The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

In 1965 the death penalty was abolished as a punishment for murder. Although it was never used since, in 1998 it was completely abolished across all crimes in the UK. Does Britain need the reintroduction of capital punishment and would it be a good thing?

 

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

It acts as a major deterrent

It acts as a major deterrent

"The prospect of spending life in prison may be a larger deterrent." - face reality please. They will sit there every minute of every day not giving a thought to the hard earned tax money that so many good people have worked for to enable them to live within THEIR 'human' rights which they so blithely destroyed without another thought. They have access to more luxuries etc than some people who've never done anyone any harm have/will ever have. Look up the meaning of justice, it's tough because it's a N-E-C-E-S-S-I-T-Y.

The prospect of spending life in prison may be a larger deterrent.

Further more, with the sort of criminals who would get the death penalty, deterrence is rarely an issue. Either people think they'll get away with it, or they don't consider the consequences at all. If you're in enough of a rage to murder in cold blood, you aren't going to be thinking about the consequences - it's not like these people are thinking 'well, worst comes to worst, I spend the rest of my life in a maximum security detention facility..." If they were in the position to consider what they were doing, most of them would think twice anyway. Those people who do think about what they're doing usually put thought into not getting caught, rather than worrying about what will happen if they do.

The US still has the death penalty, and there has been no significant deterrent effect there, with a homicide rate far greater than in the UK. Not to mention the large number of documented cases where prisoners on death row have been proved innocent, although sometimes too late. The saying goes 'its better to set a hundred guilty men free than imprison one single innocent man'. It has happened before in every country that innocent people have been put behind bars but if you the kill that person it is impossible to make it right.

Also, I have a problem with the stat killing people as a deterrent. If it is wrong to kill then the state shouldn't do it either.

To be an effective deterrent, the punishment would have to be immediate and certain. Therefore a large number of offenders convicted of a certain crime would have to be killed in order to have an impact. To achieve this then you would have to cut down on appeals and the lengthy process of collecting evidence which is associated with death penalty cases. All in all leading to a significant probability of sentencing innocent people to death. Ask yourself, are those criminals you want to kill really worth those lives?

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

It protects society from harmful criminals

It protects society from harmful criminals

If the alternative of a life imprisonment term actually meant life then that would also serve to protect society.

When individuals know they are potentially sentencing an individual to death then doubt will play a bigger role and potentially more harmful criminals will not be convicted.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

British prisons are overcrowded

British prisons are overcrowded and the british public are having to pay to keep criminals in prison.

Reinstating the death penalty would take a lot of resources. Research into the death penalty in America suggests that the death penalty is in fact more expensive(1) than life imprisonment therefore leaving less resources to create more prison space and so the for point is invalid.

The proportion of prisoners for whom the death penalty might be applicable is very small. Suggesting culling murderers as a way of reducing overcrowding is plainly ludicrous. The solution to overcrowding lies in more community service, less custodial sentences for non dangerous criminals and a program of prison building and refurbishment as well as tackling the social issues that cause people to become criminals in the first place. Surely, reducing the number of crimes and criminals is a better use of resources than slaughtering people after the damage has been done and they have committed a crime!
We are constantly hearing on the news how we need new prisons but no residents are willing to sacrifice their town for the new prison to be built! Residents protested strongly against a new Rainham Prison - but I bet they complain loudest that the prisons are overcrowded.

(1) http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Peaodofiles deserve to die for their crimes, they can never be rehabilitated

- Overcrowding in jails lead to overworked police wardens
- Which leads to judges in despair;
- Which leads to no faith in those we put the trust of our lives to it’s in their helpless hands;
- Which leads to wasted tax money that could be used to help decent suffering people.
Obviously the verdict must be right and just. That being so, wipe out the scum
of society who plague and cause unbearable pain and suffering upon good innocent people and children, not just now – their sickening actions will have far reaching consequences for decades to come.

Child abusers are the worst type of criminals, but the death penalty does nothing to remove that problem from society.

Child abusers are the least likely to be deterred by punishment of any type. Many have been abused themselves and don’t see their crimes for what they are, and others say that they did what they did because they couldn’t help themselves. The death penalty is unlikely to prevent child abuse any more than a mandatory life sentence.

It also costs more money to execute a person than incarcerate them for life. Given that we’re using the American model, and giving people all available chances for appeal, the chances are these people will end up waiting to be executed for years. You end up paying to lock people up for decades, plus the costs of the numerous appeals, plus the cost of the facilities. Child abusers are often emotionally damaged, victims themselves, etc, and hence there is no end of grounds for appeal. This is money we could be spending on helping abused children or putting back into society, rather than trying to deal with our disgust with an ineffective quick-fix solution like this.

Further to this, children are often abused by someone they know who holds a position of power over them. This provides many complications if you try to include the death penalty as a punishment. Things should be done to help those who have been abused come forward and not creating yet more barriers in the way. Many may not want their abuser killed because they are family or, because of the high level of manipulation involved, will not even recognise that they have been abused. This is another aspect which will help prevent the connection being made in some cases.

Then consider that many are patient and wait years to hold such a position of power over a vulnerable section of society. What is to stop some threatening the few victims who may speak out, to stop them from doing so.

It is important to remember that many have multiple victims and so when are sentenced many children have already suffered and so killing them will not 'wipe out the scum', merely some of them.

Also this is an opinion that they can not rehabilitate them. You don't know for fact if you can or not.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

life without parole

even on sentences such as life without parole, as happened in America, laws change and individuals guilty of heinous crimes are now allowed to apply for parole bianually.

We can do better than looking to America for inspiration - they are one of the few Western states more backwards than us.

The death penalty is illegal, morally unjustifiable and unnecessary.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

reason why it should be in force

it gives the victims family closure

The death penalty prolongs the suffering of the murder victim’s family, and extends that suffering to the loved ones of the condemned prisoner.

It is wrong to assume that every family will think the same way. Or that the justice system should be there to suit the emotional and somewhat irrational needs of some.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Permanent

The death penalty should be reinforced because the people who have commited a crime and they spend there life in jail what the point...they should derserve the correct punishment DEATH.

People take the life of others there life should be taken aswell.

The death penalty denies the possibility of rehabilitation and reconciliation, it promotes simplistic responses to complex human problems, rather than pursuing explanations that could inform positive strategies.The death penalty diverts resources and energy that could be better used to work against violent crime and assist those affected by it.Capital punishment is a symptom of a culture of violence, not a solution to it. It is an affront to human dignity.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

No Exectuted murderer commits Another Murder (or any other crime)

It is self evident. However, numerous murderers released after serving a "life" sentance HAVE gone on to repeat their crimes.
I don’t know how you came to the conclusion, that this was an argument for a full life term, when it’s obviously an argument for reinstating the death penalty. Read it again. Then make a sensible comment!

That is more an argument about whether life should really mean life in prision rather than an argument for having the death sentence. Sure they wont go on to commit any crimes but they will not go on to commit any good either.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

The public want it

As a democracy, the majority vote is what is meant to matter in terms of laws. Polls show that more people support reintroduction of the death penalty than oppose it. [http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2504]] [http://www.metro.co.uk/news/747748-half-of-us-back-death-penalty]]
The government's duty is to pass laws representing the people of Britain on their behalf, and it is clear that there would be widespread support for this policy.In a democracy if the majority of a country, nation state or any group decide that something should be so, does mean that it should be so! unless you live in a dictatorship.

Just because the majority of a country, nation state or any group decide that something should be so, doesn't mean that it should be so. Using this logic if the majority of the British public asked the government to make being of coloured origin illegal the government would have no option but to bow to the public's wish. However, this wish is in itself contradictory, since ultimately we are all of coloured origin if you go back far enough into our ancestors.

This shows that the majority vote, doesn't mean the right vote.
And so all other reasons against the death penalty stand regardless of the majorities desire.

Plus how someone chooses to vote in an opinion poll is very different than when they know their vote will count towards something. Many 'opinion' polls are conducted after horrific crimes and so play to individuals emotions rather than rational thinking.

Some opinion polls seem to be leaning more and more towards not reinstating the death penalty. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1506834/Less-than-50pc-back-death-penalty.html]]

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Due To Increases in Forensic Technology they can Identify the Perpertratior 100% because of DNA - There will be no wrong deaths.

We live in a morden day world were science and technology play a potent role in Identifying People that commit crimes. With these measures in place there can never be a wrong death via execution. This science is fool proof, we need no harbinger these people that kill another, particular those that murder children. Death is too good for them, but death via lethal injection is a true justice rather than put in a prison holiday camp to sponge of the state.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

it costs 2 much money, to keep repeat murders, in prison, when the money could b used 4 other projests.

if you execute,repeat offenders, it sends out a message,that the most serious crime, will be met, with the most severe punishment.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Acts as a moral guideline.

If we live in a society where there is hanging it will make would be murderers & the violent criminal think twice.As for terrorists,I believe they would be only venerated by a tiny minority so executing them would have little effect.As a moral guideline it would have a good psychological effect as certain people would wake up to what is right & what is wrong.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

save the child!

we need capital punishment, whether people like it or not! whether i like it or not!

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Yes by all means

Yes by all means excecute the person who has excecuted some poor terrified innocent. YES YES YES.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

they murder some one they should die

If a murdaer kills some they should die they same way they killed there victum. Bet if some one that the do gooders that so not to the death sentence if someone they know dies they will be first in line to say kill them but all they will get is a 5 year sentience 2 for bing good

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Innocent people may be put to death if wrongly convicted

The long and complex processes involved in cases of such high status mean that the chance of being wrongly convicted for a crime such as murder are extremely low. DNA evidence and new scientific advances make proving cases much easier.

Further, those sentenced to death have ample opportunity to appeal against that sentence, up until the day of execution (looking at America as a model).

Judges will not apply the death penalty where there is even some doubt as to the strength of the conviction, as it is so vital that no innocent lives are taken.

***

"If the lives of the seven innocent people alone were saved by not having the death penalty, then this is reason enough to banish it forever." If the number of innocent lives saved but having executed potential re-offending murderers outweighs the number innocent lives lost through miscarriage of justice, then surely this suffices as endorsement.

Innocent people may be put to death if wrongly convicted.
The claim that the chances of beingly wrongly convicted are low is laughable given recent events in British justice. The Birmingham 6 would have been executed. Stephan Klijsko would have been executed - the fact that there was ample evidence for his release many years before it was secured was happily ignored by sucessive judges. If the lives of the seven innocent people alone were saved by not having the death penalty, then this is reason enough to banish it forever.

Furthermore, if a jury is told that their verdict is the difference between life and death for the accused, and if they have such a stringent criteria to meet before they can reach a guilt verdict, they're more likely to return an innocent verdict. Part of the reason that the death penalty was abandoned in the UK was that so many criminals who should have at least been locked up were set free, because juries were always able to find a reasonable doubt rather than kill someone.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

It is a cruel and immoral punishment

The punishment is for a cruel and immoral act carried out by the convicted person. It is therefore not unfair.

It is a cruel and immoral punishment.

Punishing like with like isn't how our justice system works. When someone steals a TV we don't take their TV we as well, we remove them from society. Likewise, those who commit fraud we don't fine them comparable amounts to the money they defrauded.

Further, defining murder as bad and then murdering someone in cold blood (i.e. execution) is hypocritical.

It is also expressly prohibited by the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Britain is a signatory.

The point to the left avoids this point. It was never said that this was an unfair punishment. Read the point here again, and either delete your comment, or write a less flawed one.

No, it is not if it is to stop so called "humans" torturing small children
and abusing them every day! i would not call them human! therefore, the death penalty is right for them to be honest with you all i think its an easy way out for them! but there is no other way.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

The death penalty is more expensive for the taxpayer than life imprisonment

Cost has never been an issue when it comes to dealing with crime. The justice system happily carries out expensive, lengthy trials that result in not guilty verdicts and doesn't complain that money has been wasted; just because something costs money doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Carrying out justice is the only thing that matters, and cost is irrelevant.
Explain something to me... don't inmates with life sentences have as much right to appeal as those who are sentenced to death?
(and thus, cost as much in terms of appealing?)

The death penalty is more expensive for the taxpayer than life imprisonment, when the cost of several appeals are factored in. In America, the average convict spends eleven years in prison awaiting execution, simply because the appeals process takes so long. As well as the cost of locking people up for so long, there will be huge costs incurred as a result of the appeals process which the State will have to bear.

Cost is not completely irrelevant because resources are not limitless hence why the CPS has tests to ensure only those cases which will likely result in a conviction go to trial.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

It is the only fair punishment for crime such as murder

It is the only fair punishment for crime such as murder.
You wrongly use the word murder, to describe execution. Surely the execution of a first degree murderer would warrant the death penalty and if a man had killed 130 times wouldn’t he pose a threat to the rest of society? And to suggest executing him 130 times is ludicrous to say the least.Once would be sufficiant.

A life (meaning life) imprisonment is a perfectly apt punishment for murder. Removing a person's liberties and simple life pleasures for the rest of their lives forms a extended punishment whereas once a person is dead, that's the end of that.

Apart from that it is hardly a moral punishment - How can a country kill a person to show people that killing people is wrong?

I will add to the above my son was murdered by a gang on the streets of Britain he had a right to walk safely home from a night out in southampton his murder was brutal multiple fatal stab wounds to chest and body and his head kicked in like a football also causing fatal injuries we waited almost a year for the trial 5 youths picked up immediately after, 4 put on remand 1 15 year old released because he stated" NO COMMENT" all through the interviews and process and even though the other 4 defendants named him as a main culprit how sad that at that young age he could play the system his previous offences taught him that at least !

The court case then becomes a show for the defendants the victim and my family just bystanders in a game of chess to cut a very long and emotional story short the judicial system needs to put the victims first let the jury decide if the evidence is worth seeing at no time did the jury see pictures of what they had done to my son only computer generated images of his injuries they were deemed to gory and horrific for them!!!
2 days wasted on whether the defendants could see who done what and how far away the witnesses were to see if anyone was still in the car could they not have taken the jury to the scene to see how illuminated the street lights were (almost like daylight) and that the road is only 10 feet wide they all retracted their statements made at interview and said they lied why would you lie to make things worse for yourself maybe its because the judge at the start said to be found guilty of murder they had to prove joint enterprise so in response they changed their stories when on the stand.

1 guilty of murder 15years minimum was on electronic tag when he killed my son 25 previous arrests and 11 convictions 18 years old . 1 manslughter 8 years out in 5 or less if he behaves!!!!! 1 2years for violent disorder only one to admit 1 kick released at sentencing aquitted for murder jury was undecided after 2 days and judge was due to go on holiday retrial to expensive (recalled for an assult and bailed 3months later ) still carries a knife hes obviously not learnt a lesson and 1 released found not guilty he refused to take the stand and it would be against his human rights if the courts made him!!!!!!!!!! he knew he could not get on the stand and say he lied like the other 3 did that in its self would have put doubt in the jury's minds there is a lot more but my point is if the court system can find guilty people innocent then it can work the other way and so even though I lost my son until the judicial system is updated into the 21st century we can't rely on the death penalty life should mean life, no excuses, no justification. jen singleton mother of lewis singleton murdered march 2007 southampton

It is fair to counter murder with murder? Then what would you do to a man who murdered 130 people, kill him 130 times? No, taking one life for taking another does not count as fair and that logic is seriously flawed.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

It doesn't do anything to bring back the victim

Nor does a prison sentence. However it may give the victim's family more of a sense of closure. The family will know that, unlike prison sentences that can be cut short by a mixture of good behaviour and government incompetence, the murderer will never be a threat to another human being again. The death penalty is the ultimate form of vindication.

It may not do anything to bring back the victim, but by God, there won't be a second one!

It doesn't do anything to bring back the victim

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

"Two wrongs don't make a right"

It is not the person that has flicked the switch whom decided upon the death of the offender, only justice had decided that.

The person who has made the comment about the executioner "getting away with murder" is daft, plain and simple. The law has sentenced, the executioner is simply carrying out the word of the law. Therefore it is not "in cold blood". In fact it is exactly the opposite of the meaning of the expression "in cold blood". Maybe this person should read some English grammar before debating.

No, two wrongs don't make a right! your right! But only if one is HUMAN????? And I don't think 'these things' that torture children are??? do you?

If a murderer can be put to death, then it serves that the law has concluded that the worst crime a person can commit is murder, as the sentence requires the murderer to give up his most prized possession - his life.

But who flicks the switch to start the process of electrocution, or administers the lethal injection?

What of that second murderer?

If the latter goes unpunished, then the law bears no weight. The person who punishes the murderer has, himself, killed in cold blood, and 'got away with it'.

No, two wrongs don't make a right! your right!
But only if one is HUMAN?????
And I don't think 'these things' that torture children are??? do you?

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Nobody has the right to send somebody to death regardless of their crime.

Just as all governments rule by the will of the people (even dictatorships), judges also represent the justice of an overall society. The people give governments the power to create laws, and the government gives the judges the power to enforce them. Their fore the answer to 'who made that judge god?'' Would be, 'the people.'

This above statement is a good point. Killing disgusting criminals is for the good of the people, and the people support it, so let it be. And it shouldn't just be murders put to death, but any kind of repeat offenders of violent crime and/or drug dealing offences.

People need to STOP CALLING THESE THINGS!!! PEOPLE!
WHEN EVERY DAY CHILDREN ARE BEING SLOWLY TORTURED IN THE SICKEST WAY YOU CAN EVER IMAGIN!
THESE ARE NOT PEOPLE!!! THESE ARE THINGS!
so YES they need to be killed!
IF there is a mistake than so be it! i would be happy to be a mistake
to lose my life so to save a child's! then i would die happy knowing
that the death penalty is working, and 1 mistake to get rid of 12 sick things! then that is just the way the world is. It is better than hearing or seeing on the News and internet and papers every day the sick things that are happening and they just get to live in prison with food, bed, water, tv!!!!! and then come out in 4 years time!!
Now that is wrong! NOT CAPITAL PUNISHMENT!

A judge does not have the right to tell someone that their life must end. Who ever made that judge God? By issuing the death penalty the judge will be forcing the executioner to commit murder. Taking a life is homicide no matter what the circumstances.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

What about the executioner?

The executioner did not decide upon the offenders death, but the court and the jury did.

If the executioner was morally culpable for the act of killing someone for the state, then any policeman or prison guard would be culpable of false imprisonment, kidnapping, etc It makes more sense to regard him as the tool of the state, absolved of moral responsibility. If the death penalty is immoral, the state carries culpability, not its agents.

(New note)

Murder: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought.

To declare executioner's murderers you'd have to prove that they preformed their jobs with malice and out side the law. As the fact is legalised murder contains words that can not go togeather, as one of the conditions of murder is UNLAWFULLY conducted.

(new note)

As i can see here, it is clear that all those on the side of 'no' have given ridiculously silly statements that are not worthy of being called arguments, rather 'drivel'. A series of nonsensical arguments that are being wiped out by all the 'yes' comments by simple power of reasoning.

I agree with you above me!!! These n0's are not helping that child
that is in a room with a 'sick thing' that these people are calling them 'HUMAN beings' i don't think so! Torturing them, like baby P, AND a 10000 more.

Couldn't you argue that the executioner is guilty of premeditated murder? In fact wouldn't the executioners in years past be some of Britain's most prolific serial killers?

Just because the state says it's right that people should be executed doesn't make it right. It's nothing short of legalised murder.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

Illegal under EU law

the law is constantly changing and what is illegal today may be legal tomorrow!

There is no reason why the United Kingdom cannot leave the European Union and regain its sovereignty.

It is forbidden under Article 2 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights for an EU member state to impose capital punishment.

Source: Europa EU Gateway - EUR-LEX - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:303:0001:0016:EN:PDF - Accessed 12/10/2008

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

no because.....

Many criminals never feel remorse or guilt for the crimes that they commit. Many of the most horrific killed with pleasure and smiled at their court hearings. To say that letting them live gives them more of a punishment would only be true in certain cases. The death of a criminal brings little consequence to a society and often brings a group of people togeather for the 'ridding of an evil' from their group.

(new note)

Repeat offenders who are found guilty of murder should not only be killed, but slowly tortured first. Then perhaps drawn and quartered while still alive. The executioner would need to be a strong-willed man of little conscience and a righteous upholder of right and wrong. But these men can be found for such necessary tasks. There should be little in the way of an appeals process, and repeat offenders in particular should have no appeals available.

Putting someone to death for a crime might not bring justice for the victim or the victim's family. It is more of a release for the offender, as they then do not have to live with the guilt on their conscience and be made to feel that guilt. Some offenders never show remorse, but granting them an escape from the public humiliation and disgust that shows them what people think of them would make it easier for an offender. What other people think of someone and people's opinions are often very important to individuals and this could be a powerful tool to help a family of a victim know that they have public support for what someone did and that the person is being made to pay with their freedom and rights taken away, which is what they used as their weapon to commit the crime.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

The judicial system is corrupt.

Yes because it stopped me carrying a knife as a teddy boy in the 60s in case I got carried away in a fight. If capital punishment was still on offer a lot of innocent terrified people would still be alive now. And I like many many more would gladly be the exceutioner to so many evil scum..

Far too many innocent people are found guilty by courts in the UK without a shred of evidence against them and often using unreliable witnesses, many to later prove their innocence, sadly after having spent many years in prison. Far more innocent people found guilty never prove their innocence and so we have no conception of the innocent lives destroyed every year by the corrupt judicial system.

It is too easy for members of the public and people in power to invent crimes in order to destroy lives and until that has been stopped the death penalty cannot further be considered.

The majority of trials are heard in magistrate courts without a jury and even in crown courts the age of jurors should be increased to a minimum of twenty-five. The level of intelligence of a juror should also be measured since nobody knows if jurors actually understand the charges against the accused and evidence produced before them.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

The death penalty does not act as a deterrent

While murder is usally an impulsive act, it is not always. And most impulsive murderers do not get the death sentece. It is often reserved for repeat offenders, mass murderers, and serial killers.

(new note)

If a theft/mugging or armed robbery has gone wrong and resulted in a murder, then he must die for it. How is the impulsive murder of an innocent person walking home at night by a mugger who was incensed at the refusal to hand over a watch/mobile phone/cash not any more punishable by death than that of a premeditated murder? Utter rubbish. In fact many murders you see on estates by filthy drug-addicted youths are compulsive, not pre-meditated.

These animals should all be put to death. Mass burnings are in order.

The Mass Murders, the brutal killings of children, old people, death by GBH and all the other nutters that contribute to a broken Britian need to be reminded that this world has no place for nutters, chaos makers, killers, rapists, child butchers. This needs to be en-forced, these people that do this in particular those that dismember children and murder the innocent, have no human rights, they forgo there human rights right after they brutally murder the children. They deserve death, no death could be just for those that hide behind words like "instanity" "Mental Health" - no matter what they hide behind dosent excuse the fact they murdered a child / person in cold blood. Those that are proven to kill without provocation without mercy, without a justifed reason (self defence an example) for fun and just because they felt like it, need to know the swift arm of justice and that none of these people have a place in morden society no matter how much "rehabliliation" these nut jobs endure. Nothing will bring those children / people back, and an example must be made.

Murder is usually an 'impulse' act and often the result of a domestic dispute, theft or assault going wrong. The perpetrator's intention is rarely to kill the victim but death results. Murder with malice aforethought in the strict sense accounts for a very small proportion of deaths. As, in most cases, murder was never the intention of the perpetrator, the deterrent issue does not arise as the prime intention was to assault (domestic or non-domestic) or commit theft. For those who intentionally kill, it is rare to see evidence of a mass killing intent as the victim is usually seen (by the perpetrator) to deserve killing - for whatever reason. In such cases, a deterrent is irrelevant as the single killing satisfies the perpetrator's intentions. For those who kill in multiple murders at different times, the root cause is usually psychiatric and the death penalty would not be an option for the Courts, in addition to deterrent being irrelevant to such perpetrators.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

The 'State' has no right or authority to take a life, killing is an act of barbarism and is incompatible with a modern 'civilized' society.

Would you then argue that a man being attacked couldn't defend himself and kill his attacker? What about a man who's family is threatened? If that man had a gun should he not protect his family and kill the man if he could? To say that killing a human is ALWAYS wrong presumes that their is always a better choice, and often their is not. In the souther US home invasions are on the rise, armed criminals chrage into a home and kill and rob the people inside (often with links to the drug cartels in Mexico). Do those people not have the right to shoot back at the men to protect themselves, their property and their family?

"Civilized" Society cannot be mantained if we let nutters like that guy in Norway who murded 78 people including children live because "we have no right", if he killed your children or someone close to you, you would want justice, you would want to see them hang for what they have taken from you. This dosent make us worse than the people that kill, we arent killing because we want too, or we had a disagreement or falling out and we wanted to harm that person responisble. No we want to see them die for something they have done, someone they have taken from us some family that will never be the same because of that person. That is not wrong, that is not stooping to there level. That is simply removing someone that can never destroy a family or loved ones ever again without reason. The criminals of today have nothing to fear, they can get arrested, get life in jail. But prison is not a punishment like it used to be back in the 1860's , they dont wallow in a hole with nothing but bread and water, no they are given beds / tv / pool tables / computer consoles / jobs - treated like a normal person when they are not normal at all, they are evil. In the "Civilzed" world there is no place for these demons of man, these butchers of children, these rapests of women. There will be no "Civilzed" until these people are brought to justice and have answered for there unforgiveable crimes with there life.

If we accept that killing another human being is wrong and against the law, we cannot allow the state to assume power above the laws that govern our society. No-one has the right to kill another human being under any circumstance, particularly in such a 'cruel and unusual' way.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

1.Innocent people are NOTput to death.

if we make our police and criminal investigation services more responsible for the information gathered, how it is gathered, then using latest technologies, i.e. DNA testing we can be assured that the perpetrator is punished.
And again this should not be the Judge's decission but recommendation of the Jurors.

There will be no more innocent people put to death because of the fantasic Forensic system that is now in place for Police to use to determin who and what commited the crimes. Long gone are the days were people , where wrongly convicted, you can never rule out that some times (due to human error) that someone down the line will get killed. But that will proberly never happen and if it does it will be a one off. The needs of the many out way the needs of the few. 99.9% of the time the diagonois will be accruate and the people that are proven to kill (finger prints on guns , hair at the scene, dna on evidence) will provide enough facts to prove someone is there ,and has done a crime. It is a weak argument to put off re-instating the death penalty because of the off chance someone might get it wrong. Think of all the wrongs that are happening now when we have mass murderers, child rapist's / murderers living freely off our tax money in the holiday camps that are jails. Wheres the justice in that?. Its about time the law actually became LAW enforcement.

That does not stop the possibility of innocent people being put to death, just makes it less likely. And DNA testing isn't fool proof anyway it may prove someone was at a certain place it does not tell you whether a person is innocent and guilty and you can not possibly deny that people been put in prison only for it to be found out several years later that they were completely innocent.

The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK

Yes because... No because...

For many criminals death is the easy way out, that is why you have people attempting to commit suicide in prison

And for Many death is the hard way and would happily serve out life in prison.

Prison means having to watch your life waste away which I feel is a much more appropriate than giving a convicted murderer 30 seconds of fear before they are condemned to unconsciousness in which they will not feel any remorse or regret for committing the crime and don't really have to suffer at all. Life in prison is in effect a death sentence, except that it is slower and forces the criminal to think about what they have done and the price that they are paying the entire way

Debates > The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK