The death penalty for certain crimes?

[Triz]

The death penalty is an appropriate penalty for certain crimes?


There are still a fair few countries who have the death penalty and use it on people who have committed murder, rape or terrorism.
However here in the UK, the death penalty was suspended in 1965 and completely abolished in 1969.

Do you think that some crimes are worth taking a persons life for, or do you believe it's wrong to end someones life no matter what they've done.

Prisons are designed for rehabilitation, not just to lock someone up until they've done their time. Prisoners must work, they do all the jobs required to keep the prison running, such as laundry, cooking, gardening etc.. However if someone is serving 2 life sentences for a crime and has no chance on being released early at all, would you argue that there is no point them living when all they are doing is surviving until death, or does everyone have a chance to live and a chance for rehabilitation, even if they'll never make it to the outside again.


What are your thoughts?

THIS DEBATE ENDS ON THE 4th JANUARY

For more information on the debate guidelines and how to win prizes see the guidelines thread here

[Triz]

This debate is now open!

[-:Undertaker:-]

I fully support the death penalty and would gladly pull the lever on murderers to have them drop through the gallows.

When the death penalty was abolished in Britain, going against public opinion, the public were promised by the liberal political elite that life sentences would mean life. That was evidently a lie, and prison sentences have continued to get softer whilst prisons themselves have also gotten softer. If the issue were put to a referendum in 2019, I genuinely believe it would win and be restored.

Is the life of an innocent worth 25 years in a soft prison loaded with drugs, which they then walk free from? I say let them swing.

[Triz]

I fully support the death penalty and would gladly pull the lever on murderers to have them drop through the gallows.

When the death penalty was abolished in Britain, going against public opinion, the public were promised by the liberal political elite that life sentences would mean life. That was evidently a lie, and prison sentences have continued to get softer whilst prisons themselves have also gotten softer. If the issue were put to a referendum in 2019, I genuinely believe it would win and be restored.

Is the life of an innocent worth 25 years in a soft prison loaded with drugs, which they then walk free from? I say let them swing.

I know this is rare, but it still happens nevertheless; what about people who are framed for murder or wrongly accused. There have been cases where innocent people are serving years behind bars to then be finally proved innocent. If the death penalty existed then that person would have been killed for a crime they did not commit, however since that person would have died via injection (probably a mere few months after the initial crime) there obviously would been no lawyer fighting their case to prove them innocent after their death, thus no one would actually know that an innocent person got the death penalty. Meaning statistics of how many people are wrongly put on death row would be impossible to estimate. - At least when people get many years in prison, they have a small glimmer of hope that they can continue their lives on the outside either when their sentence ends, or if they ever get proved innocent.

I know prison isn't exactly the best rehabilitation place in the world, but would you not argue that if someone commits murder at the age of 18 for example and serves 25 years behind bars for a crime that happened in the heat of the moment at a young age... That after those 25 years at the age of 43, having never experienced adult life outside of prison and having never caused any trouble in prison, that they deserve a second chance of this 1 life that they get?

or would you argue that the person they killed didn't get a second chance so why should they? - I get that argument too. I think prisons are far too overcrowded and costly to actually enforce life in prison, but I think if someone killed someone I loved and I then saw them out on the streets as a free person years later I wouldn't think it was right, knowing they get to enjoy their life whilst I'm still grieving the loss of the person they had killed. Yet at the same time death is the easy way out, I think I'd personally want to know that the person that murdered my loved one is having a miserable life for the rest of their life, rather than to have an injection and to take the easy way out, but I'm sure in the heat of the moment, I'd wish death upon them rather than a life of misery (Even if life meant life) but I know that revenge doesn't solve issues.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I know this is rare, but it still happens nevertheless; what about people who are framed for murder or wrongly accused. There have been cases where innocent people are serving years behind bars to then be finally proved innocent. If the death penalty existed then that person would have been killed for a crime they did not commit, however since that person would have died via injection (probably a mere few months after the initial crime) there obviously would been no lawyer fighting their case to prove them innocent after their death, thus no one would actually know that an innocent person got the death penalty. Meaning statistics of how many people are wrongly put on death row would be impossible to estimate. - At least when people get many years in prison, they have a small glimmer of hope that they can continue their lives on the outside either when their sentence ends, or if they ever get proved innocent.

America and Japan both practice the death penalty and this is rarely an issue. We don't argue for the abolition of the Armed Forces just because innocent people will inevitably die or the abolition of hospital treatment just because some Doctors (Dr Harold Shipman) may use it as a way to kill people. If anything, you're much safer from being wrongfully killed with the death penalty due to the trial, number of appeals and so on.

I would also use your argument below about rehabilitation against your logic here. By embracing rehabilitation for murderers, we can safely assume that a handful at least of them will go on to re-offend again, resulting in more murders. Now, what is better? The death penalty for murder with all the safeguards that includes, or rehabilitation where people will be killed without safeguards?

I know prison isn't exactly the best rehabilitation place in the world, but would you not argue that if someone commits murder at the age of 18 for example and serves 25 years behind bars for a crime that happened in the heat of the moment at a young age... That after those 25 years at the age of 43, having never experienced adult life outside of prison and having never caused any trouble in prison, that they deserve a second chance of this 1 life that they get?

Would you like a convicted and released murderer living on your street? Or next door to your Grandmother?

or would you argue that the person they killed didn't get a second chance so why should they? - I get that argument too. I think prisons are far too overcrowded and costly to actually enforce life in prison, but I think if someone killed someone I loved and I then saw them out on the streets as a free person years later I wouldn't think it was right, knowing they get to enjoy their life whilst I'm still grieving the loss of the person they had killed.

Britain spent £4.56bn on prisons last year, whilst wasting £14bn in foreign aid and £10bn to the EU. We can afford it.

Yet at the same time death is the easy way out, I think I'd personally want to know that the person that murdered my loved one is having a miserable life for the rest of their life, rather than to have an injection and to take the easy way out, but I'm sure in the heat of the moment, I'd wish death upon them rather than a life of misery (Even if life meant life) but I know that revenge doesn't solve issues.

British prisons are hardly a life of misery though, are they?

I disagree on revenge. Death solves a great many of problems - had Hitler been killed in the 1944 attempt on his life, the war would likely have come to an early close. Had Ian Brady been executed shortly after conviction, his victims families would have avoided years of having to endure constant taunts and jibes from the monster who killed their children. Evil ought to be snuffed out wherever it is found.

[Triz]

America and Japan both practice the death penalty and this is rarely an issue. We don't argue for the abolition of the Armed Forces just because innocent people will inevitably die or the abolition of hospital treatment just because some Doctors (Dr Harold Shipman) may use it as a way to kill people. If anything, you're much safer from being wrongfully killed with the death penalty due to the trial, number of appeals and so on.


I would also use your argument below about rehabilitation against your logic here. By embracing rehabilitation for murderers, we can safely assume that a handful at least of them will go on to re-offend again, resulting in more murders. Now, what is better? The death penalty for murder with all the safeguards that includes, or rehabilitation where people will be killed without safeguards?

True, didn't think of it like that, but I guess this is where it'll come down to whether or not you or someone else is being wrongfully accused... If it was your mum/dad or even you being wrongfully accused for murder and are going to be put on death row, I'm sure you'll then be against the death penalty, as I'm sure you wouldn't just accept it, and be like "It's okay, statistically wrongful death penalties will happen, this is the price we innocent people have to pay once in a while to ensure maximum safety of others"

Just like the innocent people who are accidentally killed during wars, it's okay to sit from afar and say that statistically it'll happen; it's for the greater good, but I imagine if it was our families who had died, we wouldn't quite feel the same.

Would you like a convicted and released murderer living on your street? Or next door to your Grandmother?

Well I live in an up-market type of place, so if someone who has been in jail ends up down my street then they've clearly turned their life around. However assuming I live in a council house in a beat up area, then I'd probably be less happy about the idea if I had kids, but since I don't; I can't say I'd care to be honest, most victims of murder aren't random kills, and since I keep to myself, I'm sure I'd be fine lol.

Britain spent £4.56bn on prisons last year, whilst wasting £14bn in foreign aid and £10bn to the EU. We can afford it.

Oh damn, I did not know this. Maybe we can afford it then, and actually spend more money in training guards and security to ensure contraband like drugs and whatnot never find their way into prisons.

British prisons are hardly a life of misery though, are they?

Worse than other prisons, I've seen prisons in places like Sweden, that pretty much look like a dorm room for a student. A rather nice place to live, but then again prison is SUPPOSED to be about rehabilitation, whereas the majority of people these days seem to think it's supposed to be a miserable place where bad people go so they stop being bad in fear of going back to that place.

At least that's what it's supposed to do, I think these days it's more so the latter than anything else.

I disagree on revenge. Death solves a great many of problems - had Hitler been killed in the 1944 attempt on his life, the war would likely have come to an early close. Had Ian Brady been executed shortly after conviction, his victims families would have avoided years of having to endure constant taunts and jibes from the monster who killed their children. Evil ought to be snuffed out wherever it is found.

I think it does immediately after, if someone had killed my brother for example, I'd want them dead, and will feel a great relief once they are dead.. However I'm fairly sure thinking by logic that I'd rather they spend their whole life locked up, unable to do the things they want, forever a prisoner confined to 1 building for the rest of their days, eat, sleep, work, repeat, no fun, no holidays, simply surviving until death... However yeah, that opinion would change if after 20 years, they get released, then I'd want them dead... The feeling of revenge would come back. So personally that'll only work for me (at least in logic) if a life sentence really is for life.