely and a sentencing system and prison service that can handle the worst offenders and put them away for life.

More to it than that of course, that is just the barest outline.
Click to expand...

I'm against the state executing citizens too.

I'm also for police and criminal justice reform. Would like to see a real toughness on crime.

Just been thinking about something else though. Would anyone be supportive of voluntary euthanasia for the worst and most despicable crimes. Say perhaps Ian Brady. He clearly was guilty. No dispute about it. He feels guilty about being murderous scum and recording on tape; the death of an innocent child.

He wants the state to end his life and gives permission for that to happen. Says he will reveal the whereabouts of the missing bodies and then after that, would like to have his own life ended.

Would that be so terrible?
 
Yes I think in this case, the guilt was beyond presumed.

How does "innocent until proven guilty" work, when you are confessing to a killing in the street, with blood all over you and holding the murder weapon.
 
AFCDorset said:
Are you advocating the death penalty here filbo, 'cruel and unusual punishment maybe'.

Is that for all murderers, maybe just islamic extremists, or africans, or just the odd person you think deserves it?
Click to expand...
100%, yes. I am.
I would trust a cross-party group of qualified experts to set the parameters. But the likes of Dennis Neilson, terrorists targeting mass casualties, multiple-offending paedos, repeat murderers, these two, and many others should qualify.
I don't understand why you bring Africans into it? Please explain.
 
Sohofox said:
He was caught by the police stood over the dead body with a bloodsoaked machete in his hand.
Not sure there's much chance of a wrongful conviction
Click to expand...
He was, others aren't. So do we have a separate death penalty only for those literally caught red-handed? Is there a sliding scale? What if they killed someone in self-defence but it looked like murder? Etc, etc..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top