Death penalty for child killers

by , 14 May 2013

Some despicable man has just been put in prison for killing a child where the verdict is 100per cent guilty should we bring the the death penalty back

Responses

add your response here

havent you heard of karma, prison is a dangerous place to be, he should be very afraid being in prison under those circumstances

by mtiger, 14 May 2013

unfortunately mtiger, because of that risk they normally place them in secure areas with like killers to reduce anything happening.

and i've said before i'm in favour of corporal and capital punishment.

by paul38, 14 May 2013

Here here Paul

by Baggers, 14 May 2013

Prisoners are very resourceful as are prison guards, they too are sickened by some crimes and have, in the past, been known to turn a blind eye to peer retribution.

by Parchester, 14 May 2013

My feelings, and the answer to this post, is that he we have a despicable individual found guilty of killing a child. Not only found guilty, but admitted to doing so.

Apart from having his liberty taken away from him, he will serve his time in prison, never worry about another energy bill, being able to feed himself and the cost of living. Never worrying about keeping himself warm, or his medical welfare.

On top of that it is my understanding that it costs approximately £800 pounds per week to keeping him there, times that by the 38yrs (Plus inflation) of his sentence if he lives that long, then ask yourself the question again.

Then ask yourself about the elderly who can't keep themselves warm, those living in poverty, who find it hard to survive in today's measures of austerity. Those who will lose their homes, due to losing their employment for no fault of their own, I could go on.

I feel we must realize, that we are not living in a bygone age, we have excellent forensic science with DNA testing.
When we consider that not even identical twins have the same DNA it would be highly unlikely that anyone now to be charged, with murder, if such forensic evidence was offered would be innocent.

I do have thoughts on the death sentence, but would not like to publish my thoughts on the site. I have asked myself the question, based mainly on what I've written above,

by akille, 15 May 2013

That's very thought-provoking stuff, akile and I can see exactly where you're coming from.

But it's precisely because we are not living in a bygone age that I could never support the death penalty.

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

thanks feline,

As you will have seen, I deliberately never answered the question, I only said of the circumstances that I would ask myself the question.

It is very much an individual decision, and I will be very interested to see how this post pans out. But as in all posts that appear here on this forum everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I respectfully accept yours

.Regards Robert

by akille, 15 May 2013

Prison can be a dangerous place however vermin such as this are given the protection of being into a segregation wing where other inmates cant get at them.

by Noddy1, 15 May 2013

Other inmates are not sanctioned by law to inflict physical punishments on a prisoner. You seem upset that prison staff would place someone beyond the reach of such bullies.

by JSL, 15 May 2013
add a comment

No from me too, one innocent person put to death is one too many.

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013

i agree with you fruits, that is why i say beyond all doubt.

here is something to ponder! if it was a choice between the execution of a murderer or that murderer going on to kill 4 or 5 more innocent people at a later date, what would be your answer then?

by paul38, 15 May 2013

In certain cases, advances in DNA would eradicate miscarriages of justice.

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

It still doesn't make it right to take a human life......

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

i think we will have to agree to disagree on this one 123.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

I agree with Feline, if you take someone's life because that person took a life, you are guilty of the exact same thing. And how can anyone possibly know for sure that a killer will kill again...? So my answer would be the same, paul.

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013

this is one of those topics where everyone has their own view, and i can appreciate yours.

maybe another way would be to put them in a chamber with no doors or windows just a slot to give them bread and water for the rest of their life.

sorry i have no time for anyone who takes another persons life for no reason other than for their own gain

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Didn't we try that method in the Middle Ages? The oubliette? A hole in a castle dungeon to drop people into? Even in the US states which retain the death penalty they use methods such as lethal injection, rather than slow starvation. Let's not get justice confused with vengeance.

I have no time for such people either, but I think I am better than wanting to sink to their level.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

i would prefer the death penalty jsl, it was just my alternative for anyone against the death penalty, it was their choice to commit murder

and i didn't know about the oubliette, thanks always learning no matter what age

by paul38, 15 May 2013

You are welcome paul. However, I don't really think it's an alternative. It's just a slower death sentence. You can't survive long on just bread and water, surely?

by JSL, 15 May 2013

I rather think you could survive for longer than you might expect, JSL. But you are quite right in saying that it would still be a death sentence, just a slower and less humane one. So my answer is still 'No'.

Some people seem to misunderstand the point of the prison system in a modern, civilised society.

In my view, it exists to penalise criminals by depriving them of their liberty, not to subject them to pain and/or humiliation, indignity, et al.

But what do I know? I'm just one of those pesky do-gooders.

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

If we don't punish people first then we can never rehabilitate them.

People have to know that there are serious consequences for their actions and choices. Denial of liberty has shown it isn't enough in itself to affect change.

I don't mean this in the religious sense but there has to be some punishment, followed by redemption, before people earn their rehabilitation.

Better to be a do-gooder than a do-eviler!!

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

the problem is prison no longer deters, it has been made too comfortable.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Prison just needs to be much tougher, then it would act as a deterrent for most.

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013

The noose didn't deter criminals and killers either, did it? Otherwise there would have been virtually no crime before the abolition of capital punishment...

by JSL, 15 May 2013

that can't actually be proved jsl as it could have been 10 or 20 times worse, i still believe the cat of nine tails would reduce crime levels significantly as since the isle of man ceased it's use crime has soared on the island.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Well that's a tough one to argue against. As it's a purely hypothetical argument about what might or might not have been, we could be right, we could be wrong. On the Isle of Man point though, I'd need to see some statistics to back up your case.

Wasn't it the Birch they used on the Isle of Man?

by JSL, 15 May 2013

the last time the cat of nine tails was used on the isle of man was 1976

by paul38, 16 May 2013

Cripes, paul - how barbaric!

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

it worked though 123.

sorry 123 they weren't real cats tails as manx cats don't have tails,hmmmmm iwonder if thats why lol

by paul38, 16 May 2013

I'll have to reserve judgement on that one.

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

It was, in fact, birching paul. I found an informative article. http://www.corpun.com/manx.htm

by JSL, 16 May 2013

Cripes!

by Feline123, 16 May 2013
add a comment

No. If you bought it back for child killers it would have to be bought back for all murderers. I don't support capital punishment.

by Sidesalad, 15 May 2013

We seem to have a bit of a male-female split here.......

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

i think it has something to do with the mothering instinct 123, :-))

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Careful Paul! One could just say that it is humanity.

by Sidesalad, 15 May 2013

you could be right but then again being humane could be the cause of increased inhumane acts ss, so i'm a great believer in eye for an eye

by paul38, 15 May 2013

I have no 'mothering instinct' paul, and SS is right.

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

you have your pussies 123, :-))

by paul38, 15 May 2013

I've told you before, paul, they're cats. Very much loved, but not children. '-))

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

just pulling your leg 123 lol, unfortunately whether we consciously or unconsciously use these traits they are part of our genetic makeup

by paul38, 15 May 2013
add a comment

Just popped back in time to see the finale of this season of Dr Who, and what do I find? Feline, SS and fruits left to refute the weary arguments of those with a medieval view of 'justice'! Come on Parchy, get off the fence and give the girls a hand, my old mate.

To pick up on just a few points: Baggers asked if we should bring back the death penalty. Pity he couldn't ask Derek Bentley that one, eh fruits? For child-killers only? Some psychopath would work out that if you kidnap young victims and keep them in the cellar for long enough they eventually become adults... Not a good outcome Baggers?

Akille slid over 'taking his liberty' as though being banged up for 38 years was an all-inclusive holiday. And even though the expense of keeping a prisoner for that length of time amounts to something like 1.5 million pounds, doling it out at £800 a week isn't going to help many elderly or unemployed people across the UK, is it?

Paul38 isn't going to convince The Sisters by being patronising about maternal instincts, right feline? Right SS?

Never mind quoting biblical references about an eye for an eye - what about 'Thou shalt not kill'? If someone murders another person does that give believers (I don't claim to be one) the right to put God's word 'on hold' while they endorse a temporary suspension of that commandment?

Come on you guys with all the testosterone, torches, and farm implements... Let's hear something a bit better thought out.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

Wey-hey - well said JSL!

by Sidesalad, 15 May 2013

Couldn't have put it better, Sis!!!!!!

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

Exactly, JSL! :-)

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013

i would never try to convince anyone jsl, these are just my feelings on the subject, everyone is entitled to that and i believe the sisters know that.
it is also no good quoting the bible at me because i'm an atheist, i only used the quote because it was relevant to the discussion.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Hi, paul. I knew this discussion would get a bit heated, but it's bloody interesting!

Of course we're all entitled to our views, that's what makes this forum so good, and I'm sure JSL wasn't having a go at you, he was just answering your points from his view. x

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

I only quoted it back because it was relevant to the discussion.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

i know he wasn't and i haven't taken offence 123, sorry if my reply sounded like it jsl.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

xxx

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

No worries, paul. It's been a lively one, though!

by JSL, 15 May 2013

yep, i do enjoy them as the sisters can confirm LOL

by paul38, 16 May 2013

Grin!

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

see what i mean jsl :-))

by paul38, 16 May 2013

You're incorrigible, paul! ;-))

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

ya know i love it ;-))

by paul38, 16 May 2013

Go to bed, you've got an early start in the morning! ;-))

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

just about to go catch ya later x

by paul38, 16 May 2013
add a comment

I kind of agree with the death penalty when there's absolutely no chance of the person being innocent (except for 'acts of passion'), and not just for child killing.

Of course, the problem is, how can you ever be 100% sure?

by G-Man, 15 May 2013

My point, exactly, G-Man!

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

Exactly, G-Man, they were 'sure' about Derek Bentley, and they ended up taking away an innocent young man's life.

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013

Well I've some rubbish comments here about this as gman put it when there's no chance of the person being innocent I e when they admit to the crime they should be a law that. Includes the death penalty there seems to be a lot of dogooders here

by Baggers, 15 May 2013

I wondered how long it would be before someone used the expression 'dogooder'! What is actually wrong with wanting to do good rather than bad???

What are the rubbish comments, Baggers?

I certainly accept that there are times when someone is obviously guilty. You want to kill them. I'd certainly feel that way if one of my family was murdered. While I am not emotionally involved, I am able to make a rational choice. I want murderers locked up, some of them forever. Are you prepared to kill someone in cold blood as an executioner for the State? I'm not.

Is that the difference between us, when it comes down to the final analysis, Baggers?

by JSL, 15 May 2013

there is nothing wrong in wanting to do good, the problem is when as happens most of the time the person the dogooder is trying to help deliberately takes advantage of the situation and then goes out and does it again, and what does the dogooder say oh it is probably their the way they were bought up or oh they had a bad childhood, there are hundreds of thousands that grew up the same way and never do a thing wrong in their life.

by paul38, 15 May 2013

It's not about being a 'dogooder' or not beng a 'dogooder', it's an ethical stance. I personally don't believe in taking someone else's life, I think it's wrong.....that doesn't make me a 'dogooder', it's just what I believe is morally right. I'm not religious in any way at all.

by fruitcake, 15 May 2013
add a comment

I'm in no way sitting on the fence. I thought we were debating an issue.

I am stating fact that with new advances in scientific and medical analysis the likelihood of a miscarriage of justice is considerably eradicated. This is the reason many use as to why we shouldn't reinstate the death penalty.

I don't think we need to cite past miscarriages of justice as reason for not debating the death penalty in the modern era. Derek Bentley (mental disability) and Ruth Ellis (a crime borne of emotional abuse) would not happen in the modern era.

Arguments based upon humanity and morality are dubious, as we live in a society that picks and choses its principles, morality and humanity based upon greed and need.

America, China and other nations that we trade and have diplomatic relations with have appalling human rights records, each have the judicial process of capital punishment and yet we continue to deal with them out of economic expediency.

If your opposed to capital punishment then show it.

I understand that this question is brought up time and again after some brutal or barbaric act that repulses and sickens a nation. I believe it is borne of a frustration at our judicial system, where many see prison and an all too lenient sentencing policy as not a measured response to the premeditated crime.

Our prisons deny people their liberty but also offer many a better standard of living than if the person serving their sentence had remained at liberty.

When I worked in social care, it never ceased to amaze me that young offenders repeatedly committed crime, after their release, in order to be returned to an institution that offered them a structure, routine, discipline, free bed and board, warmth and rewards for good behaviour. Many of the things they didn't experience in the outside world. It may have denied them their liberty but this was a price worth paying and they were at ease with this!

The death penalty debate is one that will go on and on and will forever be fueled by a judicial system where there is no perceived deterrent.

Sadly, with three needless murders of young people, in London, in as many days, it seems we live in a society where life is cheap. Where the value of a life and its sanctity is replaced with people in gangs attempting to win status and kudos in the eyes of others.

Until we have some harsher deterrent, something that makes people seriously think about the consequences of their actions, prior to taking another human life, then the debate will rage on.

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

Thanks Parchester! Sorry if I was prodding you a bit. As usual you are reasoned and informed. Your comments are far more valid than many others written on this topic, and yet you don't seem to be publicly committed to either side of an 'all or nothing' solution. 'Come off the fence' was an invitation, not an accusation.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

No offence taken.

I know what you were up to you sly old goat (no offence meant!)!

With freedom comes responsibility but how as a society do we deal with people who abdicate that responsibility?

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

Who's a sly old goat now? That is an over-arching question which you have posed. It takes in a topic such as the death penalty and goes beyond it.

Right now we deal with people who abdicate their responsibilities to our reasonably-free society in a variety of different ways. Informally, we can apply peer pressure, or name and shame. We can, if we don't think that we are abdicating our responsibility to society, give them a good kicking or put dog crap through their letter boxes.

Formally, judicially, we have options from fines to life sentences, and all forms of punishment and/or rehabilitation in between. I think that by asking how we respond you are referring to this arena - correct?

It seems to me that you have exposed some of the weaknesses in our legal systems, and you are asking if there are better ways to deal with those who choose not to 'toe the line' observed by most normal, law-abiding citizens.

Undoubtedly there are better ways. Disregarding the inevitable cries of 'string them up' and 'chop off their goolies', I'd be happy to throw open the wider debate to our friends on the forum. I'd like you to share some of your suggestions too.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

Therein lies my frustration as I don't have answers and I haven't formulated a true response.

I am all for behaviour modification approaches to affect change. However, my immediate response is very draconian and I need to go away and think this through more.

However, peer pressure and shared responsibility has to be at the heart of affecting change. People must feel that they too have something to lose in allowing this behaviour to continue.

We tend to have created a blameless society. People look to apportion and excuse blame by pointing the finger at others and it becomes all too easy to abdicate responsibility for our actions because my action was caused by another.

Having spoken with some inmates, incarceration for them isn't about punishment but about hiding away from the realities of life as it is lived by millions. Prison is an escape, it frees some from the brutality of uncertainty and allows them to enter a world of known security.

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

A thought provoking reply, as ever, from Parch, from which I will select one point with which to disagree, before spending more time digesting the rest of it to reply later.

"Arguments based upon humanity and morality are dubious, as we live in a society that picks and choses its principles, morality and humanity based upon greed and need."

They will never be dubious in my book, Parch. My principles, morality and humanity will remain unchanged.

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

I fully accept that and don't doubt that as individuals, I too would hope that my personal morals, principles and humanity are good.

But in the wider context, our governments morality, principles and humanity have an impact upon the rest of society. The top down philosophy.

by Parchester, 15 May 2013

I can't argue with that, Parch!

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

It's so easy to have all the answers, e.g. 'Cut off their goolies', but it's much harder to admit that the answers are not obvious or foolproof. It's hard to admit that we need more time to think through a given situation very carefully. It's hard for some to realise that an opinion isn't the same as an argument.

Philosophy is a tough discipline! Thanks for keeping us on our toes Parchy.

by JSL, 15 May 2013

The goolies must come off!

'Not the 9 o'clock News' circa 1979?

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

Rumbled again! I thought you'd gone to bed...

by JSL, 15 May 2013

Well, I could say the same to you.......

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

We should do it, simultaneously...

by JSL, 15 May 2013

Oh, you bugger, you beat me to it!

OK, we'll go to bed together ;-))

by Feline123, 15 May 2013

missed that 123 i was out having fun, saw very little tv in the 70's and 80's ;-))

by paul38, 15 May 2013

Looks like feline and I saw more TV than fun. Though looks can be deceiving...

by JSL, 16 May 2013

I won't ask what you were doing, paul....;-))

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

As you say, JSL, looks can be very deceiving....

I thought we were going to bed....

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

you know me 123 and it's probably not printable on here ;-)))

where's the camera lol

by paul38, 16 May 2013

I'll just have to use my imagination... ;-))

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

Hi feline! I went without you.

by JSL, 16 May 2013

Spoilsport! ;-))

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

Go back to writing your novel, woman! You are incorrigible.

by JSL, 16 May 2013

And impregnable!

Just got a new idea for Chapter 2 from 'Woman's Hour' on R4. The suggestion was that 'you can just smear it on and do what you like'.....

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

I just have had to move my chair back from the computer table as it was becoming very cramped and uncomfortable!!

by Parchester, 16 May 2013

I've just fallen off mine, Parch!!

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

Yes... I think I'll have to go and empty the dishwasher. Maybe a bit of vacuuming...

by JSL, 16 May 2013

Stop getting ahead of yourself, JSL. The vacuum cleaner appears in Chapter 3.......

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

New thread please... Somebody? Anybody???

by JSL, 16 May 2013

Wimp! God knows what you'll do when we get to the chapter about the blender......

You could always start a new thread yourself.......

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

The blender? No, not the blender!!!

by JSL, 16 May 2013

I have ways with the blender...........

Where's this new thread then?

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

Been too busy with housework and a PM. Are you getting a bit pushy or have I just not noticed before?

by JSL, 16 May 2013

a new lease of life after a few problems on the forum sort of got sorted me thinks ;-))

by paul38, 16 May 2013

Sorry, JSL. I'll back off and let you have your time with the Prime Minister.

by Feline123, 16 May 2013

your not pushy 123, and you should not be sorry, be happy

by paul38, 16 May 2013

Ooh, I just knew you were going to say that, feline!

Paul, you are too kind. (Some might say far too kind!). It's a virtue.

by JSL, 17 May 2013

i do have a soft spot for 123, jsl, as she was the first to welcome me to the forum and made me feel at home.

i'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing :-))

by paul38, 17 May 2013

She did the same for me, Paul.

Being kind is always a good thing. Not teasing feline a little now and then is probably a bad thing.

by JSL, 17 May 2013

Very similar to a Black Widow is what you're describing paul38.:-))

Long may that spot spot remain so, or you could be placed on the sex offenders register for having a number fetish!

by Parchester, 17 May 2013

i'll have to watch i don't get tangled in a web, lol, parch, oh yes, and if you refer, which i think you are, to me using 123 for feline123 i just find it quicker but you could well be right LOL

by paul38, 17 May 2013

i'm with you on that one jsl lol

by paul38, 17 May 2013

I hope you lot will continue to tease me, and I will reciprocate, of course!

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

what does reciprocate mean.

by paul38, 17 May 2013

I think it's something to do with the pistons on steam locomotives.

by JSL, 17 May 2013

How many 'l''s are there in bollox.... ;-))

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

Just enough...

by JSL, 17 May 2013

Get back to David Cameron.......

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

i remember them didn't they have 2 pistons,

by paul38, 17 May 2013

Who, David Cameron.....?

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

no that's the 'l''s

by paul38, 17 May 2013

I'll take your word for it, paul!

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

ok i'm gonna lose the plot now, the grandson has just arrived to stay for the night, i will try and keep up but no promises lol

by paul38, 17 May 2013

Have a lovely evening, paul!

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

aaaaaah 5 minutes peace his nanna is giving him a bath

by paul38, 17 May 2013

You know you love it! Time for you to read him a story, methinks!

by Feline123, 17 May 2013

not these days it's a scooby doo dvd, some biscuits and a drink, these 4 year olds are very independent nowdays and i don't think he ever gets to see the end 15 - 20 minutes and he's out like a light.

by paul38, 18 May 2013

Who likes the dvd better, paul, you or him? ;-))

by Feline123, 18 May 2013

that would be telling ;-)))

by paul38, 18 May 2013

Lol!

by Feline123, 18 May 2013

and talking 4 year olds i think it's time to climb the wooden hill as i suspect one will jump on me at some unearthly hour, no rest for the wicked :-))

by paul38, 18 May 2013

Night, paul. Sleep well while you can!

by Feline123, 18 May 2013

thanks nite.

by paul38, 18 May 2013
add a comment
add your response here

Posts within the money.co.uk community represent the views, experiences and opinions of members and experts only. They should not be taken as financial advice and should not be followed without further research.

Get our free money saving newsletter
Join over 450,000 other subscribers who grab our expert money tips, unmissable money guides & hottest bargains each week in our special email...

More Discussions on Child Care