Chamber of Debate

CRIME - death penalty

Serial killer Steve Wright will die behind bars for killing five prostitutes, a judge ruled on 22 February 2008.

How much would that cost the taxpayer?

Do people who kill for fun deserve to die?

Is there any point at all in keeping these people alive at the expense of the taxpayer when Britain's prisons are already so over-crowded that prisoners are being released early to make way for more recent convicts?

"A life for a life, a limb for a limb, an eye for an eye" is an argument for proportionality and justice. Should we heed this injunction, or are we too blinded by liberal hand-wringing that we can no longer see the virtue of condign punishment or the moral validity of an effective deterrent?

The possibility of a miscarriage of justice and a wrongful conviction exists, of course. However, it could be argued that a criminal who is insufficiently deterred and inadequately punished is also a miscarriage of justice.

An opponent of the death penalty once said: "It is better that a hundred guilty men should go free than a single innocent man be wrongfully convicted."

Better? For whom?

Vote: Should the death penalty be re-introduced in some form, eg for the worst cases of murder?

Our Unique Parallel Polling System

OMOV (One Member One Vote)

Yes 69%

No 31%

Yes

OMMV (One Member Multiple Votes)

Yes 67%

No 33%

Yes

AAA Awarded members only.

Members Comments

Page 3 of 5

1 2 34 5

Records Per Page


oceansailor	23-Jul-2008 16:33
For those who are worried about executing the wrong man consider this. Nearly one person a week is being killed by convicted murders who are released early.Nobody seems worried about their rights.

Recyclotron	4-Jun-2008 18:45
If killing people is wrong, then it is wrong for both psychopaths and governments. If killing people is acceptable, then boy are we in trouble. If it is OK for government to kill, but not for the individual, then that is hypocrisy.

Andromeda	3-May-2008 12:34
I too saw DEAD MAN WALKING and found it to make a persuasive case FOR the death penalty! The Dead Man Walking character played by Sean Penn, gained his dignity and our sympathy AFTER accepting responsibility for his actions, in my opinion.

future8	30-Apr-2008 20:57
Defintely against the death penalty - firstly because of the risk of miscarraiges of justice, secondly killing someone else with premeditation like that isn't right. The film Dead Man Walking convinced me - have since bought the video and have never been able to bring myslef to watch it again. It is very powerful - I recommend it.

estivboy	22-Apr-2008 20:47
I'm with Jeffery Marshall on this. Do we really think that our Judicial systems is perfect enough to never execute an innocent person. Do people not see that in such decisions of finality, for our own protection no less, how that mistake would undermine the whole capital punishment system. Any one of us is capable of being subject to a miscarriage of justice. I do really get tired of people writing such things as Molly rote "Circumstantial evidence, no matter how good or conclusive, by itself, should not lead to a death sentence" People say also "Only If there is no doubt". You can not convict somebody on circumstantial evidence that's why the term 'beyond a reasonable doubt' is the lowest level of evidence required for any conviction. How do people think the law works?

Hunter	31-Mar-2008 11:35
If the British Parliament were to allow a referendum on the return of Capital Punishment, the vast majority of British subjects would be in favour of it's return. The question is purely academic while we are members of the EU, as the EU charter of human rights bans member states from executing people.

Molly	29-Feb-2008 21:54
I agree that the death penalty should be re-introduced for certain well defined crimes such as treason, large scale drug trafficking and pre-meditated murder which is proven and supported by at least two independent eye witnesses of good character. Circumstantial evidence, no matter how good or conclusive, by itself, should not lead to a death sentence. Even for Steve Wright.

jeffreymarshall	28-Feb-2008 16:59
Britain’s prisons are certainly overcrowded & this is an excellent argument for building more prisons. If sufficient prison space were available, prisoners would not have to be released early to make way for more recent convicts. "A life for a life, a limb for a limb, an eye for an eye” is not a particularly suitable way to run a judicial system. Proportionality can best be ensured by imposing long prison sentences which would both punish the offender & protect the public. Since there is the possibility of a miscarriage of justice & wrongful conviction, we should not have the death penalty. While it can be argued that a situation in which criminals are insufficiently deterred & inadequately punished constitutes a miscarriage of justice, a life sentence which genuinely means life would surely act as sufficient deterrent & would be condign punishment as well - though the latter would always be a matter of opinion, I suppose. (On the deterrent side, if “life” failed to deter such criminals, I doubt they’d be greatly impressed by “death” either, which would only be a kind of celebrity exit for some of today’s killers.) If an opponent of the death penalty preferred that a hundred guilty men should go free rather than a single innocent man be wrongfully convicted, this would undoubtedly be more likely to happen in a judicial system which included the death penalty. This is because in situations where there’s the slightest doubt, juries would simply be unwilling to convict. Anyway, personally I would rather see the hundred guilty men get sent to jail & the innocent chap released eventually, if necessary, when the mistake is discovered - somewhat difficult, though, if he happens to be buried six feet under. Of course it’s always tempting to wish death upon certain varieties of convicted pondlife & human vermin. But this question is less about their values (or utter lack of them) than about ours. Watching Saddam Hussein’s execution at the behest of the Americans was nauseating in a number of ways; I felt it was judicial murder & would tend to regard all executions in this way, I think. But perhaps a taxpayers’ referendum on the subject would be most appropriate as I do accept that the reason I believe the cost of keeping Steve Wright behind bars is actually money well spent is partly because I don’t want to participate - even indirectly – in having him put to death, despite his crimes.

Heidelberg	27-Feb-2008 14:22
I think lethal injection should be used for the worst murderers like terrorists and paedophiles and their bodies plastinated afterwards and put on public display as a warning.

Wildgoose	25-Feb-2008 21:12
A Life Sentence was supposed to be just that - Life with no parole and no remission. Now it's a few years respite for the law-abiding before the murderous scum are back on the streets. I think the usage of the Death Penalty should be rare, and typically only used for cases of indiscriminate mass murder, e.g. terrorism. But it should be an option. And it might give some of the inhuman monsters out there pause for thought.