Hazardous Harry wrote:Really that article is less of an attack on the law, and more a general stab at the Left. Is the telegraph always this biased?

Orlanth wrote:

KingCracker wrote:The Death Sentence should go as follows.

If its a slam dunk case, with no possible room for the guilty to not be guilty, the person in question should be executed as soon as the paper work is filled out. So, 20-and hour Id say?

I would go with the UK system used in the last century prior to abolition.

The condemned gets one appeal automatically heard, and it is fast tracked. The appeal may reduce the sentence uphold it without new evidence, or aquit if new evidence is found or old evidence is found unreliable.
This occurs within three weeks of sentencing.

If this appeal fails there is no further appeal. The issue now is to complete the process quickly to avoid undue distress. The condemned person is move to a special cell under individual 24 hour guard. They get access to outside food, newspapers, medical watch, family visits and a priest of any religion they choose. The parameters of the cell were at the time a closely guarded secret as the cell was located adjacent to the execution chamber, which was disguised and soundproofed.

The condemned would be given a minimum of two weeks in the condemned cell, this was in order for the condemned to get their personal affairs in order, and to fulfill religious requirement in good time.

On the day of the execution the executioner and a number of seconds would enter the cell unannounced and would immediately move the condemned person to the execution chamber next door. The gallows, which would be set for a prepared 'long drop' relative to the weight of the condemned, would be normally within 20 feet of the condemned cell sleeping area or the table where the condemned sits. The idea is that the condemned is executed before they have time to panic. Executions would be conducted at breakfast time, not at just after midnight, with a news blackout into the prison for the last 48 hours before execution to avoid undue distress. A good executioner will normally manage to kill the condemned man within half a minute of first entering the cell and almost always occurs by surprise. Long drop gallows are nearly always instantly successful, but do not disfigure the corpse.
'Lingering' last minute appeals are not permitted, the deadline for clemency is approx 24 hours earlier, so politicians, if they wish to have any input, cannot dither.

This advanced method is still in use in Singapore.



If theres a chance that the accused could be innocent, then they should be allowed 1 well planned appeal, a year from then. If still found guilty, read #1

mattyrm wrote:
Oh and regards traffic.. If my missus demands I end up back in the States next year, can anyone recommend somewhere that's pretty empty?

Hazardous Harry wrote:

TH3FALL3N wrote:I think him being arrested for this is utterly outrageous. I am 17 and still at sixth form, we had a caretaker at our school that turned out to be a pedophile and had a couple of hundred images of kids on his computer. He received a 9 month suspended sentence. Yet a drunk student who writes a status on twitter (albeit racist) is imprisoned.

God i am proud to be British...

That might be more a case of the sentencing judge being an absolute idiot with regards to your caretaker. How did you know what evidence was being presented in the trial?

hotsauceman1 wrote:The same could be said of america.

hotsauceman1 wrote:OR!!!! I can work to change american into the country i know many want to see it.
Y'know, thats how democracy works.

rubiksnoob wrote:I must say, if my opinion of GB was informed solely by posts by British users and articles found here on dakka, I would not have a very high opinion of GB. How on earth did you guys ever manage to mangle your justice system so badly?

mattyrm wrote: Hey Tom Cruise said British justice is the best in the world!

Frazzled wrote:

filbert wrote:

racially offensive

That's the pertinent point - he has the right to say whatever he wants but using racial slurs comes under the banner of inciting hatred via speech or some such. It's the same law used to lock up Muslim clerics that preach about Jihad and so forth.

So...I'm right. You don't have freedom of speech, only freedom of approved speech.
The founding fadas were right. We needed the First Amendment.


Offensiveness is in the eye of the beerholder.

reds8n wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Hazardous Harry wrote:

KingCracker wrote:Heh, no thanks. You guys can have your "Freedom of speech" Ill gladly keep mine. Sure it can be a pain in the ass at times, but at least I know I can freely say my opinions/views without being put in handcuffs for it.

Laws are (generally) designed to reflect what society does or does not find acceptable. Amazingly, we happen to find that saying such racist and offensive statements is not acceptable.

So does China.

They execute people too....

.. like America !

Relapse wrote: Is it illegal in Britain to mock someone's religious beliefs because it constitutes hate speech?

mattyrm wrote:

Relapse wrote: Is it illegal in Britain to mock someone's religious beliefs because it constitutes hate speech?

Clearly not, neither I, nor Richard Dawkins are in prison.

hotsauceman1 wrote:"Dangerous Thoughts Lead to dangerous movements with lead to deadly acts"
Hotsauceman1 2012
I think its great the britain locks up to morons so they dont breed their hatred.

Grakmar wrote:I always figured it was fiction. But, Britain does have cameras everywhere, constantly watching what you do, and they haul you away and lock you up if you say something the government doesn't like...

mattyrm wrote: I do think the Yanks are blowing this out of proportion mind you