A Sept 2009 Harris Poll showed that 54% of Britons would favour the return of hanging. I'd be interested to see what that figure would be on this forum, where we all come from different parts of the globe.
So the question is, if the Swiss government called a vote on Capital Punishment for the crimes of Murder and statutory rape, would you be For or Against??
Votes are anon
Edit: oops got there before the poll was created
murder: I am all for it (capital punishment I mean)
statutory rape: against (too much a he-said she-said kind of thing. It just happens too often that it turns out the woman falsely accused the man, an irrevocable punisment is just not OK in my book)
But it pisses me off when some criminals get luxuries inside the prison
Rape (Proven) = Yes
Read this and decide if capital punishment is right. It's the tip of the iceberg - but if you look at the other victims, you might reconsider whether it is right or not.
Mistakes are made in the law system - it is not infallible.
Whilst paying for life imprisonment for these people is a bill we as taxpayers foot, I believe we have no right to elect to take someone else's life - either as individuals or collectively (as voters).
We cannot take dispicable actions based on what we believe are dispicable actions - that's what keeps us above the other species on this planet.
That said, I have a basic inability to suggest suitable punishments for criminals that perpetrate extreme violence or sexual acts against their victims. Short of sympathy and support, there is nothing one can do for victims, so we pan them off with trying to offset their losses and suffering by making the perpetrators pay by restricting their freedom. I don't honestly know how to do this best; it's one of those things that bugs me, life imprisonment must be a mentally exhausting proposition, but what does it really achieve? I don't know that there is a system or penal practise that can truly ever lay this topic to rest. As long as there are humans on this planet, there can never be peace, justice or equality. Sounds depressing doesn't it?
The state, when performing an execution, is committing pre-meditated killing. Revenge. Spite.
Who are we to say that it was bad for one human being to take the life of another, but perfectly ok for the state to take the life of one? Isn't that doing the same as the original murderer?
In America, many have been executed and later found innocent of the crime.
Also in the US, it costs more to execute a person than it does to keep them in prison for life.
It is a barbaric practice, IMO.
However, if I am honest I think I could have a bit of a double standard here as were anyone to ever hurt one of my children I think I could single-handedly implement it.
We can judge a society by how it treats it's lowest caste members. Executing someone denies them the opportunity for redemption.
But what about those highly intelligent, cunning and beyond rehabilitation criminals who have no respect for human life either, that us tax payers have to feed whilst they are in jail, bleating about their human rights?
No, the justice system is not perfect but I would rather be safe than sorry than allowing the Ted Bundys of the world running around.
I am probably standing alone on this, looking at the responses on here but putting a murderer away for life just isn't good enough. Laws change, so do parole boards, and with time, the severity of the crime dims in human memory (except maybe for the victims families). Those are things that cause life imprisonment to weather away. As long as the murderer lives, there is always a chance, no matter how small, that he will strike again - be it within the walls of prison against inmates and guards or out in society, who are naive enough to allow him out on the basis of rehabilitation / 'we are better than him'.
*awaits onslaught*
likely to get the death penalty than a white person.
I.e. The law is applied differently to different people.