Alfa Romeo Forum banner

21 - 34 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,126 Posts
I once had an office in what was once a condemned cell. Pretty weird working in there on your own before dawn / after dusk I can tell you. I also used to sunbathe at lunch on the grass above where the executed were buried!!

I'd vote bring it back BTW. A good way of saving taxes & limiting the ever growing Prison population. Build gallows not prisons I'd say ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #22 (Edited)
....Michael, I agree totally and you make a good point about rejecting society's values.

Nev, money is probably my main issue and I'm sure all your points are valid but I do feel more concerned about the cost of keeping not just these criminals but all who we all know are beyond help and rehabilitation.

Wordsmythles, I'm afraid you just can't make it as simplified as you say, these are not just ordinary people, if it were one who committed this crime you could say or argue he may be insane, when you have six perpetrators can you come to the same conclusion ? What is the likelihood that if they hadn't been caught do you think they would have done this again, think really hard and I'm sure I know what your'e answers would be.
How long do you suggest my period of reflection should be on this issue, I think 30 years would be long enough which represents the time I became eligible to vote up to my present age, when you hold a belief that long you are going to find me hard to win over.

SB, just one gallows would do for me, I'm sure thats all we would need.

Can I just finally add that I was born Church of England, a christian but not a practising one as I don't go to church on a Sunday but I don't think this makes me a bad person. I've been in trouble with the police once, for breaking a neighbours window playing football in the street when I was 12 years old. I got a clip round the ear from the copper who terrified me as he was about 6'6" and that was the end of it.

They say that todays bully is the futures' murderer and there are those who would say if we brought back Corporal Punishment in schools this and many other crimes like it might never happen, I don't know about that but it never done me any harm, and thats going off topic into another thread so time to shut up. !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
wordsmythles said:
I'm off on one now - we do have a de facto death sentence. Amnesty International reports that over 1000 people have died in police custody in the UK with not a single police office successfully convicted in relation to these deaths. Allow the buggers to do it legally and we'll all pay the price.
So its the police officers fault that peolpe in the cells break the law and get arrested!!! 80% of the time they are smashed out of there head on drink and quite a few are on drugs.

Now heres the problem leave them on the street and they attack innocence people and chances are they will die in some dark hole somewhere. Bring them in and they are watched at least every 15 mins or sometimes constantly but when you are in that much of a state some peolpe will die end of story! Don't you think more people would die if it was not for the treatment recieved in police stations...YES!

Try telling the victims of crime at the hands of these people that they should not be locked up, if someone dies because of there own stupid actions the blame should not be cast elsewhere.

There are always stories of bad behaviour but compared to the amount of peolpe every night in police cells and the behaviour of those peolpe they are few and far between.

Death penalty . . . . if there is unquestionble proof then for the most serious crimes IMO yes, there are to many re offends where innocence peolpe get killed for my liking.

Sorry if this upsets anyone but it was time for me to get out the soap box for a rant.:rant:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,878 Posts
ASCARI said:
We all know Bush is no saint, even before he was elected we were told he would take the US and possibly their allies to war, but he is a christian who prays to God everyday or so he says, how do you work that one out. ?
With regard to Bush’s supposed Christianity:

As a committed Christian, I am ashamed and appalled at the things Bush does in the name of my religion as well. My reading of the bible is that we are supposed to be living lives based on love, humility, forgiveness and helping others (he does none of these!). It also says that we will be judged by our actions rather than our words and that you know what kind of tree has been planted by the fruit it bears (and the fruits of Bush’s actions makes it very clear what his values are). Bush got into office and into war by making the average American afraid of Iraqis, Islam and gays (to name a few), and has spent the past 5 years pushing around and ignoring the values and opinions of other countries, ignoring the plight of the poor, the homeless, and the sick, while at the same time doing everything in his power to help the rich and the well connected. Who did Jesus spend time with? Who did he care about? The rich? The powerful? Absolutely not – for the most part, these were the people that he was upset with. No, Jesus spent his whole short life reaching out to and having compassion on the sick, the poor, the prostitutes, the tax collectors, and those of other religions.

With regard to whether or not I would still be against the death penalty if one of my family members were raped or killed, this is a very ironic question since it echoes the exact question that helped Bush Sr. to come from behind to defeat Dukakis and become president. Dukakis was actually asked the same question during one of the debates and made the foolhardy mistake of admitting that even in such a horrible circumstance he would try to uphold the sanctity of life and would not seek the death penalty. Bush and the press had a field day, and hung him out to dry, with Bush putting out a series of hate commercials regarding a black rapist named Willie Horton, who was released from prison while Dukakis was governor, and then went on to rape and kill a white woman. Using fear and prejudice, Bush was able to paint Dukakis as weak and went on to win the presidency, and since then, not one major political candidate (including Bill Clinton), has ever dared to oppose the death penalty.

Fortunately, I am not a politician and need to worry about being re-elected (and actually even if I were, my answer would still be the same) – life, every life is precious, and I would be as opposed to the death penalty for a 911 terrorist (if any were caught) as I would be for someone who hurt a member of my own family. I am not saying that people who commit horrible crimes should get light sentences, be released from jail early, or have a life of leisure in jail, but I am saying that society should value their life even if they don’t value others or even their own.

Also, there is always the chance that a prisoner will begin to regret and repent of their actions and want to somehow do something positive while in jail (I don't think that revenge and punishment should be the only goals of imprisonment - rehabilitation should be just as important, though talk like that in the States might get ya lynched!) .

Without getting into the issue of the worth of a religious conversion might be for a prisoner (didn't the guy on one of the crosses next to Jesus repent just before he died?), I can think of lots of good secular examples of why life sentences are preferable to the death penalty. I remember when I was about 10 (34 years ago!), I saw a documentary at school called “Scared Straight”. It was shot at New Jersey’s Rahway State Prison and was made at the request of a few prisoners who had been jailed for life for murder and other horrendous crimes. In it, they went on and on about how badly they felt about their actions, how they knew that they could never take back the terrible things they had done, and described in detail how horrible spending life in a State penitentiary was. They were clear that they didn’t make this documentary because they wanted a lighter sentence (most said they were getting exactly what they deserved), in fact, the reason they made it was to show to other criminals who were in jail for shorter sentences and lighter crimes in order to try and convince them to repent of their life of crime and to reform before it was too late.

I understand and respect other people’s opinions on this topic, but I just feel very strongly about the sanctity of life (anyone's), and couldn’t not say my own opinion. My apologies in advance to anyone I may have offended by saying things so straight...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
...no need for any apology to me Charlie, I respect your views and opinions and I'm sure most others here do too.

That documentary must have made an impact on you, I've watched similar programmes on TV over here, its difficult to understand how these inmates can think like that after what they have done.

If I can make a comparison, Ted Bundy, the perfect psychopath, abducted raped and killed approx. 30 young girls who were mostly college students, you could have lived next door to him and wouldn't have suspected his involvement at all. Some say he may have been responsible for killing up to 150 women possibly even more. Then you have Dennis Nilsen, also the perfect psychopath, a homosexual killer who was so lonely he picked up drifters from gay bars in London took them home to bed for the night but when they wanted to leave he killed them by strangulation and drowning or both. Again he lived in a flat and his neighbours knew and suspected nothing. He killed 16 young men who were at first washed and dressed and placed in a chair as if watching TV while he went to work for the day. On his return he would undress the body, wash it and get it ready for bed, he would sleep with the corpse for a number of days until decomposition started to take hold and it started to smell, then he would dismember it and get rid of the remains.

To me Bundy was Bad but Nilsen was Mad, Bundy knew the police were onto him but he just couldn't stop himself as one killing was fueling the next. Nilsen on the other hand admitted his crimes within 15 mins of the police visiting his home, he said he was "killing for company" as he couldn't hold down a relationship. In short Bundy deserved to die in my opinion and Nilsen got life with a recomendation he serves at least 25 years, I suspect that had Nilsen committed his crimes in America he would have fried like Bundy.

Nilsen's time is up incidentally in approx. 2 years but our home secretary has to allow his release so who knows if he will be freed, if he does get out I'm of the opinion he would be no threat and sparing his life would have been just and correct. If Bundy got life and was then released I wouldn't be so sure, he is best where he is in my view.

Do you know of the Gary Gilmore case in Utah, what is your view on him and his case, I know your feelings on this but I'm interested to know how you would have dealt with him.

I'll be as polite as you and apologise if what I've said offends you but I do feel so strongly about this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,878 Posts
ASCARI said:
...no need for any apology to me Charlie, I respect your views and opinions and I'm sure most others here do too.

That documentary must have made an impact on you, I've watched similar programmes on TV over here, its difficult to understand how these inmates can think like that after what they have done.

If I can make a comparison, Ted Bundy, the perfect psychopath, abducted raped and killed approx. 30 young girls who were mostly college students, you could have lived next door to him and wouldn't have suspected his involvement at all. Some say he may have been responsible for killing up to 150 women possibly even more. Then you have Dennis Nilsen, also the perfect psychopath, a homosexual killer who was so lonely he picked up drifters from gay bars in London took them home to bed for the night but when they wanted to leave he killed them by strangulation and drowning or both. Again he lived in a flat and his neighbours knew and suspected nothing. He killed 16 young men who were at first washed and dressed and placed in a chair as if watching TV while he went to work for the day. On his return he would undress the body, wash it and get it ready for bed, he would sleep with the corpse for a number of days until decomposition started to take hold and it started to smell, then he would dismember it and get rid of the remains.

To me Bundy was Bad but Nilsen was Mad, Bundy knew the police were onto him but he just couldn't stop himself as one killing was fueling the next. Nilsen on the other hand admitted his crimes within 15 mins of the police visiting his home, he said he was "killing for company" as he couldn't hold down a relationship. In short Bundy deserved to die in my opinion and Nilsen got life with a recomendation he serves at least 25 years, I suspect that had Nilsen committed his crimes in America he would have fried like Bundy.

Nilsen's time is up incidentally in approx. 2 years but our home secretary has to allow his release so who knows if he will be freed, if he does get out I'm of the opinion he would be no threat and sparing his life would have been just and correct. If Bundy got life and was then released I wouldn't be so sure, he is best where he is in my view.

Do you know of the Gary Gilmore case in Utah, what is your view on him and his case, I know your feelings on this but I'm interested to know how you would have dealt with him.

I'll be as polite as you and apologise if what I've said offends you but I do feel so strongly about this.
As I said, I really do respect that there are other, deeply held opinions, and I of course respect yours as well. But to answer your question, as for Gilmore or Bundy or Nilsen (or Hussein, or even Hitler ), I would strongly favor life imprisonment (without possibility of parole) over the death penalty. I want to do my best to value the preciousness of life in all situations - doing so for people who place no value on human life may be a very hard thing to do, but I think it is especially in such cases that we as a society can distingiush ourselves from those kinds of people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,591 Posts
For followers of the Judaic-Christian teachings....

It is highly likely that Children are the only source of immortality that anyone has a right to expect . Certainly the original Jewish peoples thought that and expected no life after death, apart from that bequeathed to their offspring. Later it was decided by a sect of the Jewish religion,that there must be a heaven and reinterpretion the existant teachings, these teachings having been written down by humans,was made, inorder to create the concept of heaven. Christians through Jesus' teachings follow this later concept of a Heavenly afterlife.

In reality, entities such as humans could be considered as the package for DNA to reproduce. When we do not reproduce, the DNA we carry "dies" forever..i.e. eternal death.

Once we face the fact that we are really only the conduit for the reproduction of DNA and nothing more or nothing less and that DNA is the real life force, and probably the only thing that "GOD" may have actually created in it's image, we can start to attempt to come grips with what choices we may or may not have.

It is apparent that killing a human prevents its DNA from reproducing any further (as it may have already reproduced). For a non-accidental "killing" this really means that the entity that carried out the killing should loose the right to reproduce, in the same way that the entity killed has has lost the right to reproduce. However I do not think that this really means that we as a collective have the right to kill, only the right to prevent reproduction ,for that in itself is death . If we prematurely kill, then the entity created by that particualar DNA does not have a chance to realise and possibly attone for it's design flaws. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,878 Posts
Stori said:
For followers of the Judaic-Christian teachings....

It is highly likely that Children are the only source of immortality that anyone has a right to expect . Certainly the original Jewish peoples thought that and expected no life after death, apart from that bequeathed to their offspring. Later it was decided by a sect of the Jewish religion,that there must be a heaven and reinterpretion the existant teachings, these teachings having been written down by humans,was made, inorder to create the concept of heaven. Christians through Jesus' teachings follow this later concept of a Heavenly afterlife.

In reality, entities such as humans could be considered as the package for DNA to reproduce. When we do not reproduce, the DNA we carry "dies" forever..i.e. eternal death.

Once we face the fact that we are really only the conduit for the reproduction of DNA and nothing more or nothing less and that DNA is the real life force, and probably the only thing that "GOD" may have actually created in it's image, we can start to attempt to come grips with what choices we may or may not have.

It is apparent that killing a human prevents its DNA from reproducing any further (as it may have already reproduced). For a non-accidental "killing" this really means that the entity that carried out the killing should loose the right to reproduce, in the same way that the entity killed has has lost the right to reproduce. However I do not think that this really means that we as a collective have the right to kill, only the right to prevent reproduction ,for that in itself is death . If we prematurely kill, then the entity created by that particualar DNA does not have a chance to realise and possibly attone for it's design flaws. ;)
Interesting perspective! Also interesting too, that for very different reasons, you appear to be opposed to the death penalty. I think my DNA agrees with your DNA!
 
W

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
ASCARI said:
To me Bundy was Bad but Nilsen was Mad.....In short Bundy deserved to die in my opinion and Nilsen got life with a recomendation he serves at least 25 years, I suspect that had Nilsen committed his crimes in America he would have fried like Bundy.

Nilsen's time is up incidentally in approx. 2 years but our home secretary has to allow his release so who knows if he will be freed, if he does get out I'm of the opinion he would be no threat and sparing his life would have been just and correct. If Bundy got life and was then released I wouldn't be so sure, he is best where he is in my view.
Already there are cracks in your resolve and argument. You would happily make assessments of who should die, yet based upon your earlier arguments, anyone who is obviously guilty should die.

This is my (and others here) point, we shouldn't take someone's life to meet our idea of justice whenever it should be spared through doubt or reasoned argument. In this case, you would plead insanity....but another you may not because it struck a chord or the lawyer wasn't as good.

Sorry, there are FAR too many variables and doubts to allow us to have a blanket death penalty....and while there is the slightest possiblity one person could be killed in error it should never be in place. To argue ratios is a nonsense.

Relying on forensic or other evidence is fatally flawed, you only have to look at the miscarriages of justice, errors and complete falsehoods over the years, for crimes that would have been given the death penalty had it been on our books.

The only reasons I've ever read FOR the death penalty have been revenge/retribution, money (saving of), to act as a warning to offenders and fear.

Revenge and money should not be motives to take a life and it's obviously not a deterrent, so that leaves fear. Fear of re-offending...which can be easily solved by full life sentences or on the other extreme, therapeutic work. People with psychological or mental disorders need help, not death. I would argue that any mass murderer has something wrong with them, yet you have put forward arguments here to kill one and let another live???

Death penalty makes NO sense at all....and is morally wrong in our society.

btw, there is another argument that says it makes crime worse. Criminals will "fight to the death" knowing they may be executed, instead of giving in to the authorities.

wrinx
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
44,920 Posts
In an interesting parallel to the stuff written on here about Bush, on anothe forum I frequent we had the pleasure of a visit from an extremely conservative American lady because she saw a thread about abortion. She was rabidly anti-abortion - to the extent that she felt a woman made pregnant by rape should be forced to carry the baby till birth, explaining this by declaring her belief in the sanctity of life, and that at the instant the sperm meets the egg there is life there.
She later went on, in another thread, to reveal that she was pro-gun, and explain how anyone breaking into her house would 'have their head blown off'.
Lovely lady she was, completely unable to see a contradiction there.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
But nothing beats the dark, dark irony of a pro-life terrorist
killing a doctor who works in an abortion clinic.

You just KNOW religion has to be involved for
someone to have such a warped view.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,878 Posts
bazza said:
In an interesting parallel to the stuff written on here about Bush, on anothe forum I frequent we had the pleasure of a visit from an extremely conservative American lady because she saw a thread about abortion. She was rabidly anti-abortion - to the extent that she felt a woman made pregnant by rape should be forced to carry the baby till birth, explaining this by declaring her belief in the sanctity of life, and that at the instant the sperm meets the egg there is life there.
She later went on, in another thread, to reveal that she was pro-gun, and explain how anyone breaking into her house would 'have their head blown off'.
Lovely lady she was, completely unable to see a contradiction there.
Only in America! Guess why I've lived in Japan the past 20 years!
 
21 - 34 of 34 Posts
Top