Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Lord-Loss wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/

Yep, the death penalty cost more. Texas have executed 431 people since 1973, but I guess that Fraz for ya'.

Well FW, the problem there is that he was let out of jail. He obviously wasnt fit to be let back into society, if he kills a girl, after he is released.

A good question at this point is how many people that serve time for murder, rape and assorted other crimes of this magnitude, commit similar offenses after realease. It goes beyond money for the victims of these people, and may actually outweigh the number of innocent people that get executed.
It could be interesting for the pro and con forces here to dig in and bring back the results of their research.

ShumaGorath wrote:Doesn't it actually cost more to put someone to death? The repeated appeals process is considerably more expensive than maintaining a concrete box and making some lunchables.

Ive heard that alot, its definately untrue. For starters we dont put anyone in a "concrete box with some lunchables" we proper look after the fethers, with medical treatment, 3 square meals, clothing and some recreational facilities. Also, we could even kill people and make a profit, for example, i would kill people for the government for free. I had a salary when i was doing it as a soldier, but once a month i would do it for free as a decent citizen, for you all, my fellow tax payers.

Also i would use a big brother style system where i could actually make money, which would be given to charity.

How do you want Ian Huntley to die this weekend? Text - Hammer to 8111, Text - Kukri Machete to 8112, Text Louisville Slugger to 8113, votes cost 10p per message. To watch the live video feed as Matt "Merciless" Taylor slashes, bludgeons or hacks the dregs of society into oblivion, simply pay 9.99 on paypal!

Or something like that, id give 10% of the takings to the victims family, 10% to a charity of the viewers choice and the rest could help pay for the gruel and rehab for the rest of the more human prisoners. Smart thinking eh?

Oh and good call with the pigskins JEB.

Lord-loss wrote:But murder is alot more serious then kidnap.

Kidnap followed by life imprisonment... that... is pretty fething terrible. I am still not sure I follow what you are trying to say though.

Huh, when did I say that kidnap should be followed by life Imprisonment?

mattyrm wrote:
Ive heard that alot, its definately untrue. For starters we dont put anyone in a "concrete box with some lunchables" we proper look after the fethers, with medical treatment, 3 square meals, clothing and some recreational facilities.

All of which are available to people on death row. It may be different in England, but in the US the death penalty costs a good deal more than life imprisonment. Food is cheap, facilities are not an issue as they're necessary in either case, and medical treatment can be viewed in a similar light.

Lord-loss wrote:Huh, when did I say that kidnap should be followed by life Imprisonment?

Orkeo pointed out the fact that kidnap is not what imprisonment is. In the context of this conversation, it would be lifetime imprisonment vs. death; and in the bit I quoted, kidnapped for life vs. death.

But I am still not sure I follow what you are trying to say overall. Death is bad... m'kay...

Fateweaver wrote:I'm still at a loss as to how keeping him in jail would be more humane than death.

I'd rather die than be locked in a cage (which is more or less what a jail cell is) the rest of my life. That's just me, your idea of what you'd rather have happen will differ from mine.

I think everyone should just forgot what I said about humane Im pretty tired.

Thats exactly the point FW, killing them, would give them the easy way out, left them suffer, for the rest of their days, in a cell.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wrexasaur wrote:But I am still not sure I follow what you are trying to say overall. Death is bad... m'kay...

Im trying to say that, life imprisonment can be a better punishment then execution. The death penalty is hypercrite.

The question you have to ask though LL is this:

Is it really suffering to be locked up in a cell, fed 3 times a day with exercise time and cable tv? Maybe that's a better life than a lot of these murderers and rapists live.

*Edited due to the sensitivity of some

Wrexasaur wrote:

Lord-loss wrote:Huh, when did I say that kidnap should be followed by life Imprisonment?

Orkeo pointed out the fact that kidnap is not what imprisonment is. In the context of this conversation, it would be lifetime imprisonment vs. death; and in the bit I quoted, kidnapped for life vs. death.

But I am still not sure I follow what you are trying to say overall. Death is bad... m'kay...

What I was actually trying to say is that if the arrest and imprisonment of criminals was done by random citizens it would be kidnapping. However, no one thinks that this means the government is somehow in support of kidnapping, or hypocritical, for "kidnapping" kidnappers.

There's no more reason to think the government is somehow in support of murder, or hypocritical, for killing murderers.

mattyrm wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Doesn't it actually cost more to put someone to death? The repeated appeals process is considerably more expensive than maintaining a concrete box and making some lunchables.

Ive heard that alot, its definately untrue. For starters we dont put anyone in a "concrete box with some lunchables" we proper look after the fethers, with medical treatment, 3 square meals, clothing and some recreational facilities. Also, we could even kill people and make a profit, for example, i would kill people for the government for free. I had a salary when i was doing it as a soldier, but once a month i would do it for free as a decent citizen, for you all, my fellow tax payers.

Also i would use a big brother style system where i could actually make money, which would be given to charity.

How do you want Ian Huntley to die this weekend? Text - Hammer to 8111, Text - Kukri Machete to 8112, Text Louisville Slugger to 8113, votes cost 10p per message. To watch the live video feed as Matt "Merciless" Taylor slashes, bludgeons or hacks the dregs of society into oblivion, simply pay 9.99 on paypal!

Or something like that, id give 10% of the takings to the victims family, 10% to a charity of the viewers choice and the rest could help pay for the gruel and rehab for the rest of the more human prisoners. Smart thinking eh?

Oh and good call with the pigskins JEB.

Do you not have any notion of empathy? Murder isnt a crime specifically committed by "insane scumbags", its committed by ordinary people aswell, what about a woman who after years of abuse kills her husband? Or how about one day if you found out that your partner had been cheating on you, and you killed him/her? Would you if you were sentanced to death say "yeh ok thats fair, i deserve to die?" For some reason I doubt you would.... Murder isnt simply limited to the scummy underclasses.

TBH, some of the descriptions people have said about what they would do to condemed people is disgusting, whilst i realise its mostly internet tough guy syndrome, if you actually believed that you would have to be some kind of sadist....

Necroplaya wrote:


Do you not have any notion of empathy? Murder isnt a crime specifically committed by "insane scumbags", its committed by ordinary people aswell, what about a woman who after years of abuse kills her husband? Or how about one day if you found out that your partner had been cheating on you, and you killed her? Would you if you were sentanced to death say "yeh ok thats fair, i deserve to die?" For some reason I doubt you would.... Murder isnt simply limited to the scummy underclasses.

TBH, some of the descriptions people have said about what they would do to condemed people is disgusting, whilst i realise its mostly internet tough guy syndrome, if you actually believed that you would have to be some kind of sadist....

Wow the bulls t level is getting pretty deep in here.

Frazzled wrote:

Necroplaya wrote:


Do you not have any notion of empathy? Murder isnt a crime specifically committed by "insane scumbags", its committed by ordinary people aswell, what about a woman who after years of abuse kills her husband? Or how about one day if you found out that your partner had been cheating on you, and you killed her? Would you if you were sentanced to death say "yeh ok thats fair, i deserve to die?" For some reason I doubt you would.... Murder isnt simply limited to the scummy underclasses.

TBH, some of the descriptions people have said about what they would do to condemed people is disgusting, whilst i realise its mostly internet tough guy syndrome, if you actually believed that you would have to be some kind of sadist....

Wow the bulls t level is getting pretty deep in here.

Wanna explain how thats bull####? I think its a valid question, all those in favor of the death penalty, if they were sentanced to death would they accept it and say they deserved it?

I thought it hit bottom about the point we started talking about stringing people up to be flayed alive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Necroplaya wrote:
Wanna explain how thats bull####? I think its a valid question, all those in favor of the death penalty, if they were sentanced to death would they accept it and say they deserved it?

Its not. The same issue of emotional involvement applies.

I thought it hit bottom about the point we started talking about stringing people up to be flayed alive.

No, it still has a ways to go.

A good question at this point is how many people that serve time for murder, rape and assorted other crimes of this magnitude, commit similar offenses after realease. It goes beyond money for the victims of these people, and may actually outweigh the number of innocent people that get executed.

It's possible, but the concept of punishment doesn't negate the idea of re offense. If that was the point then you would kill every criminal to make sure.

Actually, I believe there was a Greek King of some sort who did that. He founded some of the first greek laws, and almost everything had the death penalty...

On the other hand, my only source on this IS Horrible Histories. (While entertaining, I've always found some aspects of it to be of questionable historical accuracy)

Dracon, begetting the term Draconian. Of course he was a bit of a wussy tree hugger and refused to give someone the Brass Bull for spitting once. Thats why Athens fell.

Necroplaya wrote:

Do you not have any notion of empathy? Murder isnt a crime specifically committed by "insane scumbags", its committed by ordinary people aswell, what about a woman who after years of abuse kills her husband?

Murder is killing committed without just cause. It is unlikely that a case like this would warrant the death penalty- odds are pretty good that there would be reasonable doubt of the woman's sanity. If it was in response to a violent attack, it might even be considered self defence. This is not the sort of thing you are executed for.

Necroplaya wrote: Or how about one day if you found out that your partner had been cheating on you, and you killed him/her? Would you if you were sentanced to death say "yeh ok thats fair, i deserve to die?" For some reason I doubt you would.... Murder isnt simply limited to the scummy underclasses.

This would be second degree murder, a lesser form of murder. If someone really believes that someone sleeping with someone else means that they deserve to die and acts on it, then I have no problem allowing their execution. This is the same situation as a rabid dog- the person's jealousy and rage are at levels that they have proven are completely uncontrollable. They are no longer fit to walk among the living.

Necroplaya wrote:TBH, some of the descriptions people have said about what they would do to condemed people is disgusting, whilst i realise its mostly internet tough guy syndrome, if you actually believed that you would have to be some kind of sadist....

On this point, I agree completely. I favor private, quick and relatively painless executions. These are generally only administered to first degree murderers. These are folks that planned their actions and killed without just cause. There are many cases where killing is not murder. If someone breaks into your house and you shoot them {in Florida, at least} you've done no wrong. Once someone trespasses and threatens you and your loved ones, you can defend yourself as vigorously as you'd like. If you were to see someone being raped or assaulted, you could kill the aggressor with no legal ramifications. Defending yourself or others is legal. If we, untrained citizens, are allowed to do this to criminals we catch red handed on the street, is it not reasonable that our judges and juries should be able kill them after fair trials?

I oppose capital punishment for the main reason that it doesn't work.

Secondly it is cruel and unjust, that is why history's most horrible regimes are always so strongly associated with it.

Necroplaya wrote:Do you not have any notion of empathy? Murder isnt a crime specifically committed by "insane scumbags", its committed by ordinary people aswell, what about a woman who after years of abuse kills her husband? Or how about one day if you found out that your partner had been cheating on you, and you killed him/her? Would you if you were sentanced to death say "yeh ok thats fair, i deserve to die?"

Necro, read what i wrote. Seriously, what did i say?

I said we can merely jail people for almost anything, this is the beauty of the system, a jury and judge can make educated decisions about criminals.

If you are even merely a murderer i probably wouldnt advocate the DP. You know, a grown man killing another grown man for some reason he deemed worth the risk.. perhaps i wouldnt. Its very simple. Nobody in their right mind would ever say a wife who was beaten by her husband for years deserved "death" if she snapped and slotted him. And what you are saying is utterly irrelevant to the point. Of course she wouldnt get the DP, she probably wouldnt even get life in prison. Indeed, i have heard of many cases where this has happened and the sentence is hugely reduced. Are you saying that if the DP existed in any form at all we would all start hanging everyone!? Of course we wouldnt! We have life imprisonment and we dont put every single criminal in jail for life now do we?

I empathise, i have a great notion of it. I dont think we should or would ever kill people with genuine mental problems, external influences, anyone who could be rehabilitated, or if there was even a miniscule shadow of doubt at all.

However, if we have Video footage of a sicko brutally raping a kid and then chopping his or her nut off, then you will never convince me that a bullet in the back of the swede is not a better idea than that fething verminous creature living to a ripe old age, consuming his nice warm 3 square meals a day paid for by tax payers. I lived in a Cave in Afghanistan, washed by pouring a bottle of frozen water over my head and ate nothing but gak spaceman rations for 6 months. They dont even live worse than that! They get hot meals, hot showers, warm beds, medical care?!

I cannot even imagine the pain victims go through, if my 5 year old nephew was killed like that i would absolutely murder the man who did it and deal with the jail time. Hopefully thanks to folk like you i would get away with only 3 or 4 years with a good lawyer and all the "circumstances"

Instead of worrying so much about the criminal, worry about the victim. I know i do, and i know wouldnt be able to swallow the fury if something like that ever happened to me and the perp was given a "life" sentance in a cushy British prison.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and Killkrazy, englighten me as to how it does not work?

It is a proven fact that crime falls when penalties are more severe.

Kilkrazy wrote:I oppose capital punishment for the main reason that it doesn't work.

Secondly it is cruel and unjust, that is why history's most horrible regimes are always so strongly associated with it.

Perhaps it doesn't work as a deterrent to other criminals. I've never heard of single person that suffered the death penalty becoming a repeat offender. From the perspective of eliminating any future crimes by the individual, it is 100% effective.

true that.

I think the question we all have to ask ourselves is, how many licks does it REALLY take to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop?

Necros wrote:I think the question we all have to ask ourselves is, how many licks does it REALLY take to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop?

Asked and answered.

Three.

My take:

Overview on the principle of the death penalty.
Sometimes it works other times it does not, generally you are better off without it. You cannot unexecute someone, you cannot account for the politised action, some perpetrators might welcome death as martyrdom and sometimes even the darkest criminals rehabilitate.

Death penalty and non-rehabilitation.
it is generally assumed some criminals cant be rehabiklitated, almost always this is du to popular misconception rather than any science, and often due to severity or nature of the offence rather than any dispassionate attitude.Take for example the opinion expressed here that paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. we hate paedophiles because they break one of societys few remaining taboos, actually a paedophile can cover a large range of persons fom someon looking at dodgy porn to a child rapist-murderer. When we look at the law and punishment we have to look dispassionately, which few can do when concerning opinions on paedophiles. Lockl em up or string em up comments are very relieving but who here can judge life or death on such emotive cases fairly. Some paedos especially those who never actually had any sexual contact with children require mental health help not prison, where is the line drawn.
There have been unusual cases of rehabilitiation, and conversely many cases of feigned rehabilitation to try and secure release, both usually involving religious conversion. While a penitant serious offender should simply accept their sentence rather than try and secure release it could be argued that assumed cases of persons beyond rehabilitation should not be taken as an excuse for the death penalty. There have been cases in the US of genuine rehabilitation on death row, such as Karla Faye Tucker. The question remains wherether an execution should still go ahead, this decision is often taken politically and the question of rehabiltiation is a politcal one with personal vocalised viewpoints of the electorate being stronger weighted than psychologists nd other prison professionals opinions.

Sentencing and the media.
the media and pupular opinion will always skew sentencing in such casesd. Furthermore the media is of itself a big unbalancing factor, in the time when Huntley commited his crimes and came to court many many other chidlren went missing in very suspicuous circumstances, some turned up dead. I remebmer a statistic to this effect which was in the low hundreds. The media didnt focus on thiose stories because it had a story ongoing. Huntley was in a way unlucky, he could have committed the same offences a little earlier or later and some other case would have made the press. British pruisons have plenty of prisoners like Ian Huntleys and Peter Sutchiff (Yorkshire Ripper), but many pass through their sentences as unknowns. The minimum life tarrif for the Moors Murderers, Huntley, Sutcliff etc are there simply because they are public cases. This isnt to show any sympathy for those scum, I have no more than you, but why single some out simply because they have had more columnn inches. Its not usualy for someone whos criminal profile is very similar to Huntley to get 30 years and be out after 15. The law is always a lottery, but media involvement and capital offences adds pressures that the justice stystem can ill afford.

Death penalty and martyrdom.
This doesnt just apply to Islamic terrorists, it is well known that the IRA hated sentencing to prison because it clearly plabelled their terrorists as criminals rather than fighters. This was the cause of Bobby Sands and other hunger strikers, Sands wanted IRA prisoners not to wear prison uniform and undergo other activities common to other sentenced criminals, principally on the beleif that they should be considered POW's and not murderers. According to historical sources of the Troubles, prison was a deterent, shooting terrorists was less of a deternet than sentencing them, as fighting against them with soldiers was a form of legitimisation in some eyes.
With regards to Islamic terror there is a current piolicy in many countries not to execute but to reserve unlimited sentences without parole. This is policy in the USA and also the Bali bombers shared this fate. In the latter case we know the Bali bombers requested the death penalty and were purposefully denied it. No martyrdom for you.
This can lead to an issue of fairness if a comon murderer, probably a far less extreme form of criminal is sentenced to die while a terrorist lives.

Death penalty and deliberate miscarraiges of justice.
This makes it easier to hide. I am glad the death penalty was abolished before the cases of the Birmingham 6 and Guildford 4, they would never have had any exoneration. Remebmer the clampaign to free them orginalated in the UK legal community There have been a number of unsafe sentences in the USA particualry the southern states and especially where the accused was black, in every case once executed it is harder to exonerate because there are compelling grounds not to even try.

Death penalty and accidental/competence related miscarraiges of justice.
all I can say on this is that the dealth penalty in the Uk would be a disaster as policing standards have gone way downhill. Police are target orientated and heavily dogmatised, they often do not listen to defence stories or follow up leads that question an accusation. They largely want cases open and ashut to keep the stats up and there are benefits for doing so. Miscarriages of justice are on the increase especially where investigationg something which is targeted on a point of dogma. A good example is Operation Orb, an FBI entrapment plan to catch paedophiles while overspread into the UK. Entrapment is not legal in the Uk because many people might be tempted to commit an opportunisitc offence they would otherwiose not comit, but due to the nature and current dogmas on child protection this legal point was overlooked. What was also overlooked was that the stiong site contained but ordinary pay site porn and child pormn in seoperation. Over 700 people were 'caught' in operation orb via their creidt cards and were proptly jumped in by the Uk police as paedos. several commited suicide duie to the harassment from the police, no sympathy I hear. However many of those arrested had clear alibiis, their identities had beern stolen (which is easy to do) others had onle purchased access to standard adult porn which wasx legally avaialable and had avoided all contact to child porn sites. The pilce had 'paedos' though, and were not in the mood to listen. a senior police officer monthsd later defended the campaign on the grounds that it had netted some paedophiles, thism ay be true, but other innocent peope were hounded to their deaths in the process, to the target orientated polce the ends justified the means.
Another example conerns a coked up chav who attacked a manager closing up a business, someone noted that figure were fighting and called the pol;ice, he could identify noone, later the other late manager came down and was attacked by the same chav (who was a martial artist) both ended up is hospital, the former one in a coma. Police turned up, arrested bioth men in hospital and charged the one who woke up. No attempt was made to collect phorensics, or to in any way check up the defence story, the manager was spared a long prison sentence only because the other manager woke from his coma. This type of policing would have been unheard of twenty years ago, excepting rare cases where tghe piolice deliberately framed someone (see Guildford 4). Now this is hapening pretty muchall the time, the piolice dont listen wont investigate and want cases open and shut quickly for conveneince and to meet targets, targets that can make a senior policemans career. I could not truast capital punishment cases to the current generation of Uk police, the old chool has gone, methodology is increasingly sloppy and result targets are politicised.

How to process capital punishment.
If you do want a capital punishment system ironically enough I would withut hesitation choose the British one. It is by far the most well thought out and humane, the specifications for capital punishment were revised and improved by ther Home Office in tghe late 19th century though to the early 20th century. the guidelines are still in use today in commonwealth countries with a capital punishment system. Singapore hax an exact copy of the early 20th century British system.


Trial and appeal.
The trial of a capital case does not differ from that of a non capital case, no special court is convened except in military cases. Thopugh only a high level court is used. the accused is afforded a very good quality lawyer at the states expense, normally the defence lawyer in a capital case is the best available on the state roll, the prosecution lawyer a very close second.
if the accused is found guilty and the sentenced of death pronounced an appeal is automatically lodged unless he condemned waives the appeal. If the case goes to appeal the accused may change his lawyers (which he may do at any time), this will delay the appeal to give the new lawyers a chance to familiarise themselves with the case. otherwise the appeal will be processed quickly. Full access to a legal library is granted in prison, the accused often attempts to take personal interest in the legal minutiae and this is not in any way discouraged. Appeals are fast tracked, delayed only if certain forms of new evidence require such a delay, other appeals are frozen so that the capital case appeal can be dealt with quickly. Normally appeals start within a few weeks of sentencing. The appeals main purpose is to look for grounds to commute the sentence not to aquit, though this can occur if new evidence is found which casts doubt on the orignal conviction.

Post Appeal
Multiple appeals are possible only if compeltely new evidence found after the appeal which can be shown to have not been avaialbe prior to the appeal. This availability of the evidence is scrutinised so that it is not possible for a defence team to trickle evidence to draw out the appeals process. execution is scheduled to be held 2 to 3 weeks after confirmation of sentencing on appeal, the condemend is not informed of the execution date and is kept isolated.

Holding for execution.
The condemned is moved to a cell post appeal and tansfered prison if necessary. Not all prisons have execution chambers. the sondemned is kepty in strict isolation from all other prisoners mainly to prevent taqunting. They are kept comfortable and looked after during waking hours at least one prison officers is in the cell at all times for verbal contact. A priest is avialble on call daily and will be present at the execution.
Family are permitted to visit on Sundays only, this is primarily to kep the actual execution date masked. No other contact with the outside world is permitted, no newspapers past a certain date and no radio. The public is informed of the execution date but this fact is concealed from the condemned.

Execution.
The prefered method of execution is a variable drop gallows, with the drop recessed to the floor below where the prisoner is held. Variable drop gallows mean a form of hanging by which the rope length is dicated by the physique and mass othe the condemened. the heavier the body the shorter the drop. Variable drops ensures that the prisoner does instantly and painlessly and also ensures the rope does not decapitate the prisoner, which can occur if the drop is too long. The gallows is erected in a conceled room no furrther than 15' from the bed of the accused. Sound proofing prevents the condemned from being aware of the gallows existance. Executons are scheduled a minimum of two whole weeks after the appeal to grant the condemened time to confess and/or make their own peace. Executions are held in the morning just after breakfast, a time the prisoner is most relaxed. the prisoner is kept unaware of this timing though it is common to allm executions because art the time execution methodology was kept conceled from the public and press.
The executioner flanked by a second and several prison warders would enter the cell and pinion the condemned and lead them to the concealed gallows. medthodology varied depending on the accused reaction and the execuctionerd style. Sometimes the accused was walked casually to the gallows and kept in conversation, if the accused was distressed the process was rushed and the prisoner manhandled to the gallows drop. a good executioner would walk a condemened to the gallows in well under a minute from first entry to death, if distressed the process would be rushed to half this time often far less. The record was seven and a half seconds by Albert Pierrepoint that is from sitting unsuspecting and relaxing havig a cup of tea or game of cards with the guards to hanging dead on the end of a gallows rope with a hood over your head and your feet and hands bound.

If anything the variable drop as used by Home Office guidelines is a good way to go, I would ironically prefer it to most euthanasia methods. It is considered barbaric purely because of the nature of capital punishment and because the methodology was never released to the public until after capital punishment was abolished. This is its only flaw, while understandable why the methodoligies were concealed the fact that Singapore uses the same methodology, only describes it heps keep the deqath penalty accpetable in the state. the poeple know its humane and thus keeps all its deterent value while minimising public anxiety over its existance.

Many here might even argue that this method is too good for some criminals. I would not agree, the minimisation of brutality helps humanise the system, something to be desired. It is generally understood that many of the execution methods used in the US are chosen because they can be drawn out, this combined with the fact that victims families often attend executions, something not allowed in the system described above, it leaves it open to suggestion that execution process can be influenced.

For those who want further information on the variable drop system watch the first section of this film on youTube, the entire film is here and is worth watching, but the relevant detail is in the introduction here. Its quite chilling the craftsman like way executions were handled:Pierrepoint

That's pretty comprehensive.

Orlanth wrote:My take:

Overview on the principle of the death penalty.
Sometimes it works other times it does not, generally you are better off without it. You cannot unexecute someone, you cannot account for the politised action, some perpetrators might welcome death as martyrdom and sometimes even the darkest criminals rehabilitate.

Death penalty and non-rehabilitation.
it is generally assumed some criminals cant be rehabiklitated, almost always this is du to popular misconception rather than any science, and often due to severity or nature of the offence rather than any dispassionate attitude.Take for example the opinion expressed here that paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. we hate paedophiles because they break one of societys few remaining taboos, actually a paedophile can cover a large range of persons fom someon looking at dodgy porn to a child rapist-murderer. When we look at the law and punishment we have to look dispassionately, which few can do when concerning opinions on paedophiles. Lockl em up or string em up comments are very relieving but who here can judge life or death on such emotive cases fairly. Some paedos especially those who never actually had any sexual contact with children require mental health help not prison, where is the line drawn.
There have been unusual cases of rehabilitiation, and conversely many cases of feigned rehabilitation to try and secure release, both usually involving religious conversion. While a penitant serious offender should simply accept their sentence rather than try and secure release it could be argued that assumed cases of persons beyond rehabilitation should not be taken as an excuse for the death penalty. There have been cases in the US of genuine rehabilitation on death row, such as Karla Faye Tucker. The question remains wherether an execution should still go ahead, this decision is often taken politically and the question of rehabiltiation is a politcal one with personal vocalised viewpoints of the electorate being stronger weighted than psychologists nd other prison professionals opinions.

From what I've learned of Pedos from research and talking to cops, once they've been at it a while, forget about rehabilitation because they can't or won't.

From what I've learned of Pedos from research and talking to cops, once they've been at it a while, forget about rehabilitation because they can't or won't.

It's fairly well known that age based sexual assault isn't something that is easily rehabilitated. It's far from unheard of though.

Relapse wrote:

Orlanth wrote:My take:

Overview on the principle of the death penalty.
Sometimes it works other times it does not, generally you are better off without it. You cannot unexecute someone, you cannot account for the politised action, some perpetrators might welcome death as martyrdom and sometimes even the darkest criminals rehabilitate.

Death penalty and non-rehabilitation.
it is generally assumed some criminals cant be rehabiklitated, almost always this is du to popular misconception rather than any science, and often due to severity or nature of the offence rather than any dispassionate attitude.Take for example the opinion expressed here that paedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. we hate paedophiles because they break one of societys few remaining taboos, actually a paedophile can cover a large range of persons fom someon looking at dodgy porn to a child rapist-murderer. When we look at the law and punishment we have to look dispassionately, which few can do when concerning opinions on paedophiles. Lockl em up or string em up comments are very relieving but who here can judge life or death on such emotive cases fairly. Some paedos especially those who never actually had any sexual contact with children require mental health help not prison, where is the line drawn.
There have been unusual cases of rehabilitiation, and conversely many cases of feigned rehabilitation to try and secure release, both usually involving religious conversion. While a penitant serious offender should simply accept their sentence rather than try and secure release it could be argued that assumed cases of persons beyond rehabilitation should not be taken as an excuse for the death penalty. There have been cases in the US of genuine rehabilitation on death row, such as Karla Faye Tucker. The question remains wherether an execution should still go ahead, this decision is often taken politically and the question of rehabiltiation is a politcal one with personal vocalised viewpoints of the electorate being stronger weighted than psychologists nd other prison professionals opinions.

From what I've learned of Pedos from research and talking to cops, once they've been at it a while, forget about rehabilitation because they can't or won't.

Yep.

My take doesnt involve a wall of text - if you are 99% sure a guy is a paedo, send him to prison.

If you are 100% certain (video evidence, DNA on a corpse among others) hang the fether.

Easy.

ShumaGorath wrote:

From what I've learned of Pedos from research and talking to cops, once they've been at it a while, forget about rehabilitation because they can't or won't.

It's fairly well known that age based sexual assault isn't something that is easily rehabilitated. It's far from unheard of though.

Good, then you can have your kids live next to a "rehabilitated pedo", because I know I won't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:My take doesnt involve a wall of text - if you are 99% sure a guy is a paedo, send him to prison.

If you are 100% certain (video evidence, DNA on a corpse among others) hang the fether.

Easy.

Amen to that.