PDA

View Full Version : Death penalty - right or wrong? [FIRST THREAD!]



jackass
27-03-2008, 06:39 PM
Should UK have it? Do you agree with other countrys having it?

The Professor
27-03-2008, 06:44 PM
Personally I think murderers should be sentenced to death, but only after all their time for appeal has expired to minimise the amount of "mistakes" that happen.

You hear of reformed drug addicts, thieves, muggers, fraudsters etc, but never reformed murderers. Probabably because the prison system does nothing to teach them they've done wrong.

jackass
27-03-2008, 06:47 PM
Well, its the perfect solution!

A man kills someone, he goes to jail, gets released later and does it again, if he was put to death, he couldn't do it again.
It will also eliminate the over-crowding prison problem.

Redacted
27-03-2008, 06:48 PM
I totally agree.

If people can murder people, they must be prepared for the worst.

j
27-03-2008, 06:49 PM
They should just be left to rot in a prison cell till they die. I mean, come on? Execusion would be a quick painful death and they don't have any more hell to go through do they?

And we're talking about the right subject, right? :P

Bomb-Head
27-03-2008, 06:58 PM
I don't think the UK should have it.

Firstly if the person is in jail, then they have time to appeal and over time, new evidence may come up and prove the person is innocent - they can then be freed and compensated. However if they're dead, nothing can be done and an innocent person has just been killed.

Secondly, if a person HAD done something, I would much rather see them rot away in a cell for the rest of their lives rather than go through a quick 5 minute death. (However in the UK I think you only stay in prison for about 15 years for a 'life' sentence anyway :@)

Everlong
27-03-2008, 07:09 PM
An eye for an eye. People should be treated the same way they have treated someone else. Murder = death penalty, Theft = paid out of theives pocket etc.

Homoevil
27-03-2008, 07:11 PM
Personally I think murderers should be sentenced to death, but only after all their time for appeal has expired to minimise the amount of "mistakes" that happen.

You hear of reformed drug addicts, thieves, muggers, fraudsters etc, but never reformed murderers. Probabably because the prison system does nothing to teach them they've done wrong.
Most murders are done impulsively and accidently, does a person deserve to die if they did it through sudden rage or abuse of alchol? If a person is remorseful and sorry after they've murdered, surely there's no point in them going to prison as they've already "learned their lesson", execution will just be pointless and barbaric then.

Well, its the perfect solution!

A man kills someone, he goes to jail, gets released later and does it again, if he was put to death, he couldn't do it again.
It will also eliminate the over-crowding prison problem.
As said before, a very small amount of murders are purposely carried out and a lot are done on impulse by unlikely people. These people will have a microscopic chance of committing murder again, do they deserve to die?
The prisons aren't overcrowded because of murderers, about 3% is murders. The rest is tax evaders and bad drivers.

I totally agree.

If people can murder people, they must be prepared for the worst.
What about people who get sent to prison for these situations, do they deserve murder?:

An elderly woman has terminal cancer and is in constant pain. She asks him to end her life so he smothers her.
A woman is battered by her husband for years, she's too frightened to tell anyone so one day during an argument she loses herself, picks up a blunt object and smashes him around the head.
I can't be bothered to think of anymore.

Why do these people deserve death?

-:Undertaker:-
27-03-2008, 07:17 PM
People deserve death if they have killed someone else on purpose, i'd personally have no regrets on flicking the switch to watch the killer fry to death. I have no remorse at all for these evil people.

-Xiangu-
27-03-2008, 07:30 PM
I would rather it be a slow and painful death :)

myke
27-03-2008, 07:56 PM
No, two wrongs don't make a right. I disagree with anything like this, it makes you as bad as them. Life should mean life and nothing less.

The bible says:


"Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man."

This means that the dealth penalty is approved by the bible, and it can be seen in the old testament as it explains what deserves death and


"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth…"
This also supports it, however, surely. If this was to be the case, it'd be a never ending chain.
**** < Means Kills ****
Victim < Murderer < Executer < Executer (Because previous one killed someone) < Executer (same reason again) and thats a chain, it'd end up with no-one in the world.

Life should mean life.

Wig44.
27-03-2008, 08:03 PM
No, two wrongs don't make a right. I disagree with anything like this, it makes you as bad as them. Life should mean life and nothing less.

The bible says:


This means that the dealth penalty is approved by the bible, and it can be seen in the old testament as it explains what deserves death and


This also supports it, however, surely. If this was to be the case, it'd be a never ending chain.
**** < Means Kills ****
Victim < Murderer < Executer < Executer (Because previous one killed someone) < Executer (same reason again) and thats a chain, it'd end up with no-one in the world.

Life should mean life.



No. The old testament quotes are excellent but the way most people see murder is an unjustified killing. Victim < Murderer < Executer. The End.
An execution is a legal killing in justice and no one can execute the executer for executing a convict. However, the ways in which people are executed don't work. The idea is good, the practicality is not.

EDIT: And I just remembered, the death penalty is still allowed in England for treason. It's like getting thrown off a bridge or something.

-:Undertaker:-
27-03-2008, 08:07 PM
It doesn't make you as bad as them because they knew what could happen if they ruthlessly decide to kill someone. There is a difference between killing someone with a chainsaw in your house and someone being sent to death by a democratic court for a reason.

samsaBEAR
27-03-2008, 08:07 PM
i believe, like most people in this thread, that if someone takes a life their life should be taken. its fair.

Wig44.
27-03-2008, 08:10 PM
It doesn't make you as bad as them because they knew what could happen if they ruthlessly decide to kill someone. There is a difference between killing someone with a chainsaw in your house and someone being sent to death by a democratic court for a reason.

At last, someone who makes the distinction. But the problem is, getting the job done can be just as nasty as being brutally stabbed. Electric chair; Some people didn't die within a short period of being shocked, and sat in the chair aflame for a considerable period of time. Burning. Lethal injection: Given by non-medically qualified people (They have a snazzy name, which I don't remember) who can miss the veins and so the convict dies slowly in horrible pain for as long as 30 minutes. These are the two most used executions in the western countries that still allow it.

Nereo
27-03-2008, 08:16 PM
If you kill someone you dont deserve to live if you ask me:D

Virgin Mary
27-03-2008, 08:19 PM
I think they should be used to test drugs on. What a waste of human life otherwise. Besides that most people in prison sentenced for ages try and kill themselves anyway. I wouldn't give them the privilege of doing the job for them.

partie2
27-03-2008, 08:42 PM
I think that the death penalty should be brought back as I believe that if someone kills someone else for no good reason except for they are sick in the head then they dont deserve to live as they arent human. But people who are sentenced to death have to be on death row for many years incase any evidence comes up to show that they are innocent of any crimes.

But on the other hand..

I also think that why should someone who has killed be let of so easy to be given the death penalty, surely they should suffer more from the guilt and pain in which they have caused to others. They should be locked away for the rest of there lives with nothing special to entertain them so they can rot away in prison.

Slowpoke
27-03-2008, 08:55 PM
As long as it's a humane death then it's ok in my opinion. Yes, I know people mutilate and toture their victims before killing them but they must have some sort of mental problem, no human being can just do that surely.

By humane, I mean things like lethal injections. I would hate for hanging/electric chair/stoning etc to be brought back because the people who let things like that happen deserve to be put to death themselves.

-Xiangu-
27-03-2008, 08:57 PM
I think the best way would probably be torture :D Alot likke "hostel" to all the serial killers

Virgin Mary
27-03-2008, 09:06 PM
What about people who kill out of retribution, e.g. if someone kills their family they kill them?

jackass
27-03-2008, 10:13 PM
An eye for an eye would make everyone blind.
A stabbing for a stabbing would be justified.

Blue
27-03-2008, 10:22 PM
To be fair, some people have serious mental issues. Perhaps they're schizophrenic? One side of them is an aggresive maniac, the other wouldn't harm a fly.

Jellybeans
27-03-2008, 10:28 PM
if twas an accident then no death penalty..
if they killed someone on purpose then i think they should die tbf.
or serious torture then death
:]

Moh
27-03-2008, 10:34 PM
If there's enough evidence to prove that they committed the murder, then yes, there life should be took.

Colin-Roberts
27-03-2008, 11:01 PM
it's cheaper to keep people in prison for life then kill them by death penalty.

bo$$
27-03-2008, 11:09 PM
Wrong.
Put them into the army rather then sentence them to death.
Let OG KILLA from the streets show how hard he really is.

Redacted
27-03-2008, 11:10 PM
What about people who kill out of retribution, e.g. if someone kills their family they kill them?



How would they kill them, If there already dead, From death penalty.


Owned

Virgin Mary
27-03-2008, 11:23 PM
How would they kill them, If there already dead, From death penalty.


Owned
Because they decided to take it upon themselves to kill that person.

@xP
28-03-2008, 12:31 AM
Sometimes, criminals change when they are in prison for such a long period of time. Sometimes, criminals get sentanced to death even though they didn't commit the crime. Police sometimes make mistakes and can never be certain.

However i don't agree with it if the death is immediate. I like it the way it is in the USA as they have death row which gives the police enough time to be 100% certain before they kill the criminal.

Naythi.
28-03-2008, 09:51 AM
I dont know because, if you think about it..

Some people do get convicted of things and crimes they actualy have not done.
Some people would be wrongly murdered then.

People like that man who mudered Holly And Jessica, Ian Huntley? Or somebody.. He should of been murdered way before now.

-:Undertaker:-
28-03-2008, 05:13 PM
it's cheaper to keep people in prison for life then kill them by death penalty.

It isn't.

It was recently discovered that convicts have £8 spent on their meals in prision and people in hospital only get £3 spent on it.

RedStratocas
28-03-2008, 06:03 PM
im against it. not because of the hypocracy (although it is a valid point) but because of the surprisingly large amount of innocent people that get put to death. plus, killing someone doest prove anything. people commit crimes and don't think about the consequences. before a person stabs someone, they don't think "if i stab them once, that's 5 years, twice that's 10, if i kill him i'm going to die." so it really doesnt make people think twice about committing crimes.

also, the death-worthy crimes are so inconsistent. you can kill one person and get fried, but you can also kill 5 people and get life in prison.

Hushie
28-03-2008, 06:18 PM
No way. What gives anyone the right to take someone else's life. And what if that person had been wrongly convicted or framed? Ever seen the green mile? Look at some of the horrible ways those people died, like the man burning for about a minute after. It just seems horrible to take someone else's life.




This means that the dealth penalty is approved by the bible, and it can be seen in the old testament as it explains what deserves death



^
|

That's better evidence that we shouldn't bring it back. ;)
Since the bible is such a fake.
Not just my opinion either, has quite a few flaws. BTW that's not being disrespectful to anyone,just to make sure I don't get infracted for saying that.

jackass
28-03-2008, 06:36 PM
Since the bible is such a fake.

Prove it.

Dan2nd
28-03-2008, 07:13 PM
I think any civilised country should not have death as a punishment.... and the last man who was ever sentenced to death in the UK was later found innocent =l

Hushie
28-03-2008, 07:19 PM
Prove it.
I'm not gonna go into it all right know. But check around the internet. And that's my opinion anyway. You prove it's not. Gonna be harder for you then me :)

jackass
28-03-2008, 07:48 PM
I'm not gonna go into it all right know. But check around the internet. And that's my opinion anyway. You prove it's not. Gonna be harder for you then me :)

All around the internet? Deary me, you are naive.

Wig44.
28-03-2008, 08:38 PM
BTW zobex, it is only the old testament that agrees with a life for a life, not the new testament.

-:Undertaker:-
28-03-2008, 08:46 PM
No way. What gives anyone the right to take someone else's life. And what if that person had been wrongly convicted or framed? Ever seen the green mile? Look at some of the horrible ways those people died, like the man burning for about a minute after. It just seems horrible to take someone else's life.



^
|

That's better evidence that we shouldn't bring it back. ;)
Since the bible is such a fake.
Not just my opinion either, has quite a few flaws. BTW that's not being disrespectful to anyone,just to make sure I don't get infracted for saying that.

The Green Mile is a) a movie & b) set in the 1920's/1950's when DNA didn't exist. The right for a state to take someones life is pretty simple. You take someone's life = you lose yours. It's called justice.

The man burning was because Percy didn't wet the sponge, normal electric chair isn't like that.


I think any civilised country should not have death as a punishment.... and the last man who was ever sentenced to death in the UK was later found innocent =l

DNA wasn't around then so I think the death punishment should only be used in CLEAR cases of where DNA evidence is undisputable.

Hushie
28-03-2008, 10:17 PM
The Green Mile is a) a movie & b) set in the 1920's/1950's when DNA didn't exist. The right for a state to take someones life is pretty simple. You take someone's life = you lose yours. It's called justice.

The man burning was because Percy didn't wet the sponge, normal electric chair isn't like that.
.


I realized it was a movie.:D
Besides people could still not wet the sponge if they felt like it. (Although it's highly improbable that scene was sick)
And DNA can be planted :)


All around the internet? Deary me, you are naive.

Not as naive as believing theres a big man in the sky. ;)
And obviously theres gonna be people on the internet who believe in God. Your trying to imply I meant that everyone on the internet doesn't believe in the bible, when I blatantly wasn't, I was saying look on the internet for evidence.

Virgin Mary
29-03-2008, 12:02 AM
I doubt it'd curb crime, people who commits crimes, especially murder, don't plan on being caught.

jackass
29-03-2008, 12:07 AM
Not as naive as believing theres a big man in the sky. ;)
And obviously theres gonna be people on the internet who believe in God. Your trying to imply I meant that everyone on the internet doesn't believe in the bible, when I blatantly wasn't, I was saying look on the internet for evidence.

Its not technically a "big man in the sky", God can be a symbol.

And, look around the internet for evidence. I could say a LOT of things to that, but i'll say one thing, there is no evidence whatsoever for ANYTHING that can prove that something is not real.

Hushie
29-03-2008, 07:30 AM
Its not technically a "big man in the sky", God can be a symbol.

And, look around the internet for evidence. I could say a LOT of things to that, but i'll say one thing, there is no evidence whatsoever for ANYTHING that can prove that something is not real.

:rolleyes: I was talking about evidence the bible isn't true.

Some things that aren't real:

The Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause & The Easter Bunny

God is like them for older people.

Bomb-Head
30-03-2008, 07:34 PM
People deserve death if they have killed someone else on purpose, i'd personally have no regrets on flicking the switch to watch the killer fry to death. I have no remorse at all for these evil people.

But what if they turned out to be innocent once they had been killed?

-:Undertaker:-
30-03-2008, 07:37 PM
But what if they turned out to be innocent once they had been killed?

As I have said in the past, there should be degree's of murder. Death should only be used in cases were the evidence is undisputable, eg; 10 people saw the man cutting a random man up with a chainsaw.

jackass
30-03-2008, 07:44 PM
:rolleyes: I was talking about evidence the bible isn't true.

Some things that aren't real:

The Tooth Fairy, Santa Clause & The Easter Bunny

God is like them for older people.

Fine, i'm just going to act like you.

Things that are real:

Computers, Food & Water.

God is like those for older people. :rolleyes:

alexxxxx
30-03-2008, 07:50 PM
i'm against the death penalty under every circumstance. because someone has killed someone doesn't make it right for the country to kill them.

leah
30-03-2008, 07:56 PM
I think that there shouldn't be a death penalty, purely incase someone gets killed for a crime they didn't commit. Most people would rather die, quickly and painless than have to spend so many years in prison, I do however think that crimes such as Rape or Murder desearve FULL life sentences in prison instead of going in for about 5 years and coming out again. =/

-:Undertaker:-
30-03-2008, 08:42 PM
;4604452']i'm against the death penalty under every circumstance. because someone has killed someone doesn't make it right for the country to kill them.

Then surely it should be up to the family of the victim to decide life or death. Two wrongs do make a right.


I think that there shouldn't be a death penalty, purely incase someone gets killed for a crime they didn't commit. Most people would rather die, quickly and painless than have to spend so many years in prison, I do however think that crimes such as Rape or Murder desearve FULL life sentences in prison instead of going in for about 5 years and coming out again. =/

Prisions in Britain are like holiday camps, a prisoner even said himself to Jack Straw a few weeks back.

Hushie
30-03-2008, 09:26 PM
Fine, i'm just going to act like you.

Things that are real:

Computers, Food & Water.

God is like those for older people. :rolleyes:


there is no evidence whatsoever for ANYTHING that can prove that something is not real.

I was pointing out some things that there is tonnes of evidence that they aren't real. ;)

What a silly reply by you.

jackass
30-03-2008, 09:47 PM
I was pointing out some things that there is tonnes of evidence that they aren't real. ;)

What a silly reply by you.

Oh course.

Mine are silly, yet saying "look on the INTERNET for proof that God isn't real" isn't silly?

I can see your logic is perfect. :rolleyes:

fweggy
30-03-2008, 09:50 PM
Its right for paedofiles who rape and kill young children, and for mass-murderers

Its fair judgement

Tiked
30-03-2008, 10:07 PM
An eye for an eye. People should be treated the same way they have treated someone else. Murder = death penalty, Theft = paid out of theives pocket etc.

I complete agree with Everlong here, the right punishment should be whatever you did, not 10 years for murder.

RedStratocas
30-03-2008, 11:37 PM
I complete agree with Everlong here, the right punishment should be whatever you did, not 10 years for murder.

what about drugs?

Thetan
13-04-2008, 06:32 PM
In my opinion, nobody can decide whether somebody gets to live. Life in prison is fine, most people probably don't want to live with themselves anyway.

Like for a rapist, or a pedofile, a good punishment is to cut off their genitalia, and spend time in prison. For murder, you spend life in prison.

ToxicPaddy
14-04-2008, 03:46 PM
I say NO to the death penalty. Killing them wont bring the victim back and I cant see how it will make anyone feel better, life imprisonment is fine :)

jackass
15-04-2008, 07:08 PM
I say NO to the death penalty. Killing them wont bring the victim back and I cant see how it will make anyone feel better, life imprisonment is fine :)

If someone killed my family, it would make me feel a damn lot better if he got put to death.

blackops121
15-04-2008, 07:12 PM
i totally! agree with the death penalty, i mean if someone can murder someone why should there lifes be spared? they can kill why shouldnt they die? they should have thought about what there doing and know the consiquences.

Murderers= Death Penalty

ToxicPaddy
15-04-2008, 07:28 PM
Ok so I know what you mean saying it would make you feel better, but if you ask yourself a few years later that it put a 'closure' to the situation, would it? Probably not. And what about the relatives of the person being executed, what about them? They would feel awful aswell.

Virgin Mary
16-04-2008, 08:13 AM
i totally! agree with the death penalty, i mean if someone can murder someone why should there lifes be spared? they can kill why shouldnt they die? they should have thought about what there doing and know the consiquences.

Murderers= Death Penalty
Because it's hypocritical to kill someone for killing someone else. Furthermore, murderers generally don't think about what they're doing, nor do they intend to get caught.

RedStratocas
16-04-2008, 11:30 AM
people really need to read this whole thread. the same argument has been said over and over for the death penalty. you have to look at it a bit deeper than "if someone kills someone, they should die too." there's waaaaaay more to it than that, such as:

- a surprising amount of innocent people who get put to death
- the fact that it doesnt teach criminals anything. (criminals always think they're going to get away with it, so they don't think of the consequences)
- the inconsistencies in the system (as in one person can be put to death for killing one person, but someone else could kill five people and not be put to death)

Asher
16-04-2008, 12:14 PM
Prison is by far the worst punishment. Death is an escape rope for them.

jackass
16-04-2008, 04:07 PM
Prison is by far the worst punishment. Death is an escape rope for them.

I don't agree. Some prisons have there own TVs, pool/snooker tables and nice proper meals. I've been to one!

I think prisons should be all grey and dull. Hard beds, stone floor/walls and bread and water for meals.

Achieve
18-04-2008, 09:52 AM
http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=477351

If you go into that thread and click the youtube video (it links to a Sky news article showing two people getting attacked and one getting stabbed to death, just to warn you) and the fact that they are allowed out in atleast 5 years is absolutely sickening. We shouldn't be housing these criminals, we should be weeding them out with the necessary deterrents or the necessary punishments. Which in my opinion for the people in the video, should be the implementation of the death penalty.

If there is evidence to support that it was said person who commited a serious crime (such as murder) then I believe that they should be put to death. Whereas if they were drunk and they killed someone they should be put in jail for a few years. Even if they didn't do it purposely, a life was still lost by them, justice should be implemented. Getting smashed isn't an excuse for commiting a crime.

My two pence on the subject. :)

mantora
21-04-2008, 06:03 PM
The people that kill little childeren the deserve to die.

JackBuddy
21-04-2008, 07:35 PM
I don't care about human rights when it comes to criminals, they don't deserve any.

ToxicPaddy
21-04-2008, 08:11 PM
The people that kill little childeren the deserve to die.

Only the people the kill the children die? So your saying the adults and others who get murdered aren't as important?

--ss--
21-04-2008, 08:17 PM
I'm pretty sure there was already an official debate about this at one point when Sadam Hussain got hanged but I guess I can repeat what I said :P

There is soo much irony regarding the death penalty seeing as the person is getting killed for killing another person even though they are going to be doing the exact same thing.

But I also agree with Jack about criminals not deserving any human rights as they don't care about others and will most likely re-offend so why should we give a toss about them if they're going to just wreck and harm the community.

24
21-04-2008, 08:25 PM
- a surprising amount of innocent people who get put to death.

I agree, evidence which is first brought up when the case begins can later be found to be flawed or false. But if someone's sentenced and put to death, then the evidence is deemed inaccurate its a bit late then isnt it and some innocent persons been killed.
Man should not do Gods work.

Sulai
20-05-2008, 09:23 PM
the death penalty should be re-introduced in the UK, but only the sickest people should be killed. for example: pedophiles, racists and serial and single murderers.

StickMan
21-05-2008, 01:48 AM
What would you feel if your'e the one executing the person?, I mean, could you live with that?, and what if he is innocent and doesn't have the money to pay a private lawyer, and he is innocent?

I mean, this is not a question that can be answered yes so quickly, I wouldn't be able to live if I kill anyone, NO ONE IN EARTH IS GOD TO DECIDE WHO LIVES OR WHO DIE'S.

Dan/

Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!