The death penalty in cases where there is clearly no doubt I think is justified and in such cases there should be not appeal and the sentence should be carried out immediately.

This is another example where the Luvvies and Snowflakes in parliament (which is supposed enact the will of the people) is at odds with the majority of the voters. As it is with Brexit. Law on treason should be updated to include terrorist and also carry the death penalty.

I fit in to the Mark Hodgson view. Some instances the death sentence is justified. Im also only ever so slightly in agreement with Supertroll...not all crimes deserve the death sentence. Its also not a deterrent, its a punishment (albeit a permanent one but hey, theres always the post humorous pardons eh).

Part of the problem with liberal society today is how hand wringingly hand wringy it has become in defending the "rights" of criminals while utterly and completely ignoring the rights of the victims (to staying alive) and the rights of the victims family (having an alive member of the family).

Sadly this is only ever going to be an argument we will have on the board because there is clearly no stomach for reintroducing capital punishment today (or any time soon). Interestingly enough, I didn't realise Japan had the death sentence??

Having posted on here yesterday morning, I then disappeared for the day, as the weather was rather nice here. I have this morning caught up with the capital punishment debate with interest. I should also have added, before departing, that I thought the BBC reporting of the execution of the sarin killers in Japan was close to perfect - objective, factual, no moralising, no attempting to influence the views of its readers/viewers/listeners. If only it could do that all the time, then I would have no complaints. It's one of the reasons why I enjoy Simon Reeve's programmes (though of late he does seem to be following the BBC line a bit more closely) - in the past he has tended to present both/all sides of a case in an objective way, and leave the viewer to decide what they think.

Returning to the death penalty, I endorse a number of views expressed on here:

1. Endless appeals that last an inordinate amount of time can constitute a cruel and unusual punishment. It's in no-one's interest to have convicted murderers languishing on death row for 20 years or more.

2. Many murders are spontaneous, not planned, and the death penalty may not be a deterrent in such circumstances.

3. Jurors may fail to find a defendant guilty if the death penalty is the inevitable result.

4. There is no coming back from death where there has been a miscarriage of justice.

5. Despite all that, I favour the death penalty in limited circumstances - terrorists and mass murderers being the obvious examples. The bottom line is such people will often kill again given the chance, and need to be stopped - permanently. Also, too often the wishes of the victims' families are overlooked, and too much consideration is given to the murderer, not the murdered person and his/her family.

Btw...my ffs was aimed at my use of the wrong your!! :)

Jul 26, 2018 at 10:24 PM | Mailman

Thank you for that clarification

Actions have consequences: indeed but it is Society that determines the nature of those consequences, and that doesn't mean that serious crimes necessitate the death penalty. Seems to be a foreign concept to many on the right (sark).

I was surprised to learn, from my good friend Wikki, that capital punishment has declined with development of the prison system. Also that the majority of countries do not practice capital punishment and a good many more have it on their statute books but do not practice it. On the other hand because China, India, the USA (and some others) 60% of the world's population live in countries that follow the practice.

Btw...my ffs was aimed at my use of the wrong your!! :)

Capital punishment isn't a deterrent, it's a punishment.

Remember, actions have consequences. Seems to be a foreign concept to many on the left.