# The Death Penalty: Do/would you support it?



## The Mint Man (23 June 2006)

Recently there has been threads on this forum to do with life and death, wether it be about animals, Al Qaeda/Bakkar Bashir, Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia, god/the after life... the list goes on.

Obviously we dont have to worry about it (death penalty) in this country but this question still interest me. Do you support other countries that enforce it? 

So i thought it would be an interesting question;
*Do/would you support the death penalty?  Why/why not? AND 
what crimes do you think justifies the death penalty?* (if you support it)

Feel free to discuss.

I wont put my view as Im sure someone will say exactly what I think anyway.

EDIT> the poll is based on someone thats found guilty. 
There are obviously some grey areas with this question


----------



## Happy (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				The Mint Man said:
			
		

> I wont put my view as Im sure someone will say exactly what I think anyway.
> :





Very smart smooth move, hope somebody will voice my opinion too.


----------



## The Mint Man (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Happy said:
			
		

> Very smart smooth move, hope somebody will voice my opinion too.



hmm.. thanks
I just want to hear peoples point of view without putting them off by (possibly) making them angry with me/my view first.
get my drift?


----------



## Happy (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Yep, drifting too.


----------



## Smurf1976 (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I would never support the death penalty simply because it is the most permanent form of punishment. The legal system does make mistakes, evidence can be forged etc. There is no such thing as 100% certainty that someone actually committed a particular crime. 99.999% certainty maybe, but not 100%. If someone is wrongly imprisoned then at least you can let then out if they are subsequently found innocent. Not so with the death penalty.


----------



## bullmarket (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				The Mint Man said:
			
		

> I wont put my view as Im sure someone will say exactly what I think anyway.




I can't take this thread seriously if you're not prepared to put up your view and hope that someone else puts it up for you.  

So i'll take the easy way out as well and hope someone "will say exactly what I think anyway"  as well  

Can that person please vote for me as well  :


----------



## Happy (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Just remembered something, and we could link all the mentioned threads.

How about this proposition – 

 We identify ‘evil’ gene, isolate it and destroy (with the foetus or not, I am easy – hope will not get challenged over that)

This way we address the cause and we don’t have to worry about effect, like murder, rape or any other nasty case of inappropriate behaviour.


----------



## MalteseBull (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

they should shoot down the illegal refugees like China does...

and yes


----------



## crackaton (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				MalteseBull said:
			
		

> they should shoot down the illegal refugees like China does...
> 
> and yes





Um have a look here and you'll see heaps of illegal Chinese. You will never get rid of illegal refugees in this country. i have met English refugees that have been here for years, never worked and sponge. Then there is Indians and the rest of asians. Now we have Africans. what next? This country has gone to the **** hole.


----------



## Prospector (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

OK, I will start the ball rolling then.

I disagree with the death penalty.  I dont think we should make killing a human being legal (and I am not referring to a fetus Mr B as I hear you breathing behind me  )  For the same reason I do not believe in war.

I do think that people who commit heinous crimes (eg multiple murders) and who show no remorse should not be given a wonderful time in prison - eg if Milsovic is threatening suicide because he has lost his TV, well, so be it!  Remorse is true remorse, and not something their lawyers dream up.

When people commit serious crimes while on parole, or they have multiple convictions for similar serious offences, or against children - life imprisonment, no privileges.

For most offenders gaol should be a rehabilitative process, but it is naive to think that some prisoners can be rehabilitated.  But we shouldnt put them to death.  That is too easy.


----------



## Blitzed (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> OK, I will start the ball rolling then.
> 
> I disagree with the death penalty.  I dont think we should make killing a human being legal (and I am not referring to a fetus Mr B as I hear you breathing behind me  )  For the same reason I do not believe in war.
> 
> ...




Yes, we fear death because we fear the unknown, if someone kills someone who is innocent, I don't want them to go straight away to where that innocent person has gone....doesn't make sense to me....give them hell on earth....strip them of all luxuries and make them work their asses off or sit alone with nothing to do but think of the child, father, mother they stole life from. If someone killed one of my sweet children etc I want them to pay here first  ....Hell is on earth only.


----------



## quinny (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Well hell, I'll post against the flow. At this point the votes are in favour of the death penalty but there are no posts about why.

Let me say at the start that I know it's pointless to argue about it as people will _never_ agree on it. I can have this debate with my friends for ever. We had a huge discussion about this after that shooting in Tasmania about 10 years ago.

I would support the death penalty, but only in certain situations. Where the certainty is 100% guilt and the crime is murder (other than self defense), torture or some other horrible suffering then yes death penalty. I don't care if they can be rehabilitated or not. The family of the victim (and of course the victim themselves) will suffer for ever so why should the murderer be able to come back into society years later? I think murderer has given up their right to live in this society by their act.

I am not as aggravated about this topic now as I once was.


----------



## kgee (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Ever since I quit smoking I'm getting so argumentative ,angry and self righteous(...at least with this forum I can spare my friends)...
so here it is
like a cancer in the system get rid of them as quickly and painlessly as possible ...and don't harp on about it just move on 

PS I'd hate to ever see any of our world leaders quit smoking I'm sure there could be serious ramifications


----------



## Julia (23 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> OK, I will start the ball rolling then.
> 
> I disagree with the death penalty.  I dont think we should make killing a human being legal (and I am not referring to a fetus Mr B as I hear you breathing behind me  )  For the same reason I do not believe in war.
> 
> ...




I agree completely with Prospector's comments, especially denying perpetrators of serious crime all privileges.  Many criminals end up with more comfortable accommodation in jail than they had on the "outside" with reasonably comfortable room (hard to see it as a cell) with their own TV, music system etc.  And they don't even need to share a bathroom.  It's better than many of our sad mentally ill citizens get when they attempt to exist in grotty caravan parks where they are subject to all sorts of abuse.

Prisoners should lose all rights to any sorts of personal choices, i.e. the so called Muslim Australian who recently was awarded compensation for not being served fresh hal el meat on every day of the week.  Bloody hell!

Julia


----------



## coyotte (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Suppose it all depends on wether we are a Christian Nation !


Thou Shalt Not Kill
Vengence is mine --- sayth the Lord
He who is with out sin cast the 1st stone
Remove the log from your own eye -- before the speck in mine
As you judge others --- so will you be judged
Forgive them father -- they Know not what they do


GUESS WE ARE NOT !


----------



## crackaton (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				quinny said:
			
		

> Well hell, I'll post against the flow. At this point the votes are in favour of the death penalty but there are no posts about why.
> 
> Let me say at the start that I know it's pointless to argue about it as people will _never_ agree on it. I can have this debate with my friends for ever. We had a huge discussion about this after that shooting in Tasmania about 10 years ago.
> 
> ...





The death penalty is the best thing this country can introduce. It will make crims think twice. Is this country you can kill or rape a person, get about 7 years punishment and be free again. 

I am sick of do gooders arguing about wrong people being convicted etc. This happens very rarely. Rid society of this scum that  a) commit a heinous crime.  and then  b) cost the rest of society thousands of dollars per year to be kept alive and then c) get educated at tax payer expense and then d) get released.

ALL CRIMS SHOULD BE EXECUTED. **** THIS SOFT SOCIETY WE LIVE.


----------



## crackaton (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				coyotte said:
			
		

> Suppose it all depends on wether we are a Christian Nation !
> 
> 
> Thou Shalt Not Kill
> ...




Forget this christian morals crap. Look at the people entering this country. Look at the generation of ugly people that has emerged. people who think they can do anything and get away with it. Drug dealers murders, thugs rapists. They have no morals. Fight fire with fire. Do something wrong pay the penalty. It works in Singapore. Time to re-introduce it here. BRING BACK THE DEATH PENALTY.


----------



## crackaton (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kgee said:
			
		

> Ever since I quit smoking I'm getting so argumentative ,angry and self righteous(...at least with this forum I can spare my friends)...
> so here it is
> like a cancer in the system get rid of them as quickly and painlessly as possible ...and don't harp on about it just move on
> 
> PS I'd hate to ever see any of our world leaders quit smoking I'm sure there could be serious ramifications




I agree 10000% All this ****ing around, is bull****. Anyone not supporting the death penalty is either a crim or related to a crim. the solution is simple. Eye for an eye tooth for a tooth. Kill and be killed.


----------



## bullmarket (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I oppose the death penalty for the same reasons I posted in the RU486 thread.

_Imo, those who support the death penalty undeniably support morally blatant, cowardly, cold blooded murder (whether legalised or not)_ and arguing the death penalty rids society of people we are better of without is blatant BS imo because I assume someone who murders someone else out of vengeance, hate or whatever is in their mind ridding the world of someone they perceive the world would be better off without as well   ........so in my eyes there is no difference in the mentality of the person who committed the murder in the first place and those supporting the death penalty.

For extremely serious crimes and where there is no sign of remorse and/or rehabilitation then I would simply lock them up for the term of their natural life....and imo the pros of this solution greatly outweigh the cons.

_And then there is the religious side of the argument, which is just as valid as any other argument_.............as I suggested as    food for thought in other threads........*I suppose those that do not believe in God hope that they are right and that everyone else is wrong because eternity is a hell of a long time to be suffering in hell (or whatever your equivalent might be) for getting it wrong (ie...supporting the death penalty) for the relatively miniscule 80 odd years we spend on average in this life  *  

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die. 

Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.


----------



## bullmarket (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi kennas



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die.
> 
> Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.




I disagree - imo that offender has just as much right to life as you and I and everyone else, especially if they show genuine remorse and there is a chance of rehabilitation over time......sure, they have to spend significant time in prison to reflect on the consequences of their crimes and to hopefully repent and rehabilitate and to act as a deterrent to others.....and for those that show no remorse or unwillingness to even attempt rehabilitation then as I said earlier, lock them up for the term of their natural life.....imo the pros of this greatly outweigh the cons.

Unfortunately I have to leave soon for the weekend, so I will return next week to discuss further if you like.....or even if you don't like   

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## crackaton (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die.
> 
> Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.




Spot on Kennas. They know what they are doing and there is no rehabilitation. Even behind bars they infect society. these are not people, theese are the lowest form of life on this planet. A coachroach has more right to life than these scum. Hang shoot fry the ****ers. No publicity. No waste of time. No bull**** wankers saying this is wrong.No last meal. Nothing. Once sentenced straight out the back door and be done with. I'll bet they'll show remorse dangling in the air.


----------



## Joe Blow (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Crackaton, tone down the language please. It is completely unneccessary.


----------



## crackaton (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Joe Blow said:
			
		

> Crackaton, tone down the language please. It is completely unneccessary.



Sorry Joe. I'm just very emotive about this particular topic. sorry to all posters on this thread also.


----------



## coyotte (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				crackaton said:
			
		

> Spot on Kennas. They know what they are doing and there is no rehabilitation. Even behind bars they infect society. these are not people, theese are the lowest form of life on this planet. A coachroach has more right to life than these scum. Hang shoot fry the ****ers. No publicity. No waste of time. No bull**** wankers saying this is wrong.No last meal. Nothing. Once sentenced straight out the back door and be done with. I'll bet they'll show remorse dangling in the air.



your view would seem to be with the majority --- hence how come our claim to be a "christian nation" with christian values!
at least love em or hate em, the moslem nations practice what they claim to be and not swap their values around to suit the situation.

Cheers


----------



## Sean K (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Coyote, I think a problem with this topic is that the 'Christians' can not discuss it logically and reasonably as they are bound to the ethics instructed in the Book. And as Bull has said 'Thou Shall Not Kill' is an overriding principle which probably negates all the other talk of killing, and retribution, and 'eye for an eye' stuff.

The problem with the ethics of the Book is that it does not say WHY you should not do something, it just says 'do this, or don't do that, or you go to hell!' That is not a logical or justifiable argument. It doesn't hold up in a court of law.  

So, I think we should try as much as possible to come up with some logical and sound reasons why or why not we should have the death penalty. 

I say yes, purely on a _relevant punishment_ basis. I do not believe our system is a 'rehabilitation' system, but it is a 'justice' system, and that means that for certain crimes 'justice' needs to be served. Sure, rehab is part of our system, but in this case we are talking about the most serious of crimes that probably take anothers life. 

For the most heinous of crimes, where an individual has inflected terrible suffering on another, and taken life, and which has ultimately significantly effected others, such as friends and family, for their lifetimes, then the only 'justice' would be for them to forfeit their own life for their actions.


----------



## BSD (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I would only support it for the children of those who agree with it.


----------



## Joe Blow (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Crackaton has just earned himself a week's holiday. Next time it will be permanent.


----------



## bunyip (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I doubt if there's a person alive who really believes it's never right to kill someone. 
Consider a situation where some thug breaks into your house and starts weilding an axe. He hacks up one of your kids first, then heads for your wife or husband or some other member or your family, or he heads for you. 
Each and every one of us would kill him if we could, if that was the only possible way to stop him. 
And our killing of him would NOT be wrong, it would be right and it would be justified as a means of protecting others from being killed.

That's what happens when some terrorist or some drug smuggling bastard is executed....by killing one person we save others. I was absolutely delighted when Van Ngyuen was hanged in Singapore. The mongrel was going to smuggle 25,000 doses of poison into our country for distribution to our citizens, mainly our young people. Some of them would quite likely have died as a result of using this poision. Drug traffickers are mass murderes, and do not deserve to live.

The smiling assassin, Indonesian Amrossi, is a mass murderer who does not deserve to live.
Abu Bakir Bashir is a mass murderer who does not deserve to live. 

It's ludicrous to suggest that these types of people should be kept in prison permanently and given, at tax payers expense, all the necessities of life such as food, accommodation, medical care, clothes etc.

Get rid of them, use them for body parts, whatever, but just get rid of them. The world would be a better place without them.

Bunyip


----------



## Prospector (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bunyip said:
			
		

> I doubt if there's a person alive who really believes it's never right to kill someone.
> Consider a situation where some thug breaks into your house and starts weilding an axe. He hacks up one of your kids first, then heads for your wife or husband or some other member or your family, or he heads for you.
> Each and every one of us would kill him if we could, if that was the only possible way to stop him.
> And our killing of him would NOT be wrong, it would be right and it would be justified as a means of protecting others from being killed.
> ...




Of course you are entitled to protect yourself and family if you are in fear of your life.  But that is not what the issue is here - it is about a court of law sentencing a person to death - ie state legalised killing when there is no personal threat of death.  Entirely different!

Just wondering why this thread has changed into accusing new immigrants of being the ones most likely to be in this situation    Probably the only people for whom I thought maybe death penalty was appropriate was Martin Bryant (blonde, blue eyed aryan) and Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma bomber/US Resident/US Marine - first Iraq war)

Also, I havent voted NO on the poll above - life is never black and white, but then, maybe I am just a true Gemini   - Mr P calls it being indecisive


----------



## kerosam (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

i'm for it! If my children happens to be a victim of some sick b*****d's actions, bugga the values of any institutions, bugga the offender's right, hang or shoot the bugger, i say! including the legal representative who try plead 'insanity' for the b******d.

one example, from spiderman the movie comes to mind.... peter parker's(spiderman) uncle was murdered by the crook whom Peter has allowed to escape after the crook has robbed Peter's boss. well, it maybe a hollywood movie, but there's a principle behind the event... well, that's my opinion anyway.


----------



## Porper (24 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> Imo, those who support the death penalty undeniably support morally blatant, cowardly, cold blooded murder  and arguing the death penalty rids society of people we are better of without is blatant BS imo because I assume someone who murders someone else out of vengeance, hate or whatever is in their mind ridding the world of someone they perceive the world would be better off without as well
> 
> 
> And then there is the religious side of the argument




So let me get this right.You think people that support the death penalty support cold blooded murder ?

You also use a strange example.Let's talk about murderers and rapists, and not somebody killing another person out of vengeance.These are the criminals that should be castrated or put in the chair until fried.

As for the religious side, that's easy, the biggest cause of war and ill feeling in the world bar nothing !! No doubt this last comment will cause an outcry...........Tough luck.The facts don't lie.


----------



## saichuen (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

it is not the death penalty that worries me most but rather the crime that the condemned has committed.  whatever it is, there will definitely be different views of it.  

if a person is to consider committing a crime in a place where a death penalty is applicable, then it better be worth the effort for whatever the reason may be.

my 2cents worth...


----------



## bunyip (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> Of course you are entitled to protect yourself and family if you are in fear of your life.  But that is not what the issue is here - it is about a court of law sentencing a person to death - ie state legalised killing when there is no personal threat of death.  Entirely different!




You completely missed my point......By killing an axe-weilding  home invader we prevent him from killing our innocent family. Similarly, by killing drug smugglers and terrorists we achieve the same thing...we prevent them from further killing of innocent people.
And we send a very strong message to society that if you commit these horrible crimes, you can expect to forfeit your life.

And please - don't insult my intelligence or your own by suggesting that such a policy is no deterrent. Sure, there will always be drug smugglers and terrorists and mass murderers regrdless of what penalities we impose. But there will be less of them, resulting in less innocent people being killed.
Proof? Singapore has some of the toughest laws and penalities of any country in the world. It also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world, and is one of the worlds safest cities.

But wait a minute I hear you say, instead of killing these scum, let's put them in prison for the rest of their lives so as to eliminate any possibility of them committing further crimes.
What a joke....In this day and age of corrupt judges (particularly in Indonesia), slick lawyers, endless appeals, nobody with an ounce of common sense really believes that a sentence of life in prison actually means that a person will never be released.

Apart from that, how many of them get a life sentence anyway? Quite a few get 15 or 20 years but are released after serving 10.
They go home, they're treated like lepers, nobody wants to employ them because of their criminal record. 
Are we really so naive that we can't see the probability of these people returning to the drug trade because it's the only 'employment' they can get?

Other criminals like Abu Baka Bashir get 18 months for masterminding the Bali bombing that killed close to 200 people. Such a debacle could be avoided if he was given a death sentence, then taken out behind the courthouse and shot.

Any clear thinking person can see that someone like him is not fit to walk on this earth, and should be eliminated. Any clear thinker can see the very real possibility of him instigating further atrocities now that he out of prison and free to go about spruiking his messages of hate.

The Christian mob like to draw our attention to the "Thou shalt not kill" commandent in the bible. Yet they conveniently neglect to mention that the bible also encourages killing, and has various stories that glorify killing.
The bible also says 'an eye for an eye'.

Try giving the 'thou shalt not kill' rhetoric to the families of those killed by Amrossi the smiling assasin, as he grinned like a lunatic from the dock, waved his fist in the air and shouted 'God is great'. 

Someone on this thread claimed that criminals who commit terrible crimes like mass murder have the same right to life as everyone else. Rubbish. They have no rights at all, they forfeit their rights the moment they take the life of innocent people. 
They're not fit to breathe the same air as the rest of us breathe. They're not fit to feed and clothe and be given health care. They're fit for none of the rights of decent people. 
An eye for an eye.
We all want to live in a safe society with minimal crime. Our best chance of achieving such a society is to model our criminal justice and law enforcement policies on countries that have a proven track record in this regard.....countries like Singapore.

Bunyip


----------



## Prospector (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bunyip said:
			
		

> You completely missed my point......By killing an axe-weilding  home invader we prevent him from killing our innocent family. Similarly, by killing drug smugglers and terrorists we achieve the same thing...we prevent them from further killing of innocent people.
> And we send a very strong message to society that if you commit these horrible crimes, you can expect to forfeit your life.
> 
> Bunyip





Well, if you reread your original post you didnt write it like that.  You wrote it as though you were in the middle of a terrible incident and had to do what you could (ie kill the person) in order to be alive yourself (and you family).

Surely I am not insulting anyone's intelligence by suggesting that there is an issue with legally sanctifying the killing of another person. I also do not believe that the threat of death is an actual deterrent, otherwise there would be no murders in the US state of Texas.  Murders are committed for a number of reasons - eg Crimes of passion, in which case the threat of death is certainly no deterrent, crimes of madness, in which case there is no deterrent, and crimes of opportunity (in which case the death threat MAY be a deterrent).

The evidence did not show that Abu Baka Bashir masterminded the Bali bombings, although I do understand the anger that has resulted from his release.

And yes, I think there are clearly some people who are not fit to walk upon this earth, but why should I be the judge of that?  I dont think I am that clever.  And by what definition do you determine 'fit'?  Some people would say I was not fit to walk upon this earth because I am not religious!  Certianly the muslin community would think I was not worthy of breath, and probably fundamentalist Christians too!

I didnt 'cry'  when the drug smuggler in Singapore was executed and I did get angry with all the attention it received.  But the KNOWN threat of death in Singapore for such crimes didnt stop him doing it in the first place, did it?

I also resent the money that has paid for the prison system, but not enough to sanction the death penalty.

I really, really, see your point.  I just cannot see that the death penalty is the answer.


----------



## bunyip (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Prospector said:
			
		

> Well, if you reread your original post you didnt write it like that.  You wrote it as though you were in the middle of a terrible incident and had to do what you could (ie kill the person) in order to be alive yourself (and you family).
> 
> Surely I am not insulting anyone's intelligence by suggesting that there is an issue with legally sanctifying the killing of another person. I also do not believe that the threat of death is an actual deterrent, otherwise there would be no murders in the US state of Texas.  Murders are committed for a number of reasons - eg Crimes of passion, in which case the threat of death is certainly no deterrent, crimes of madness, in which case there is no deterrent, and crimes of opportunity (in which case the death threat MAY be a deterrent).
> 
> ...




Prospector

I respectfully suggest that it's you, not I, who should reread my post. If you do so you'll see that I did not mention the hypothetical home invasion incident in isolation.
I mentioned that in that situation you'd be justified in killing the offender to save your innocent family from harm or death. Then in the very next paragraph I drew the parallel between this situation and the situation where a drug smuggler or terrorist is executed as a way or preventing him from committing further killings.

You stated that the death penalty is no deterrent. To support your view you've mentioned the fact that there are still murders in Texas which has the death penalty for murder.
This doesn't mean that the penalty is no deterrent, it simply shows that no matter how tough the penalties, there will always be some crime.
Take Singapore for example....the country still has crime, are you therefore suggesting that the penalties they have are no deterrent? They have the lowest crime rate in the world.....from where I'm standing it sure looks like they're effectively deterring most people from committing crimes.
We have rapes in Australia.....does that mean that the penalty for rape (5 to 50 years in jail) is no deterrent? Try removing the penalty altogether, now there are no deterrents at all, a man can rape whomever he wants. The number of rapes would immediately spiral out of control.
There is no complete answer to crime, no single penalty that will ensure zero crime levels, not even the death penalty. But that doesn't mean that deterrents do not deter. 
Again, I refer you to the Singapore example....they have the toughest penalties, and consequently the lowest crime rate, of any country in the world.
True enough, in the case of drug smuggler Van Ngyuen, the threat of death didn't stop him from committing the crime. But by hell it's stopped plenty of other people from committing crimes in Singapore, and this fact is reflected in Singapores extremely low crime rate not just for drug trafficking, but for all other crimes as well.
The Singapore government are not kidding themselves they can wipe out crime altogether, but they're fully aware that the harsher their penalties, the less crime they'll have to endure. And they have the track record to prove it. 

My information is that the evidence did show that Bakar Bashir masterminded the Bali bombings. And whether he did or didn't, if he was involved with it in any way, then he should now be a dead man.

You don't think you're fit to judge others? Why not? You're a decent person aren't you? If decent people like you and me can't judge others, then who can?
Are you suggesting that we abandon our legal system on the basis that jurors and magistrates and judges, (who afterall are just ordinary people like you and me) are not fit to judge anyone either?

If you resent the money being poured into the prison system, then perhaps you should change your view that rapists of little kids, and terrorist and drug smugglers and other mass murders, should be given free food, accommodation, clothes, medical care and so on for the rest of their lives.
These people are scum, and should be eliminated. 
If a savage dog attacked your child, the dog would be destroyed and both you and I every other clear thinking person would support its destruction. But the dog didn't kill anyone did it....only attacked and bit the child.
Yet if a drug smuggler or terrorist kills dozens of kids, not just bites them or hurts them, KILLS THEM,  your policy is that we should not kill him, we should look after him for the rest of his life and give him everything he needs.
Sorry Prospector, but with all due respect you're not making a lot of sense.

Bunyip


----------



## Prospector (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Bunyip, on the one hand you say I am a decent person fit to judge others, and in the next paragraph you say I am not making any sense.  So  

I am able to look at this from an objective point of view and not use emotive language or emotive situations to make my point.  I am not a social worker, religious zealot or whatever.  I have however, worked extensively with victims of serious crimes, children, and offenders and have professional qualifications in this area.  Does that make me an expert - no, but maybe I do have some idea of what I am talking about!


----------



## bunyip (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Prospector, professional qualifications are no substitue for common sense.

Dennis Ferguson repeatedly raped three small children as he held them captive in a Queensland motel for 5 days.
Commonsense says that we should castrate such a person and prevent him from ever setting foot in society again. Some say he should be executed, which I fully agree with. 
Professional opinion takes a different view, it says we should give these types a period in jail, and also professional counselling aimed at rehabilitating them. Then give them another chance back out in the community.
Ferguson was released from prison despite the public outcry. Within a few weeks he had reoffended.
So much for professional qualifications.


----------



## FXST01 (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Let them swing i say, (not the good swing either!)


----------



## Happy (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

If we can happily kill bacteria, viruses, cancerous tumours, plants, like weeds for example; this is only normal extension to other type of undesirable form of life.

Of course we can use them for spare parts, so there is no total waste.

And this could be done in a meantime, until we fix our gene mix and eliminate existence of violent behaviour, by skilful DNA or RNA manipulation or modification.

Then we can all become angels, with no need to take anybody’s life ever.


----------



## Sean K (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Happy, You are on the right track here. This is the logical future of human kind. We need to start seeing things as they truly are. Humans are not a special being, we are just another animal that MUST contribute in some way for the betterment of the planet. Those that do not, should fall away.


----------



## visual (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

having read all these opinions I`m going to trow my   in.Death penalty I agree with,however I ask,can anyone assure me that it would be applied without fear or favour?In our society morality comes with a price,if you are poor or weak then obviously you are not going to be able to afford very strong legal advice,and chances are that these will be the first people to swing.On the other hand if you have money or power then you will propably be able to influence whatever decision is made in your case.
Point in case Ramage killed his wife,confessed to the police ,his lawyer came along and said no it was all about passion,not murder, only manslaughter,guess what Julie Ramage reputation was put through the mud and Ramage her former husband was convicted of manslaughter.Same in America or even in Singapore or wherever the death penalty applies its mainly used against the helpless not necessarily the guilty.Look at the muslim countries where sharia law applies who cops the brunt of it,women,the weakest link in that society.


----------



## Sean K (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Visual, That's my point. The weakest lose, making humans a better species. This is reality.

We only have the emotions we do (compassion etc) in order that we survive. We no longer have to rely on them. Now, lets use logic.


----------



## kerosam (25 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

i don't think all christians are against death punishment.... i, for one, support it.


----------



## pacer (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Death is too good for some of those sick b#@#%@s.......all crims should be flogged, especily types like Allan Bond. It's been proven time and again that a good flogging usualy does the trick, most won't reoffend in a hurry.....child rapists should be flogged, castrated, crucified, then tied to a fire ant nest to slowly fade away and thier naked rotten corpses left in public places as a reminder of what happens to Rock spiders.
Varying levels of this for all crimes would be the way to go.

If I caught anyone interfering with my kid's you can guarantee this is what they'd get when they got out of prison.....take a week off and go bush.....let the wild pigs clean up the mess....no evidence.

Sorry if I got carried away and offended anyones sensibilities but the current system just aint working.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi porper   



			
				Porper said:
			
		

> So let me get this right.You think people that support the death penalty support cold blooded murder ?




yes that's right porper   .......the reason being as I posted earlier.


Imo, those who support the death penalty undeniably support morally blatant, cowardly, cold blooded murder and arguing the death penalty rids society of people we are better of without is blatant BS imo because I assume someone who murders someone else, in the first place, out of vengeance, hate or whatever is in their mind ridding the world of someone they perceive the world would be better off without as well. 

I don't see how anyone who deliberately murders, *legally or not*,  someone who has been found guilty of a crime is any different or any less of a coward and murderer than the original person was who committed a murder or whatever in the first place.

I gave my reasons earlier why I thought *everyone has a right to life* and what my alternative to the death penalty was for serious crimes.......imo the pros of my alternative greatly outweigh the cons  

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Bull,

Interesting concept 'the right to life'.

This inferrs that, no matter what, every person/foetus/egg/sperm has the unmitigated entitlement to continue to exist. Anyone can act in any way they want but they still have this basic freedom. 

On the surface it seems this is a solid foundation for humankind and is certainly a key aspect of international human rights and the 'rights based approach' that many NGOs have. I'm sure the US Bill of Rights has this in there somewhere. 

What this approach does however, is absolve peoples responsibilities to be the best human being that they can be. They can exist without ever having to contribute to their own survival. It's this mindset which limits the potential of the human species. 

The way we should approach it is to say that everybody has the _'opportunity to live._' This simple shift in paradigm will make people work harder at being humans and not to take everything for granted, including life. 

My point is that while 'the right to life' is something that many people unquestioningly cling to as a freedom we should all have, this mindset is limiting our development, and allowing those who are degenerating humankind to continue on. And thus, holding human development in a mindless timewarp. 

The way forward is to get rid of the bad eggs. Unfortuntely for humans at the moment, they seem to be breeding faster than the more highly developed specimens. This doesn't sound very 'compassionate' but I'm taking the purely scientific, pragmatic, non spiritual approach to this, which is the only way to ultimately see 'the truth'.


----------



## Happy (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

'everyone has a right to life' 

That’s all well said, and sounds fantastic and feels great, but what about those who were raped and killed, or only killed or just robbed and killed?

Didn’t they have equal right to live till natural death, or euthanasia if they wish and use RU486 if they think it is what they wish to do too?



So much for our eternal right to life.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Happy

Yes of course the victims also had a right to life.

But if someone for whatever reason decides to take a victim's life by committing murder then the offender still has a right to life for the reasons I expressed earlier 

If someone says that they then have the right to take the life of the offender as punishment or whatever then *imo the 'executioners' are no less cowards and blatant murderers (in at least the moral sense) than the original offender * because both offender and executioner are deliberately taking the life of another human being for their own personal reasons/justifications........the original offender could easily argue they were ridding society of someone they believe society is better off without just as supporters of the death penalty can argue 

As I posted earlier, imo the pros of my suggested alternative to the death penalty greatly outweigh the cons......but that's just me...

If you read through my original post you will see the reason behind my views.....some will agree with me, some will obviously not.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Happy (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

It’s only innocently honest debt repayment


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

no problem Happy 

re  your comment:



> It’s only innocently honest debt repayment




but I don't see it that way because as I posted earlier, the original murderer could use the same argument to justify his/her taking of another person's life ......*and imo that excuse is nowhere near valid for the original murderer or for those supporting the death penalty.......and hence in my eyes there is no difference between those that commit the original crime and those who support, and would execute, the death penalty as in a way, they are all using the same excuse to try to justify the taking of another life (legally or not) * 


cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Bull, I think your point misses the mark because it does not consider the justice/injustice aspect of the act of killing. 

There is always just killing, for eg self defence and war. The murderer has committed an unjust act while the executioner is committing a just act. 

I suppose there lies the difference. You believe it would be unjust (because the Book says so) while I believe the punishment is just for some crimes. 

My case has a hole in it because defining what is a crime punishable by death is very very subjective. Every case will be slightly different.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi kennas

*I don't believe I have missed the point at all. * 

In my original post in the RU486 thread I clearly said that killing another human being in self defence, be it a war or whatever, is totally justifiable........and so goes without saying as it applies equally here.

Yes  *I agree * that a murderer commits an unjust act _but *I disagree * that an excutioner supporting the death penalty is committing a just act, as you call it, for the reasons and logic I posted earlier ....and imo therein lies our differences and so be it._.....so we'll just have to agree to disagree because I doubt very much either one of us will the change the view of the other 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Happy (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Let’s have deeper look into our moral obligation to preserve life dark-matter.

We are told that 1 max security in-mate costs circa $60,000 pa, we are also told that 1$ can save one child per day from hunger death.

All of the sudden our pro-life stunt makes us mass murderers.

Also I bet, many bed-ridden nursing home in-mates would love the 24-hours security and nice nutritious meals and even 24-hours suicide watch, which could double up as room service should they soil the bed in early hours of the morning.

Selective morality at its best


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Happy 

*I don't believe it is selective morality at all because * :

1) I would much rather be in a nursing home, with all its pros and cons, than a maximum security prison and its associated environment.....it's certainly no picnic in a max security prison 

2) I fail to see how you can put a $ value on a human life.....some will obviously try using similar arguments as yours but at the end of the day, *no matter how you try to justify coming up with a $ value, the bottom line is that it is only your opnion on the value of a human life and nothing more*.....it's very possible that others might see 'value' in a very much different way as we are all entitled to do.

*Imo you cannot put a definitive $ value on a human life as every human life is sacrosant other than in cases of self defence.*

So whether someone supports the death penalty or not to some extent boils down to whether you agree with 2) above or not.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Bull, Philosophically your argument fails when you use the 'except in self defence' clause. 

'Thou shall not kill' does not say 'Thou shall not kill, except in self defence'. You are making an exception which means your premise is contradicted.

You can either kill another human or you can't. 

If you really believe life is *sacrosanct * then you wouldn't even kill someone else in self defence!


----------



## Julia (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Visual, That's my point. The weakest lose, making humans a better species. This is reality.
> 
> We only have the emotions we do (compassion etc) in order that we survive. We no longer have to rely on them. Now, lets use logic.




Hello Kennas

I'm finding your arguments in this thread logical and persuasive, but have a problem with the post above where you use the term "better species".
In Visual's example, it seemed to me that the person who was able to "buy" himself a better result obviously had access to power and money which a poor and non-connected person wouldn't, but I'd dispute that this makes him a "better" person.  

It brings up the whole fraught question of what qualities should we be looking for in the citizens of our "best" society.

Further down the track, it seems entirely possible that we could be selectively breeding, i.e. only allowing people to procreate if they fulfil the criteria set by some authority which will determine what a future society needs.  What do you think?

Of course it sounds purely the stuff of fantasy right now, but is it possible?  Would it be desirable?

Apologies if I've gone too far off topic here, but it seems a natural extension of the discussion of who should live or die.

Julia


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I really dont know what the answers are to all these scenarios,but again selective breeding for want of a better word isnt going to change things in the least.The people who will afford all the good qualities arent going to be necessarily the kind of people who make much of a difference to our society anyway.Even as we speak crims are using TAFE to learn how to grow better drugs.
What I think would be good is for the community is to have strong judges,onces who dont get sidetracked by dogooders.Lawyrers who arent confused about whats right and wrong.The lawyer who defended the death row drug dealer in Singapore is now defending the Mokbel woman who is in danger of losing her house.A house that she bought with drug money,which wouldnt be difficult to prove if the government really wanted to.

We need less excuses of woe for the crims and better applying of community starndards,not necessarily designer babies.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Julia, I think there's a couple of issues with human development related to this topic. 

Have you ever played the management/learning game where there is a boat full of people and you have to choose someone to go so the boat stays afloat? One person is old, one a doctor, one a young female, one a military person etc. Each person brings something to the table but a decision has to be made about who is going to be the best for their survival. Certain people will bring prosperity to the rest of the world, some do not.  

Those that are natuarally intelligent, moral, ethical beings and are not physically flawed are probably the ones we want in order that the human race continues to progress. If we continue to allow the weakest genes to spread then we will not develop any further, or our condition may actually degenerate.

So, I think that's what I'm alluding to. 

We are not perfect specimens by a long shot. Who knows where we are going, but maybe gene therapy will fix all our flaws and develop a more ethical race of beings who will be happier to live side by side.


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

flaws,ethics
Who decides whats flawed and whats ethical,someone flaws could be someone elses positives again ,ethics,who decides?

The nazis thought they were on the road to the perfect race all they nedeed was blonde hair and blue eyes.They thought using people who didnt fit this criteria was ethical.Only when the nazis threathened the rest of the world were they stopped.Maybe off topic but there you go.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi kennas



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Bull, Philosophically your argument fails when you use the 'except in self defence' clause.
> 
> 'Thou shall not kill' does not say 'Thou shall not kill, except in self defence'. You are making an exception which means your premise is contradicted.
> 
> ...




I disagree - _*imo* the meaning behind 'Thou shalt not kill' is that human life is sacrosanct _ and if someone is about to murder someone else and if the potential victim is in a situation where they can, in self defence, prevent that from happening then it is totally justifiable to do so using 'reasonable force'...._especially since in all probability either the attacker or their target will die anyway._

Basically, given that every life is sacrosanct it is totally justifiable, however unfortunate it may be for the attacker and potential victim, for a person whose life is being threatened to save their life by killing their attacker provided it is the only way the threatened person can save their life.

_The only question then is whether the person whose life is being threatened has an option other than killing their attacker to save their life.....but that's a whole new ball game and thread _ 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Julia (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Julia, I think there's a couple of issues with human development related to this topic.
> 
> Have you ever played the management/learning game where there is a boat full of people and you have to choose someone to go so the boat stays afloat? One person is old, one a doctor, one a young female, one a military person etc. Each person brings something to the table but a decision has to be made about who is going to be the best for their survival. Certain people will bring prosperity to the rest of the world, some do not.
> 
> ...




Agree entirely.  Whether or not the social and/or political will could ever exist to change the status quo is another question.

Does anyone think we could find it acceptable to sterilise, say, a drug dependent person who has already had  two children who have been removed to the care of Family Services?

Julia


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

off topic,
as it turns out, my eldest son (doing a psychology course at university) has taken an interest in this subject and wished to make a clever statement.
Hitler's idea of the perfect race were strictly aesthetic, blonde hair, blue eyes, 6 ft tall and athletic.
turns out this "Aryan" race was not as perfect genetically as Hitler wanted them to be, studies have shown that people with blue eyes are at a greater risk of developing cataracts or even becoming blind when older while people with blonde hair have a higher chance of developing melanoma when compared to the "Lesser" race of brown featured people.
currently, our class has discussed this matter (relating to something else, but still relevant). there has been no irrefutable evidence linking genes with criminal behaviour.
you can claim the "Nature or Nurture" argument, and call it quits, but at some point, the individual, and not his DNA, must answer for his actions.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Visual I think it can be related, but not always as you say. 

Follow this line of thought: Someone of a lower socioeconomic group, on average probably a lower IQ, mother or father more likely to be abusive, hangs out with other members of the same class, doesn't finish high school, gets girlfriend pregnant early, gets married and then divorced probably a couple of times, gets sacked from low paying job or the coal mine closes, moves to the city, gets hopelessly in debt on the credit card, robs a bank and in the subsequent police chase kills a cop.  

The perfect specimen is by NO MEANS the 'good looking' one but the FUNCTIONAL one. Good looks are only a means of attracting the opposite sex to procreate and ultimately survive. It's obviously important then, but it must be functional. 

Your son will study part of this in evolutionary psychology.


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Kennas,arent you then agreeing with the nurture argument.
Are rich people not getting into the same mess as those from the poor class?

The point I think my son made is that you cant rely on genes to obliterate bad behaviour.Which is the point that you made.

Now back on track,in the herald sun,a lawyer is defending someone who killed a 3 year old,apparently the defence goes like this,he had sex with the three year old but didnt torture him,no he electrocuted him in a bid to revive him.Its these human garbage we should clear from the bench,without these scum animals like him would not be able to come up with these lovely defences and therefore would be put so far out of sight that no one would ever hear from them again.

And when in the hell do 3 year olds have sex?this was clearly a sexual assault.
Heres the article http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,19591936%5E1702,00.html


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Terrible story visual. How sad for the family etc. 

Back to the nurture thing, my little story was meant to show that it's both genes and environment that put people in these circumstances. It's the genes that actually place people in a particular environment and class system which is very hard to get out of. It's a viscious cycle. The guy in my story has kids who marry someone else from the same town and the cycle continues. People can get out of it, but it's a low % I reckon. I call this situation 'The Moe Syndrome'. Apologies to anyone from Moe.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi visual



			
				visual said:
			
		

> ...................Now back on track,in the herald sun,a lawyer is defending someone who killed a 3 year old,apparently the defence goes like this,he had sex with the three year old but didnt torture him,no he electrocuted him in a bid to revive him.Its these human garbage we should clear from the bench,without these scum animals like him would not be able to come up with these lovely defences and therefore would be put so far out of sight that no one would ever hear from them again.
> 
> And when in the hell do 3 year olds have sex?this was clearly a sexual assault.




Reading the article clearly shows that the accused pleaded guilty to the sexual assault charges and not guilty to murder.

So, as in all cases, everyone is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty and that is the way it should be 

And so while obviously not condoning what the accused is alleged to have done, it is the job of the defence lawyer to ensure the accused gets as fair a trial as possible by putting up a defence that is at least plausible if not proveable and the job *and onus of proof * of the prosecuting laywyer is to provide evidence that proves the charges 'beyond reasonable doubt' (and that could be the tricky bit)

So in general, when accused are found not guilty then that means either:

1) they are innocent

2) the prosecution could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the charges for whatever reason....ie...lack of evidence, poor laws etc etc.

So it's no good blaming defence lawyers when people are found not guilty, blame either the prosecuting lawyers and/or the law makers for not having robust enough laws in place.

It'll be interesting to see if the  prosection in your example can prove the intent was premeditated murder or someone doing something absolutely silly and stupid, whilst still obviously wrong but that only makes them guilty of lesser charges than murder......it looks to me that the only issue here is the *intent* behind the accused's actions.

But at the end of the day, even if he is found guilty of murder, imo it does not justify a death penalty in this case for the reasons I posted earlier. Imo, if no genuine remorse is shown and if it is felt that rehabilitation is unlikely then you simply lock the accused up for the term of his natural life.......because, whose to say that in say 15, 20 or whatever min years sentence you like to impose as a deterrent to others, he might not repent, be genuinely remorseful and so could be rehabilitated.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

If proved guilty there is no rehab possible for this animal. And even if possible, *Justice * should probably be the priority. Although, I understand inmates aren't kind to these sort of people. He'll be getting some of his own medicine at least.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

ok no prob kennas 



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> If proved guilty there is no rehab possible for this animal. *Justice * should be served.




that is where we differ and I think we are starting to go round in circles now - *imo rehabilitation could still be possible * _and if it turns out that it isn't after whatever the appropriate minimum custodial sentence is, then you leave him locked up for the term of his natural life._
cheers

bullmarket


----------



## emma (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Gosh its great to be so sure - try this site http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/4205/dp.html  to read a few other stories.


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Kennas,a while back people thought that they had the criminal gene isolated,wrong!
are you saying that you are being influenced by this fallacy.

My link illustrates that this horror of a human being is aided and abetted by society to the extend that he is able to present his story in court,if it were not for the do gooders who would have us believe that how he grew up has any relevance to his behaviour later on,we would not have to put up with the Moe syndrome as you put it.People behave as you let them!

The only reason people from lower socio economic backgrounds are more often in the papers has to do with who ever controls the media.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi visual



			
				visual said:
			
		

> Kennas,a while back people thought that they had the criminal gene isolated,wrong!
> are you saying that you are being influenced by this fallacy.
> 
> My link illustrates that this horror of a human being is aided and abetted by society to the extend that he is able to present his story in court,if it were not for the do gooders who would have us believe that how he grew up has any relevance to his behaviour later on,we would not have to put up with the Moe syndrome as you put it.People behave as you let them!
> ...




It seem to me that you are suggesting the accused in the link story should not be allowed to present his side of the story.

*Everyone should be allowed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty * and then it is up to legal system as broadly described (in an earlier post) by the respective roles of the defence lawyers, prosectuting lawyers, law makers and juries to decide who is guilty of whatever charges and to take into account any mitigating circumstances........*and that is the way it should be imo * 

Otherwise you would potentially get people like us in chatrooms deciding who is guilty and who isn't   

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Bullmarket if you read the story,his defence is saying that he had sex with the three year old,therefore allowing him to minimise the torture,when in the hell has it ever been acceptable to have sex with a three year old.Would this sexual assualt have been presented as having sex if he had not tortured the little boy and killed him.I dont care how stupid you are putting a 240 volt to a childs body is not trying to save his life.Stop making excuses for this low life thats why we are  even having this argument because people allow these low lifes so many exuses.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Visual

If you read the story again you will see:

1) the accused pleaded guilty to the sexual assault charges....and so that is not an issue anymore.

2) the autopsy could not establish the cause of death and so there may be some other factors in the child's death that the general public are not aware of.

*Therefore, the onus of proof is correctly on the prosection to prove guilt and not on the accused to prove innocence...and that is the way it should be imo * 

As I said earlier, the prosecution has to prove that the intent of the accused's actions was murder and unless the prosection can do that then the accused is most likely still guilty of lesser charges.

But either way, even if found guilty of murder, as I said before this case (like any case) does not justify the death penalty imo for the reasons I posted earlier.

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				emma said:
			
		

> Gosh its great to be so sure - try this site http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/4205/dp.html  to read a few other stories.




spot on emma 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## robots (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

hello,

i have voted to support the death penalty

it would be great to lock them up for there entire life, but this does not happen

the private companies running the prisons dont want them there, so they give them a good report and bang there out on parole

numerous criminals re-offend once released from prison

look at that guy in Melb who killed two sisters in Altona (i think) just recently, his run sheet was huge 

thankyou
robots


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				robots said:
			
		

> hello,
> 
> i have voted to support the death penalty
> 
> ...




I thought that locking up offenders for their natural life doesn't occur because the laws currently don't allow for those types of sentences....and if that is the case then maybe the sentences allowed by law need to be changed and increased.

If current laws do allow custodial sentences for the natural life of an offender then maybe judges need to be encouraged to impose them on more serious cases where no rehabilitation is possible,

Also maybe the way prisoners are assessed to see if they are fit to be released after their minimum sentences needs to be improved rather than taking the easy way out and murdering them (at least in the moral sense).....this may require changes to current laws.


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi Visual
> 
> If you read the story again you will see:
> 
> ...





Bullmarket,knowing a miniscule amount of how these things work,I can tell you that more than likely his guilty plea was more than likely a deal with the prosecutor,time and money wouldve been contributing factors.However this advice wouldve come from his lawyer,obviously a sexual assualt would attract a lesser sentence,My point remains however his lawyer is now defending his use of the electrical volt,and using words that are revolting for the sexual assualt.

Without him,he would never have taken the easy way out.Pleading guilty to the lesser charge.Justice is about money and a long queue.
The fact remains that these people ,the courts represent us and we should hold them accountable for how they represent us,but instead too many people forget that,and go on and on about proving this proving that,the onnus.Plase this guy killed the three yearl old,the only thing to discuss should be in my opinion how long to lock him up,and how much oxygen he should be allowed to use,no if or buts.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi visual

_You seem to be ignoring the fact that the autopsy did not find the cause of death _ and so, in theory at least, maybe it wasn't the electric shock that killed the child.........*that is for the jury to decide based on ALL the evidence that is presented in the court and not for you or I or anyone else to decide waffling on in chatrooms making judgements based on what is reported in newspapers which may or may not be factual*......and even if it is assumed that the electric shock killed the child, the prosecution then has to prove to the jury that the intent behind the shock was premeditated murder and not something else....*which would make the accused guilty of lesser charges.*

*I still maintain that ANY  accused person has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.*

*Based solely on the contents of the story you posted, I personally could not convict the accused of murder simply because there are too many unknowns with the main unknown being the cause of death*......but I am sure there has been and there will be more evidenced presented to the jury to decide how the child died and if it was murder or not.

Re your comment:



> Plase this guy killed the three yearl old,the only thing to discuss should be in my opinion how long to lock him up,and how much oxygen he should be allowed to use,no if or buts.




_I don't see how you can be so certain atm when firstly the autopsy did not find the cause of death and secondly you haven't seen all of the available eveidence   

I agree the accused did probably kill the child but based solely on newspaper story I am not convinced it was murder......but as I said earlier, even if it is proved to be murder then that still does not justify the death penalty and the penalty imo should be what I described in earlier posts._

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## BSD (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Setting aside the emotional stuff - how about some maths. 


1. How many innocent people should we kill annually to kill all those convicted of rape?

2. How many innocent people should we kill annually to kill all those convicted of murder?

3. How many rapes/murders does one need to be guilty of before being killed by the government?

4. How much heroin do you need to get caught with before death? Is one gram too much or do you need a kilo?

5. Ecstacy kills fewer people than bee-stings, but should we still kill all ecstacy shippers or possessors or should we kill all bees?

6. How many of your own children would you be prepared to kill if they were caught with five "deadly" ecstacy pills?

7. How many cigarette company salespeople should we kill per annum seeing they kill 10,000 times as many as the heroin dealers?

8. How fast do you have to be going before you are up for the death penalty for killing someone in a car accident?

8. How many years before we start killing retards or dumb people because they are a potential threat and/or cost us too much to house in care or on welfare?

Just some simple numerical answers are required. 

No more emotional stuff.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Visual, 

I'm not saying that the 'criminal' gene can be isolated but genetics predispose us to certain personality traits and intelligence quota. Then we are influenced by society at large. This is common dog. 

Certain people are predisposed to turn into criminals because of genes and environment. Neither may be a direct influence, but will _absolutely _ be a factor contributing to someones final actions. 

Bullmarket,

I look forward to the outcome of the trial about this lunatic. I think he should have pleaded insanity to get the best result for himself. Did I read correctly that this child was also a *boy*? Holy ghost Batman, your God certainly created an incedibly warped and demented and peverse human. In His own image mind you! God was a rapist of 3 year old boys??? What omnipotent Being would create such a thing?


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi kennas

It appears to me that you are becoming increasingly frustrated with me having different views to you and accepting the fact that those like I who oppose the death penalty are just as entitled to our views as you and those supporting the death penalty are entitled to yours.

_I have never said that everyone must do what God, or whoever your equivalent might be, says is the right thing to do so I don't see what your previous post is getting at  _ .......every human being has the option to either follow God or not...some will, some won't...it's as simple as that 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> Hi visual
> 
> _You seem to be ignoring the fact that the autopsy did not find the cause of death _ and so, in theory at least, maybe it wasn't the electric shock that killed the child.........*that is for the jury to decide based on ALL the evidence that is presented in the court and not for you or I or anyone else to decide waffling on in chatrooms making judgements based on what is reported in newspapers which may or may not be factual*......and even if it is assumed that the electric shock killed the child, the prosecution then has to prove to the jury that the intent behind the shock was premeditated murder and not something else....*which would make the accused guilty of lesser charges.*
> 
> ...





Bullmarket,the point I`m trying to make is that as a society we allow these things to happen,not ignoring any thing.You would have to be a total moron not to know that the electrical current would`ve killed the child.What other intent could there possibly have been,The boy was 3 years old.The only reason this human garbage was allowed to plead guilty to the sexual assualt  was becasue in all probablity there was a deal between the lawyers,thats all.

Also his lawyer is reported in the paper using language as though minimizing the sexual assualt.And presenting the eletricution as a life saving attempt.Do you see what I mean now.We put too many things in place to defend the indefensible.And I`m pretty sure that if the system was prepared to spend enough money they wouldve been able to determine a cause of death.And the fact that he was sexually assualting the child wouldve been taken in consideration at the sentencing stage or during the case.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I agree to disagree Bull.


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

But Bull, I wonder if this fun loving guy was a Christian? I bet he becomes one in jail.


----------



## visual (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Visual,
> 
> I'm not saying that the 'criminal' gene can be isolated but genetics predispose us to certain personality traits and intelligence quota. Then we are influenced by society at large. This is common dog.
> 
> ...





Kennas first of all I take offence to you addressing me as DOG.This is Australia not some ghetto,all you`ve proved that you are simply a wannabe.
Also you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about.Seeing that you have just proven that the gutter can be reached simply by watching television not even experiencing the situation.


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> I agree to disagree Bull.




sounds good to me kennas 

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## bullmarket (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi visual

no problem  but please don't misunderstand me.

As I said in earlier posts, I certainly don't condone what the accused did and I would imagine that your interpretation of what killed the child, seeing the autopsy could not find the cause of death, and motives behind it could be correct.

But the basic difference in our views, as I see it, is that you are prepared to convict the accused of murder right here and now *and I am not * since I firmly believe in everyone's right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and based solely on the newspaper report (which is dangerous to do at the best of times   ) for me personally there are too many uncertainties to convict him of murder, but of lesser charges for sure.....ie...the cause of death is uncertain for me atm and the motive behind the electric shock has not been conclusively established atm.

Hopefully during the trial more evidence will be presented to clear up the uncertainties _but at this stage I could not come up with a guilty verdict._

*But again, after all of the above, even if the murder charge is eventually proved it still does not justify a death penalty imo for the reasons I posted earlier..*

_Please don't think I am defending the accused at this stage as I am neither defending or convicting him atm.....*what I am trying to defend is the process we have to help determine what actually happened and to what extent guilt is to be apportioned to anyone.*_

cheers

bullmarket


----------



## Sean K (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

he he, visual. 

'Common Dog' must be just a military term used to describe an event or situation that everyone knows or understands. I picked this up while serving in the Army. I thought it was a common term that everyone would understand! 

Very sorry for this misunderstanding!!!!


----------



## edogg75 (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				crackaton said:
			
		

> Eye for an eye tooth for a tooth. Kill and be killed.




If you assent to the state's killing of its citizens (for whatever reason), then you share the role of executioner with the state. Therefore, you kill and (by your reasoning) should be killed. Society needs to recognise the futility of its obsession with vengence , do away with it, and start trying to address the issues that lead people to extreme acts such as murder. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.


----------



## Buster (26 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> 'Common Dog' must be just a military term used to describe an event or situation that everyone knows or understands. I picked this up while serving in the Army. I thought it was a common term that everyone would understand!



Now that was funny.. I always find it amusing when our jargon is construed as derogatory.. 25 years in the Navy, and the wife generally translates for me now as I'm too lazy to explain it to civiies.. 

I too support the death penalty, with the caveats that most of the more reasonable of posters have included.. I personally like the deterrents that many other cultures use such as the removal of hands from thieves etc etc.. I've had three rotations through the middle east now, and quite honestly feel safer walking the streets at night there vice Sydney or Melbourne..

Anyway, Cheers all

Buster


----------



## Sean K (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Buster, Hope your putting all those allowances on specie U3O8 explorers. he, he. I just got out of the farter, now it's time for a brew.


----------



## Happy (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				bullmarket said:
			
		

> But the basic difference in our views, as I see it, is that you are prepared to convict the accused of murder right here and now *and I am not * since I firmly believe in everyone's right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and based solely on the newspaper report (which is dangerous to do at the best of times   ) for me personally there are too many uncertainties to convict him of murder, but of lesser charges for sure.....ie...the cause of death is uncertain for me atm and the motive behind the electric shock has not been conclusively established atm.
> 
> Hopefully during the trial more evidence will be presented to clear up the uncertainties _but at this stage I could not come up with a guilty verdict._






And if little boy was your grandson, before verdict, offender is not guilty and you could even visit the offender as your grandson sexual partner.

Since boy is dead, it is hard to establish if he gave consent to sex, he could be simply experimenting in sexual activities, he could possibly seduce grown up man for lack of same age partners, and poor man fell in love and fell into trap.

He could also, as possible de facto husband, claim any superannuation or part of inheritance left after little boy’s death.



Suppose these avenues were not explored yet, but the way we go and lawyers twist matters and general public accepts bull, who knows, matter of time?


----------



## bullmarket (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Happy 

I'm not sure what you are getting at because the newspaper story clearly states that the accused has pleaded guilty to the sexual assault charge but not guilty to the murder charge.

The story also said that the autopsy could not find the cause of death, so there is uncertainty there atm for me. Also the motive behind the electric shock has also not been established yet and so that is another uncertainty atm for me.

*But even if the charge of murder is eventually proved then all I am saying is that the convictions do not justify a death penalty imo for the reasons I posted earlier and imo the pros greatly outweigh the cons for the alternative to the death penalty I posted.*
cheers

bullmarket


----------



## tech/a (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

*If they're World Cup referees I'd have to think very carefully.*


----------



## bullmarket (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

John,

even World Cup referees don't deserve the death penalty


----------



## tech/a (27 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hmm I'm sure thats a penalty many Cup players would like to be able to impose.


----------



## The Mint Man (28 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I cant belive how timely I posted this thread.
here are some coments from the 'Horrific child murder in Perth' thread.


> THE OTHER THREAD FLOATING AROUND ABOUT WEATHER TO BRING IN THE DEATH PENALTY JUST CHANGED A FEW MINDS I BET...



and heres proof


> I think I've just changed my mind about the death penalty.
> Nothing else seems appropriate in this instance.
> Julia




they are fairly straight forward and to the point.... some have even changed their mind by the looks of it? yes?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (28 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I support the penalty of chopping limbs off. In Japan there is the death penalty, but there are still murders. 

If someone was going to lose a limb for robbery and for murder I think they would stop.


----------



## The Mint Man (28 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I was acually thinking this today after someone said that death is too good for some of these people. I started to think what could be worse.... anyway I actually thought that cutting off a leg, arm or two would do the trick.
I was not aware that they actually already do this in some countrys.

I think this could be a good solution as you wouldnt be killing them (one for the pro lifers  ) but at the same time you could give tyem something to think about for the rest of their life.

In the W.A case you could have the guys penis cut off plus his arms so that he couldnt posibly get hold of anything for the rest of his life, let alone rape someone.


----------



## kerosam (28 June 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

and make sure that b******d doesn't claim any welfare benefits!


----------



## twojacks28 (2 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

the death penalty is a horrible thing. to take ones life even if they have done something inhumane is wrong. it is better to lock them up for life as it deprives them of everything they once had. I would rather be dead then in prison all my life. staying in prsion your whole life in some ways is worse then the death penalty and more effective.


----------



## Bobby (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				twojacks28 said:
			
		

> the death penalty is a horrible thing. to take ones life even if they have done something inhumane is wrong. it is better to lock them up for life as it deprives them of everything they once had. I would rather be dead then in prison all my life. staying in prsion your whole life in some ways is worse then the death penalty and more effective.



 Just to remind you of the cost per year of keeping this filth 80k each one , so say 40 years = 3,200,000 mil for a hunk of poop !

What a cost !   What a waste of money   

Bob.


----------



## shasta (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				Bobby said:
			
		

> Just to remind you of the cost per year of keeping this filth 80k each one , so say 40 years = 3,200,000 mil for a hunk of poop !
> 
> What a cost !   What a waste of money
> 
> Bob.




imo $80k pa is a small amount to pay to maintain a human life, regardless of what they have done in the past.......I suppose it's all relative at the end of the day - what is a large amount for someone is a small amount for someone else


----------



## Sean K (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Wouldn't that 80K be better spent on children with special needs, or the victims of aggravated assault, rape etc? Clearly yes.


----------



## Happy (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

With possible prisoners exchange treaty, we could extend it to prisoners export treaty and do it cheaper at least in some countries.


----------



## Rafa (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

hey all...

Am i reading this right...
Are most people on here advocating FOR Sharia Law.... (i.e. chopping limbs off, death penalty, etc...???)

Thats a dramatic turnaround from the threads a few months earlier saying muslims should be kept away from australia cause they will want to bring in Sharia law...!

I'm confused!

R.


----------



## twojacks28 (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				shasta said:
			
		

> imo $80k pa is a small amount to pay to maintain a human life, regardless of what they have done in the past.......I suppose it's all relative at the end of the day - what is a large amount for someone is a small amount for someone else





i agree with you totally


----------



## tinkerbell (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> Wouldn't that 80K be better spent on children with special needs, or the victims of aggravated assault, rape etc? Clearly yes.




that argument doesn't wash with me cause there are many things governments spend money on that I think are totally useless and so the money should be redirected to children with special needs, or the victims of aggravated assault, rape etc as well.

so who decides what is worthwhile spending money on and what is not. It's all reletaive and open to opinion  :


----------



## Sean K (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I agree Tink, It could go anywhere. 

I'm not sure if your argument works either because then we may as well not try to redirect money to the most appropriate places at all, and just stick with the status quo. Don't you want to make sure our taxes go to the most appropriate places for the people of this country to live the best life possible? Of course yes. 

This is just but one of the areas of government expenditure that could be looked at. And, as seen in the opinions on this thread, is one that could be discussed. 

Although, I'm sure if a referendum was held in Australia the vote would *not * be in favour of capital punishment. We are generally not a vengeful people I think and are always willing to give people a second chance. Just my impression though.


----------



## tinkerbell (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				kennas said:
			
		

> I agree Tink, It could go anywhere.
> 
> ...............Don't you want to make sure our taxes go to the most appropriate places for the people of this country to live the best life possible? Of course yes...........................




you hit the nail on the head with this question kennas 

the operative word in your question is *"appropriate"* and everybody could have a different opinion on what areas are appropriate to spend taxpayer $'s.

imo I see nothing wrong with spending $80k pa (or whatever) to maintain prisoners irrespective of what they were convicted for. obviously some won't agree with that but I agree with you that if a referendum on the death penalty was held today, it would not get up


----------



## Happy (3 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Prisoners could earn their keep.

They could make bricks, furniture, and many other goods without the need of leaving security of their locker.


----------



## bunyip (5 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Haven't seen Bullmarket on here for a while. I notice the words 'On permanent holiday' have recently started appearing below his name on his past posts. 
Could this mean he's copped a long overdue ban? Gee it'd be great if we no longer have to put up with his snivelling, repetitive style, if we no longer have to put up with him shoving his religious dogma down our throats, if we can have a rational discussion on various topics without Bullmarket hijacking the thread.

I guess there are a few on here who thought Bull made sense, however I believe the majority will be pleased to have seen the last of him......if in fact we have seen the last of him. Guess we can live in hope.


----------



## The Mint Man (5 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

ditto  
all that agree say 'I'


----------



## wayneL (5 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Yes bullmarket has been banned. But as he can no longer defend himself, lets just leave it at that. 

Thanks


----------



## The Mint Man (5 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

fair enough. sounds like a good deal to me  
cheers

edit- lock thread if you like


----------



## nelly (5 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				The Mint Man said:
			
		

> fair enough. sounds like a good deal to me
> cheers
> 
> edit- lock thread if you like



Hi...I've been reading [obviously] this thread and was surprised........_scenario_..you are put in jail and convicted of a crime you did not commit..sentence..*death.*....... While on death-row you have to mix with the lowest form of scum imagineable, you hear stories that would curl your mommas toes, stories of heinous acts toward young children, crimes of murder, rape....... No one showing any signs of remorse, quite the opposite, bragging was rife.  The government decides to change the law and abolish the death penalty. Would you be for or against.....
Just a thought...anyone?
Cheers


----------



## utedog (7 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



			
				nelly said:
			
		

> Hi...I've been reading [obviously] this thread and was surprised........_scenario_..you are put in jail and convicted of a crime you did not commit..sentence..*death.*....... While on death-row you have to mix with the lowest form of scum imagineable, you hear stories that would curl your mommas toes, stories of heinous acts toward young children, crimes of murder, rape....... No one showing any signs of remorse, quite the opposite, bragging was rife.  The government decides to change the law and abolish the death penalty. Would you be for or against.....
> Just a thought...anyone?
> Cheers




This an extreme case, but you certainly raised a very good point there.  To protect your own life, you would be in favor of abolishing the death penalty.

However, in all cases you need a very good jurisdictual system to support the death penalty.  but whether death penalty or not, it makes me cringe to see how lenient the aussie system has become.  criminals just get a slap on the wrist, a couple o months and that's it.  I believe convicted criminals should serve much longer sentences than they do now - and also take away some of the freedoms they have.  Problem with this is the added cost on the tax system - you need more prisons - and as anyone would understand - I'm not willing to pay a single cent for the scum that's locked up in prison.  So YES - bring back the death penalty - it'll save us hard working aussies a lot of money.  Why do we have to lock up murders, rapists and the like...  So they can live and we have to pay for it.

just my 2cents worth.


----------



## nelly (7 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi
Would you support the death penalty taking into account the however many innocent, it would take only one innocent for me to vote against.  :nono: [but then again if the one innocent was my 'ex' I would vote an emphatic yes  :fu:  ]  :evilburn:


----------



## nelly (7 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

who's a twit...replied to Bullmarket  t'other day....


----------



## Julia (17 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The following letter to the Editor appeared in yesterday's paper.


"To those who argue the death penalty has not been shown to deter serious crimes, I have one question:  Why are some savage dogs destroyed?   As a deterrent to other dogs?  Or to remove an unacceptable risk?


Written by Michael Jensen, Ferny Hills.


Julia


----------



## The Mint Man (17 July 2006)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

is it me  or is that guy contradicting himself


----------



## insider (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The death penalty is applied in Australia but only for those who commit murderous treason... example you are a soldier and you turn against your own during a war but even more extreme than this will warrant a death penalty


----------



## constable (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



insider said:


> The death penalty is applied in Australia but only for those who commit murderous treason... example you are a soldier and you turn against your own during a war but even more extreme than this will warrant a death penalty




Im not for the death penalty even for the most evil of crimes! However they should be made to repay for the rest of their lives in jail producing a service or goods that cover the cost associated with keeping them plus an additional 20% to the victims relatives (to do with as they please). If the criminal cannot, or will not meet this, then i feel the victims family/relative should have the ultimate say in wether or not the criminal lives.
None of this should come into effect until at least 5 years after the crime , should there be any new evidence (lets face it the legal system is far from fool proof)


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Human death by accident or natural causes is normal.When someone attempts to or takes another persons life ~`premeditated & devoid of emotion`~then yes, remove them from the planet.
If these things aren`t policed then self defence could become a fine line that in the heat of the moment would see more perpetrators not reaching the jail system.I suppose that is the train of thought in America.


----------



## Bobby (28 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Julia said:


> The following letter to the Editor appeared in yesterday's paper.
> 
> 
> "To those who argue the death penalty has not been shown to deter serious crimes, I have one question:  Why are some savage dogs destroyed?   As a deterrent to other dogs?  Or to remove an unacceptable risk?
> ...




Hello Julia,

Good post.

Bob.


----------



## Happy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

And if reintroduction of death penalty affects level of employment of jail guards, we can always take up or remove slack by adjusting levels of immigration.


----------



## greggy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> And if reintroduction of death penalty affects level of employment of jail guards, we can always take up or remove slack by adjusting levels of immigration.




Everyone has a right to their opinion on this life or death matter.  I for one am opposed to the death penalty.  I rather see people who commit horrible crimes spend a lifetime in a rough jail without any luxuries.  I don't like seeing people released early from prison for such crimes. 
I feel that its not for us to judge who shall live or die. That is up to God IMO.


----------



## happytown (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I would support the death penalty but under one absolute condition - that the 'licence' to act suchly be granted to everyone and not reiside, primarily, in the hands of the state.

cheers


----------



## Happy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



greggy said:


> Everyone has a right to their opinion on this life or death matter.  I for one am opposed to the death penalty.  I rather see people who commit horrible crimes spend a lifetime in a rough jail without any luxuries.  I don't like seeing people released early from prison for such crimes.
> I feel that its not for us to judge who shall live or die. That is up to God IMO.





How about somebody to pay my share of their upkeep, as I am not that keen on supporting their existence.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



kennas said:


> The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die.
> 
> Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.




Bloody hell that was graffic, jeez you really woke me up then Kennas!

Yes I think some criminals should get death. Martin Bryant is one for sure.


----------



## greggy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> How about somebody to pay my share of their upkeep, as I am not that keen on supporting their existence.




Hi Happy,

I don't see life or death decisions from a financial point of view.  Just the same, we're all entitled to our own views.


----------



## Happy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



> =Kennas]The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die.
> 
> Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.




And now with water shortage, we would be able to release some of the water locked in this miserable body back into system.


Hi Greggy,
would this slant appeal to you better?


----------



## greggy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> And now with water shortage, we would be able to release some of the water locked in this miserable body back into system.
> 
> 
> Hi Greggy,
> would this slant appeal to you better?




Hi Happy,

A neighbour of mine lost their son in a vicious murder. He was shot to death in a mass killing.  His parents to this day are still against the death penalty on religious grounds.  I too fall into this bracket.  Whatever slant you put on it will not change my mind.  Nice try though.  
I feel however a lot of support for the death penalty comes from the fact that too often people are let off lightly for serious offences.


----------



## happytown (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



greggy said:


> ... too often people are let off lightly for serious offences.




Due to the sentencing process carried out by our esteemed judiciary being an objective/subjective process.

ie the objective element of the crime, mitigated somewhat by the subjective element of the defendant.

From an end result perspective, I find it somewhat intriguing that crimes can be viewed from one bookend as the worst case and, in effect, worked backwards in sentencing outcomes.

Let's not forget though that it is our elected politicians that legislate sentence ranges.

cheers


----------



## Happy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi Greggy,
I respect your opinion.

In my opinion humans should live and behave the way that is acceptable, many religions advocate appropriate behaviour.

And most stop here.

I have different opinion, to live in society, there is mutual benefit and obligation and certain boundaries should not be broken.

Some put it to too hard basket, as forced death is difficult issue.

Luckily they can be put into too hard basket, as everybody must die one day anyway.


----------



## greggy (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> Hi Greggy,
> I respect your opinion.
> 
> In my opinion humans should live and behave the way that is acceptable, many religions advocate appropriate behaviour.
> ...



Hi Happy,

Nice post.  It shows that 2 people can have different opinions yet still be civil to each other. 
Have a good day.


----------



## bel532 (29 March 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

For a limited number of henious crimes eg multiple murders with no apparent regret, extreme cases of rape where absolutely no respect is shown for the victim/s eg those rapists in Sydney who received long term prison sentences.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/01/2078230.htm?section=australia

crikey I feel for Scott Rush's dad ( who asked the fed police to stop him leaving the country - and they in turn did nothing - other than to dob him into the indon police) 

Then of course there are a heap of other matters...  as per talk yesterday by Sir Gerard Brennan.


> "*Ultimately, political rhetoric about the rule of law may be exposed to be as genuine as the electoral kissing of babies*."






> Death penalty stance hurts Aust credibility: Brennan
> By Jennifer Macey
> 
> Posted 3 hours 2 minutes ago
> ...


----------



## Happy (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



> From ABC, 1 Nov. 07
> 
> RAPIST GETS SIX YEARS' JAIL AFTER BLAMING SPIDER
> 
> ...





They come up with new excuses, shouldn’t we come up with something new too?

Like old fashion death penalty.


----------



## explod (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



kennas said:


> The serial rapist murderer repeat offender, who broke into your house, tied you up, and forced you to watch him repeatedly violently rape and then murder your 12 year old daughter should die.
> 
> Obvioulsy there's variations on this story, but you get my point. Some people do not deserve to be using our vital oxygen. And we shouldn't be spending milions of dollars to lock them up in a holiday camp with bars.




Two issues; ..... taking a life for a life lowers us to the level of the life taker/or destroyer in the case of rape.  A dog eat dog idea will destroy society.

If someone did that to my Daughter I would want him to live as long as possible in the worst misery we could bestow on him.  Killing the culprit gets him off the hook.

A third idea is that someone who could do that already has a destroyed and tortured mind.  He did not create that mind, society did.

Agression will not tame the world.  The learned say that in evolution it was the female instinct to protect her young that tamed the male.   Interesting at Spider level the female kills the male after copulating because I suppose she knows we males are a waste of time.

On world standards (some may disagree, but generally) we are relatively less violent than most.  One of the reasons I feel is because we dont' have the death penalty and two, we dont allow firearms.


----------



## disarray (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

2020 the thread necromancer weaves his magic yet again :

yes to the death penalty (with incontravertible proof + DNA). yes to corporal punishment - eg. rape = 5 years + 25 lashes, 5 per year on the date the original offence took place. people without emotional control need to be taught that there is a higher authority than themselves.



explod said:


> Two issues; ..... taking a life for a life lowers us to the level of the life taker/or destroyer in the case of rape.  A dog eat dog idea will destroy society.




totally disagree. it is perfectly possible to execute a criminal while maintaining a higher standard of logic, emotional control and morality.



> If someone did that to my Daughter I would want him to live as long as possible in the worst misery we could bestow on him.  Killing the culprit gets him off the hook.




now THAT attitude lowers society to the level of the offender.



> A third idea is that someone who could do that already has a destroyed and tortured mind.  He did not create that mind, society did.




yes blame society, never the individual. its always someone elses fault. wasn't there a blame thread doing the rounds here?



> Agression will not tame the world.  The learned say that in evolution it was the female instinct to protect her young that tamed the male.




aggression is a part of our species programming and has been instrumental to our survival as a species. i don't know what learned you refer to but humans aren't tame - civilisation is a thin veneer over an animals soul and if you want to see how quickly it can all be stripped away look to the aftermath of hurricane katrina. humans under stress will revert to primal urges and instincts remarkably quickly.



> Interesting at Spider level the female kills the male after copulating because I suppose she knows we males are a waste of time.




what you mean "we" paleface?



> On world standards (some may disagree, but generally) we are relatively less violent than most.  One of the reasons I feel is because we dont' have the death penalty and two, we dont allow firearms.




we are less violent because we are comfortable. we are fed, clothed, and sheltered. take those away (to mirror conditions in many parts of the third world) and see how violent we really are.


----------



## moXJO (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The majority here http://www.mako.org.au/auschildkill.html would make good fertilizer IMO.At the very least they should be made to enter the general pop in the prisons and not protected


----------



## Happy (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



explod said:


> Killing the culprit gets him off the hook.





I have no arguments, if that person pays for the use of land and all the other expenses of keeping that person alive on the hook.

With global warming, ageing population and diminishing resources we should not be too generous and every person should have paramount obligations to be at least not destructive to the society.

Next time we have referendum on the issue I know what I'll do.


----------



## explod (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> I have no arguments, if that person pays for the use of land and all the other expenses of keeping that person alive on the hook.
> 
> With global warming, ageing population and diminishing resources we should not be too generous and every person should have paramount obligations to be at least not destructive to the society.
> 
> Next time we have referendum on the issue I know what I'll do.




In fact in some countries a life term of hard labour is used to earn money for the state.  Of course this competes with the idea of private enterprise though I think some multinationals profit from such labour when they deal with third world countries.

Arrhh Happy, the world would be so much better if we were in charge.


----------



## wildkactus (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The death penalty, yes I support it 100%, we should have this as part of our  justice system but when the verdict is read, it's not back to a cell for an appeal to be lodged or the doogooders to protest, it's straight off to a public execution
either a hanging or firering squad. See how this would changes thing here.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



disarray said:


> 2020 the thread necromancer weaves his magic yet again




disarray..
wowo - word de jour....  "necromancer" - big word and all !!.  
I always thought that was a refernce to Dracula. 

Needless to say, I disagree with most of your post -  btw it wasn't me that introduced the topic of justice, capital punishment etc - it was a former chief justice of the Aust high court, Sir Gerard Brennan  (and of course you disgaree with him as well   ).

Incidentally, he introduces many more topics than simple capital punishment, and in many respects it would have made sense to start a new thread.    

- applicable to the election for instance.  I'll probably post it there as well - unless someone else has already done so - and unless you object of course, lol.   


PS I add a definition of "necromancer" (which I had to look up), conveniently expressed in terms of thread and chat-forums etc. 
I will plead innocent to most of this definition. 



> bring long-dead forum discussion threads back to life.



Long dead topics?
not that long really - and it's neater to continue an old one that start a new.

but if you prefer we can start a new one. 

and disarray - speaking of long dead topics ...
(apart from the fact that we'll all be long dead one day)...
what's your opinion of the way the fed police handled Scott Rush's case? 

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/necromancer.htm



> Necromancer has a supernatural ability to bring long-dead forum discussion threads back to life. After having been flogged to death the thread may have been deceased for many years, and bringing it back may have scant relevance to the current topic, yet Necromancer will unexpectedly exhume the thread’s rotting corpse, and strike horror in the forum as its grotesque form lurches into the discussion. The monster, instantly recognized by all who knew it in life, seems at first to breathe and have a pulse, but, alas, it is beyond Necromancer’s skill to fully restore the thread’s original vitality. The hideous apparition may frighten away some of the weaker Warriors or Warriors badly wounded in former battles, but the thread is only a shadow of its former self and very quickly expires.
> 
> Unlike Archivist, Necromancer compulsively saves every forum message in carefully preserved archives for future use in battle, while Necromancer collects departed threads merely for the thrill of resurrecting them. Some say he performs this unnatural act out of malice, others say he can’t help himself, but no one really knows.


----------



## Ageo (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



explod said:


> On world standards (some may disagree, but generally) we are relatively less violent than most.  One of the reasons I feel is because we dont' have the death penalty and two, we dont allow firearms.




hehe explod although i understand where your coming from i cant understand why you would think such a thing regarding your firearms statement. I dont wanna go off topic but instead of thinking about firearms and amercia all the time, have a look at a more usefull system.

Switzerland

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1566715.stm



> Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.
> The country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols.




Tools arnt the problem, its the culture thats associated with those tools.

In terms of the death penalty, if they were made to suffer then i would agree but i see too many of them complaining about inhumane treatment then the greens step in and its all over, they start having rights etc..

Look at ivan milat, he looks like hes having a ball (not compared to David Hicks treatment which is what they should get). I have no love loss for them.


----------



## explod (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



> "hehe explod although i understand where your coming from i cant understand why you would think such a thing regarding your firearms statement. I dont wanna go off topic but instead of thinking about firearms and amercia all the time, have a look at a more usefull system.
> 
> Switzerland"   [un quote]
> 
> ...


----------



## Whiskers (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



wildkactus said:


> The death penalty, yes I support it 100%, we should have this as part of our  justice system but when the verdict is read, it's not back to a cell for an appeal to be lodged or the doogooders to protest, it's straight off to a public execution
> either a hanging or firering squad. See how this would changes thing here.




Well you certainly are a wild west cactus...

Haven't you seen any of numerous reports in the US where innocent people on death row have later been exonerated, largely by DNA?


----------



## IFocus (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The death penalty makes no sense to me unless maybe accepted as a primitive act of revenge driven by anger. If thats the case then lets get really primitive like in Kennas example castration with a blunt rock would surely be more beneficial method of revenge.  

The US uses capital punishment more and has a higher incarnation rate than any other Western Country. Guess what death row isn't getting any shorter any where and has no effect on basic crime rates. And yes they do kill innocents fairly regularly.  

Since we are so hell bent on being like the US maybe having the death penalty could be our crowning glory after becoming the 50 something state. 

In the US the average time to get some one to the chair was around ten years at a cost greater than serving life it makes no sense.

I just cannot equate the death penalty and the progressive growth of our culture as being comparable.

The subject always draws on strong emotions, when deciding to kill some one from your own community emotional input is the last thing needed a bit like trading...........

Focus


----------



## Purple XS2 (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Death to the worst offenders?
Emotionally I support it, but not intellectually.
The arguments against which persuade me:
1. There's always going to be the cases the law gets wrong. One per decade is too many. A lifer being released 10, 15, 20 years later is better than the grotesque charade of a posthumous pardon.

2. Running a penal system is hard enough without running a gallows as well. Applies to the gaol as to the society as a whole.

3. (Re)-Introducing the death penalty would clash with retaining the jury system (and that's a whole different kettle of worms), but assuming the jury stays, it's a very different thing for a jury to UNANIMOUSLY say 'guilty' when the probable outcome is a life sentence than it is when that guy sitting over there is going to die. In other words, we could expect to see MORE creeps get off if the death penalty is on the cards. Many a juror could consider themselves steely enough to take their place at the start of a trial and find when it comes to the crunch, they just don't find themselves able to get over that tiny tiny (un)reasonable doubt. Defence lawyers would just love it to bits.

The great failure of the anti-death penalty lobby is their common failure to insist on what a capital offence should be punished with. Life should mean life, no parole, no sanctimonius psuedo-scientific claptrap about rehabilitation. Life. In prison.

If a bridge builder builds a bridge that collapses in a storm because it just wasn't well-designed or constructed, they get sued. If a judicial officer or parole-board member lets out a creep who recommits a henious crime, is that not a professional failure calling for the accountability of the professional concerned? I see these questions as more germane to the question of justice than the gallows.

Just my 

Purple XS2, B.A./L.L.B. (Melb), Dip. Comp. Sci (La Trobe)


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Robespierre had thousands beheaded - and in the end - he himself was beheaded 
- still it was a fashionable way to go...

http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/french/french.html



> The French Revolution is clearly one of the central events in Western civilization - a period of history whose characters and events have always fascinated me. The more moderate American Revolution, in comparison, was much less influential upon the world of its time - even if it was more successful and less bloody. I would argue it was more successful precisely because it was more moderate and less murderous than the French Revolution.
> But the French Revolution ironically was a failed revolution: LibertÃ©, EgalitÃ©, and FraternitÃ© quickly descended to the *towering figure of Robespierre and his Reign of Terror as the revolution spun out control and began to murder itself.*
> 
> First the royalists were beheaded, next the moderate girondists, and b*y then the violence and suspicion was totally out of hand *as *the revolution devoured itself*. In my opinion, after they started beheading the moderate Girondists it was only a matter of time before everyone else went to the guillotine. 26 years after the "Declaration of the Rights of Man" was written up, a Bourbon once more sat on the throne as the King of France - that is what I mean by "failed" Revolution. Since 1793, France has had no less than 11 subsequent constitutions (while the United States still uses their first). This is what I mean about moderation and political stability. It is the legacy of those revolutions so different in style, substance, and in legacy.
> ...


----------



## disarray (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Purple XS2 said:


> Death to the worst offenders?
> Emotionally I support it, but not intellectually.




i'm the complete opposite   intellectually it makes a great deal of sense to remove dangerous and demented individuals from society, emotionally it gets mired in rights, morals and other emotive subjects.



> The great failure of the anti-death penalty lobby is their common failure to insist on what a capital offence should be punished with. Life should mean life, no parole, no sanctimonius psuedo-scientific claptrap about rehabilitation. Life. In prison.




good point. we'd have to debate the conditions of incarceration though 

and 2020, the necromancer quip was just that, apologies if i offended you 

regarding scott rush, he is an idiot. individuals are responsible for their own actions and its not the job of the feds to prevent people from doing stupid things.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



disarray said:


> regarding scott rush, he is an idiot. individuals are responsible for their own actions and its not the job of the feds to prevent people from doing stupid things.





gee - where's weird when you need him lol

"to forgive is civilised ? divine ? "- something like that anyways 

I assume you know that there were 12 hours approx that the fed police had the opportunity to intercede (as requested by a tax paying aussie, as in Mr (Lee) Rush senior)


----------



## misterS (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

It is interesting to see the expression "an eye for an eye" so widely understood to be some sort of incitement to wreak revenge.  

Its original employment was as an argument to moderate the scale of revenge - to stop slaughtering whole villages or families by way of revenge for a death or killing people in revenge for a less than fatal injury.

Rather, it was argued, it should only be "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth".

Taken literally today, I suppose it would mean the State should start raping and torturing the convicted, as well as putting them to death.  We should also execute those convicted of manslaughter and of culpable driving.

As far as the death penalty is concerned, it's partly the certainty of guilt in each case, compounded by the unreliability and periodic corruption of the state and its organs that is one of the problems - as well as the range of offences to which such a penalty might apply.

It is also questionable whether this is ultimately a satisfactory result for everyone affected by some of these atrocious crimes.  I can't imagine anything is really much solace, and certainly not any sort of recompense.

It is also a quite brutalising process for those people who must kill for the state - the details of hangings and the effect on those carrying them out makes sobering reading. 

It is a fair point that it does achieve revenge, and removes the person permanently from society - but so does a true life sentence - something we rarely practice.  

Life really is quite short and people do change, so with the lengthy period of incarceration before execution, it is often a quite different person being executed than the one who committed in some cases a murderous "crime of passion".

That said, some people are so evil, dangerous and untouched by remorse, that their permanent removal one way or another seems an attractive solution. 

There are few things, if anything, more infuriating than when someone is assaulted or has their life taken by some previously incarcerated but incorrigible sociopath.  And the actual things some of these people do is so horrible that discussions of the general argument relating to capital punishment must seem terribly misguided to anyone who has been touched by, or even been confronted on a jury with the details of what some of these people have done.

However, having rid ourselves of it, and having alternatives, on balance, there is little to seriously recommend the return of the death penalty, except as far as it satisfies the immediate visceral feeling that some people really should be executed for their terrible crimes.

Gee, ASF threads don't shy from the tough questions do they?


----------



## disarray (1 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

yes i do, and i still think the onus was on scott rush NOT to strap heroin to his body while walking through the customs area of a country that quite clearly and succinctly states "WE EXECUTE DRUG RUNNERS".

the federal police can't go running around interceding on behalf of every parent who thinks their child is going to do something stupid.



> It is a fair point that it does achieve revenge, and removes the person permanently from society - but so does a true life sentence - something we rarely practice.




life sentences do not remove the person from society. they still must be maintained, the cost paid by society (including the victims / families).



> Taken literally today, I suppose it would mean the State should start raping and torturing the convicted, as well as putting them to death. We should also execute those convicted of manslaughter and of culpable driving.




well not really, raping and torturing would only be done to satisfy an emotional need. capital punishment must be a detached, logical response to heinous crimes. when a dog mauls a child we don't torture it, blame it or try to reason with it, we just calmly and methodically terminate it so the threat is removed. good post btw.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Purple XS2 said:


> Death to the worst offenders?
> Emotionally I support it, but not intellectually.



Intellectually, nobody supports it purple.
In primitive barbarian mode, sure a few do.


----------



## ithatheekret (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The justice system is far to open to abuse , they do say that power breeds corruption , so a death penalty which is the omega to any legal arguement is a very unhealthy situation ....... especially if you tread on the wrong persons toes . To give license to it could only be hysteria , to believe that DNA wonderfully given to us by science , is infallable , is sheer lunacy .
To entrust it to our wonderful police and courts is suicidal !


----------



## Happy (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Whiskers said:


> Well you certainly are a wild west cactus...
> 
> Haven't you seen any of numerous reports in the US where innocent people on death row have later been exonerated, largely by DNA?




Since we can have DNA checks, we won’t need to exonerate anybody, as they will never be sentenced to death in a first place.

We are so hung up against death penalty while thousands of innocent lives are snuffed out in road fatalities and we live with it, just bad luck.


Going back to death penalty, I assume that we would do everything we can to make sure that no innocent life is taken.

When guilt is not clear no death sentence, but when more than clear then no long term accommodation just exit.

Of course even with all the safeguards somebody is innocently executed, well tough luck, that person can always be exonerated.


----------



## mark70920 (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> Since we can have DNA checks, we won’t need to exonerate anybody, as they will never be sentenced to death in a first place.
> 
> We are so hung up against death penalty while thousands of innocent lives are snuffed out in road fatalities and we live with it, just bad luck.
> 
> ...





No justice system is perfect , mistakes get made, innocent people confess to crimes thay didn't commit etc. The death penalty is final , I rather help fund the unkeep of the guilty for life than take one innocent persons life.
Life should mean Life.


----------



## Happy (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



mark70920 said:


> No justice system is perfect , mistakes get made, innocent people confess to crimes thay didn't commit etc. The death penalty is final , I rather help fund the unkeep of the guilty for life than take one innocent persons life.
> Life should mean Life.





Maybe we should be able to declare in our tax retrurn, that we want to pay higher tax to go toward otherwise death penalty cases or not.

This would make you happy and me happy too.


----------



## mark70920 (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> Maybe we should be able to declare in our tax retrurn, that we want to pay higher tax to go toward otherwise death penalty cases or not.
> 
> This would make you happy and me happy too.




Its actually cheaper to keep them in prison for life than to kill them (Lawyers fees are a bitch) so maybe you need to pay the higher tax , I should get a deduction 
You could also contribute to the compo fund for the families of those wrongly executed.:


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



ithatheekret said:


> The justice system is far to open to abuse , they do say that power breeds corruption , so a death penalty which is the omega to any legal arguement is a very unhealthy situation ....... especially if you tread on the wrong persons toes . To give license to it could only be hysteria , to believe that DNA wonderfully given to us by science , is infallable , is sheer lunacy .
> To entrust it to our wonderful police and courts is suicidal !




apart from the fact that I agree 100% ith... , I repeat a poem which I found (not original) - which is kinda in keeping with your nicname   Friday afternoon after all 



> Forth went the thunder-god
> riding on his filly,
> "I'M THOR!!" he cried!!
> His horse replied
> "You forgot your thaddle, thilly".


----------



## Whiskers (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Happy said:


> Of course even with all the safeguards somebody is innocently executed, well tough luck, that person can always be exonerated.




You know what is the worst aspect of this attitude... the guilty person is still free to offend again while people with this attitude celebrate 'an execution' for their own emotional satisfaction.

Well tough luck, you say. The contradiction of this attitude is that you put as little value on human life as a murderer.


----------



## hilly1981 (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I would love to see murderers/serial killers and rapists (if 100% sure) get executed.

There should be a zero tolerance policy in force. If you are caught or admit to guilt, or there is unquestionable evidence against you, then you should be destroyed.

I mean these low lifes who commit these crimes destroy their victims and their families lives. Why in the hell should they keep their life? I dont believe in this 'it makes you as bad as them' nonsense.

This is the real world. They wouldnt think twice in knocking you off. Some of these people are mentally screwed anyway.

Problem is we are too soft here. You can knock someone off and still only serve 20-25 years. What a bargain! Then I bet once they are released they will do it again. 

Lets make it interesting, lets put all these crooks in gaol for life, and then have a daily lottery where if your numbers comes up then you will be executed that same day. That would really give them something to think about. Fearing for their lives constantly, just dreading that moment when their number is called out. I would love to see the looks on their faces, then have the last laugh right in their face.

To those whom are against capital punishment ask yourself this.. if it was your loved one, daughter or son, or any member of your family, would you be satisfied with their killer being able to live the rest of their life in the prison system? Reliving their experience with fellow inmates and boasting about it to any passing member of staff? I know I couldnt.


----------



## Whiskers (2 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



hilly1981 said:


> I would love to see murderers/serial killers and rapists (if 100% sure) get executed.
> 
> There should be a zero tolerance policy in force. If you are caught or admit to guilt, or there is unquestionable evidence against you, then you should be destroyed.




I don't dispute some criminals deserve to be extinguished. But history tells us that far too many innocent people have been sent to death row or executed only to be later found innocent. The Jury, part of the community and authorities thought they were 100% sure guilty. 

When you know that many innocent people have been killed in the name of justice, that even when you think you are 100% sure, you still get it wrong,  and you continue  'Sacrificing' innocent lives you are no better than a murderer. Some would rightly argue that you are worse than a murderer, because you recklessly/mistakenly kill an innocent person under the guise of the law.



> I mean these low lifes who commit these crimes destroy their victims and their families lives.




So what do you think the 'justice system' does to the community and families when the execute an innocent person! 

I put it to you that it not only destroys the lives of the families of innocent people, but it destroys the credability of the justice system... then you start to get people taking the law into their own hands... and criminals knowing they are probably going to get the death penalty if they are caught, so they fight to the death anyway. Had it occured to you why the US crime rate is so high!



> Why in the hell should they keep their life? I dont believe in this 'it makes you as bad as them' nonsense.




Ok, if killing for revenge or jealousy or just because you could is criminal, what would you call the killing of an innocent person in the name of the law? surely that is a worse act when the LAW that is supposed to protect innocent people, starts killing innocent people, just in case they are guilty.  



> This is the real world. They wouldnt think twice in knocking you off. Some of these people are mentally screwed anyway.
> 
> Problem is we are too soft here. You can knock someone off and still only serve 20-25 years. What a bargain! Then I bet once they are released they will do it again.




I agree totally there, life should mean life, but that is an entirely different issue. 



> To those whom are against capital punishment ask yourself this.. if it was your loved one, daughter or son, or any member of your family, would you be satisfied with their killer being able to live the rest of their life in the prison system? Reliving their experience with fellow inmates and boasting about it to any passing member of staff? I know I couldnt




Actually I have a friend whose son was killed in a brawl a few years ago. So I do have some exposure to the issue.


----------



## Happy (3 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Whiskers said:


> You know what is the worst aspect of this attitude... the guilty person is still free to offend again while people with this attitude celebrate 'an execution' for their own emotional satisfaction.
> 
> Well tough luck, you say. The contradiction of this attitude is that you put as little value on human life as a murderer.




I simply acknowledge that many innocent people die too early.
Be it medical misdiagnosis, or incorrect treatment, 
Road fatality due to somebody else’s fault.
Risk misjudgment with death as a result.

Since I cannot give anybody life back I too say here bad luck.

Nobody would be deliberately sentenced to death, should something like that happen this would have to meet severe punishment.

After some initial clean up, we would be left with honest people who would cherish life, honesty and would be contributing members of society.


----------



## Spaghetti (3 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I would never support it. 

I have read back (some posts from years ago) and saw Singapore mentioned. They have the death penalty for having drugs on your possession. That is it. They only have a trial to determine that there is no doubt they were on your possession, it is the only aspect debatable in the courts. How or why they were in your possession is not an issue. If they belonged to a friend, a family member and you were unaware, too bad. If you took a job as courier and were just delivering a parcel without knowledge of the content, too bad. So hard to believe people would support that type of policy. 

Then there is a valid argument that it is state sanctioned murder and then we have a discrepancy on what crimes deserve the death penalty. I am sure for example that if your son, daughter, wife, husband or friend was driving over the speed limit and resulting crash caused death not many would support the death penalty in that instance. Even though it is probably the single most preventable cause of death of young people in Australia right now. Morals change, we accept people that driving over speed limits but not some selling speed. Seems strange that it is ok soemtimes, but not others. The pain for the victims families is the same. In 20 years we may ahve a difefrent opinion on who should live or should die.

Then we have Saddam who killed people for reasons he found necessary to maintain stability in his country. We called him evil yet is any government deciding who lives or dies any better when they claim it is to maintain social order? Saddam afterall did keep a lid on tensions and he did have stability as a result of his policies. 

So no I do not support it, if we do we accept any outcome for our children whether we agree or not and hand over far too much power to the legal system.


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I think also it's been shown (yes?) that a jury (in a christian country) is far less likely to find someone guilty if the accused is likely to be subjected to the death penalty.  

As for Singapore, Spag,  - agree entirely.
I recall they had a "no trespassing sign" on a fence surrounding Changi airport - a sign of a person being shot. 

Bit like this sign I guess... (not sure where it is from - found it on the internet)
at least with a picture, the message still has a good chance of getting across - whereas if you're don't speak english, a few squiggles on a sign don't mean that much...


----------



## noirua (11 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



2020hindsight said:


> I think also it's been shown (yes?) that a jury (in a christian country) is far less likely to find someone guilty if the accused is likely to be subjected to the death penalty.
> 
> As for Singapore, Spag,  - agree entirely.
> I recall they had a "no trespassing sign" on a fence surrounding Changi airport - a sign of a person being shot.
> ...





Hi 2020 et al, In cases where the death penalty could be given, I believe there should not be a jury and 4 judges should sit and there should be a 3-1 or 4-0 vote in favour of the death penalty, for it to be carried out. 

I'm all for anyone bringing drugs into Australia to be shot by firing squad. Any person selling or being involved in the distribution of drugs should receive the death penalty.

Hard labour camps should be set up and those found using drugs or keeping drugs, should be sent there for up to 20 years. On a second offence they should be shot by firing squad.

In all cases of murder the death penalty should apply and judges given the option to apply the death penalty in cases of manslaughter.

Any person entering Australia as an illegal imigrant should be sent to a work camp for 2 years and then deported.  

Tough on crime and the causes of crime.


----------



## ithatheekret (11 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



2020hindsight said:


> apart from the fact that I agree 100% ith... , I repeat a poem which I found (not original) - which is kinda in keeping with your nicname   Friday afternoon after all




Crack me up ............


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

the picture adds to it lol.  - the wide dilated eyes lol.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



noirua said:


> On a second offence they should be shot by firing squad.



noi, 
You're aware I trust that, in the case of firing squads, one man is given a blank.

That way EACH of them can always kid himself that he wasn't involved - that he was the one with the blank - 

that way he won't have nightmares as he ages accompanied by the memory of that day.....

Now in reality 5 of the 6 (or whatever) will have been responsible for a bullet hole in another man's chest  

but sure - we are good at kidding ourselves 

and for the rest of us ? sure - we are good at delegating the grubby stuff to others.


----------



## numbercruncher (11 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I have this suspicion that the Howard Government supports the death penalty, what else would explain them dobbing in those guys in Indonesia, they knew they would be facing the death penalty.

Im not sure i support the death penalty or not, I mean i could for violent offenders (specifically cold blooded murderers) ... they should actually be prisoned on off shore Islands.

Perhaps they could offer voluntary death penalties? Like life in prison in the off shore island or take this pill your choice sort of deal ...


----------



## Happy (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



numbercruncher said:


> Perhaps they could offer voluntary death penalties? Like life in prison in the off shore island or take this pill your choice sort of deal ...




Above all they should earn their keep, like all ordinary people do before they fall into walfare net.


----------



## noirua (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



2020hindsight said:


> noi,
> You're aware I trust that, in the case of firing squads, one man is given a blank.
> 
> That way EACH of them can always kid himself that he wasn't involved - that he was the one with the blank -
> ...




Hi 2020, It may sound a bit sad but it is best to have people in the firing squad who enjoy their work.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



noirua said:


> Hi 2020, It may sound a bit sad but it is best to have people in the firing squad who enjoy their work.



slippery slope there noi 
who ya gonna call?
soldiers? police?
I guessing that most soldiers would be reluctant to take part. 
Maybe you'd find a few police prepared to volunteer 

(IN EITHER CASE, I bet they secretly hope to get the "blank"  )


----------



## noirua (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



2020hindsight said:


> slippery slope there noi
> who ya gonna call?
> soldiers? police?
> I guessing that most soldiers would be reluctant to take part.
> ...




I'm not quite sure of my facts here and am going from long distance memory. However, I believe, in olden times, they recruited:behead: and:whip from amongst those who had been convicted of similar:shoot:, but were totally loyal to those who were in power at the time, ie the:aus:. Government now.


----------



## Happy (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

If worse comes to worse, and nobody would be prepared to do the job, we could outsource it like we do with IT jobs recently.

Failing to do that, they could employ hunters and dress up condemned to death as game.

Alternatively we can leave it as is and hope that by 2020 nobody is going to commit hideous crime; hence problem will disappear altogether.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 November 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Make the pollies do it yes?
Mind you, Henry Bolte would have shot hundreds 



noirua said:


> ... from amongst those who had been convicted of similar (crimes), but were totally *loyal to those who were in power at the time, ie the Government now.*



sheesh - lol
and to think we are arguing about what constituted a "subjective decision" on Dawkin's thread lol.

you nailed it through the heart there noi 

as for "sourced from those loyal to the current Govt", -   gee whiz you'd get some emotive sprukers at election time wouldn't you   

or maybe 
"vote Shooter's Party - just think of the economies - fewer misses ! fewer bullets!!" 

PS noi - would you go as far as to send the bill for the price of the bullets to the parents? (Chinese style)


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 December 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Well I agree with this initiative anyway. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/12/2116187.htm?section=justin


> Rudd to plead for death-row Aussies
> Posted 42 minutes ago
> Updated 35 minutes ago
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 December 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/12/2116152.htm?section=justin
and sounds like at least some bipartisan support in New Jersey to abolish the death penalty


> US state moves to abolish death penalty
> Posted 7 hours 49 minutes ago
> Updated 7 hours 24 minutes ago
> 
> ...




twenty minutes ... sheesh



> *The US Supreme Court on September 25 began deliberating whether lethal injections infringe the US constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" amid growing controversy over the procedure.
> 
> One convict was executed the same day the Supreme Court announced its review, after a Texas court refused to stay open 20 minutes longer to hear the appeal of a man convicted of rape and murder.*
> 
> However, no other executions have taken place since then as states have adopted an unofficial moratorium while the high court considers the matter


----------



## DB008 (12 December 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Eye for an eye in my view. 
I've got a name for ya's all, Martin Bryant!!! 
While the victim is bashed, raped, stabbed, head injuries, the perpetrator  
get's off easy. 

BUT

Like people have said in previous posts, nothing is 100% accurate. Unless they have someone admitting to the crime, the death penalty should be on the shelf. 
Andrew Mallard went to jail for 12 years, now freed. If the death penalty was in use, maybe he wouldn't be here now?
http://www.andrewmallard.com/


----------



## tronic72 (12 December 2007)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I used to be pro DP but after September 11, it occurred to me that many of these criminals WANT to die. Killing them often only creates heros. Our current justice system has the provisions to punish those that commit the most violent cruel crimes but the judges are unwilling to serve the criminals with suitable sentences.

I read somewhere, a suggestion from a member of the public who suggested the legal system is backwards. He suggested that Judges, with all their knowledge of the law should be given the task of determining guilt and that the public should determine the length and severity of the sentence. 

The think that idea is simply brilliant.


----------



## Whiskers (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I thought it worth while regurgitating this thread again given the recent admission that the Hicks prosecutor said that he wouldn't have brought charges in the first place and particularly yet another proved innocent by DNA and released after serving time for a crime he did not commit.

No doubt about Texans. If they can't shoot you for something, they'll find a way to lock you up somewhere for something. 



> *Innocent man freed after 27 years*
> April 30, 2008 - 6:26AM
> 
> DALLAS, Texas - A Texas man who spent more than 27 years in prison for a murder he did not commit is free after DNA results proved his innocence.
> ...


----------



## metric (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

there should be a legal facillity to eliminate corrupt or treasonous politicians, just as there is for military.


----------



## gfresh (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

There was another one recently.. was on Foreign Correspondent I think it was recently (or was it 4 corners).. who was also proved innocent after many years. They say there is probably a good proportion that are executed who are innocent. The "peaceful" lethal injection is not too peaceful either according to doctors, and those that have witnessed it go wrong. 

Personally, I think no matter what the crime, taking another's life does not fix the event, nor makes the executor really that much better at the end of the day. Killing somebody else because somebody else killed somebody? That makes great sense! I thought we moved on from the dark ages


----------



## explod (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

We have had a mongrel just murder a young lass here at Frankston in Victoria.  He was rounded up just this morning.  It has been found that he was convicted of murder in the past and was supposed to be hung but was pardoned.   So now at 60 years of age he is out and has murdered again.

I have and would never support the death penalty.   It is the penal and justice systems that continues to let us down.    As an ex cop (and that is not necessarily a qualification on this subject) these types of mongrels never ever rehabilitate, pedophiles are the same.   Once identified they should be kept from normal society for all of life. period.

Some humans are at different stages of evolution, and though they would not like to admit it neurologists can (I have been told) confirm such types.


----------



## skint (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



explod said:


> We have had a mongrel just murder a young lass here at Frankston in Victoria.  He was rounded up just this morning.  It has been found that he was convicted of murder in the past and was supposed to be hung but was pardoned.   So now at 60 years of age he is out and has murdered again.
> 
> I have and would never support the death penalty.   It is the penal and justice systems that continues to let us down.    As an ex cop (and that is not necessarily a qualification on this subject) these types of mongrels never ever rehabilitate, pedophiles are the same.   Once identified they should be kept from normal society for all of life. period.
> 
> Some humans are at different stages of evolution, and though they would not like to admit it neurologists can (I have been told) confirm such types.





HI Explod,

Like you, I don't support the death penalty, for reasons I'll expand upon in a later post, if I get the time. I'm not sure I agree with your recidivism rates. Whilst pedophiles do indeed have a very high rates of recidivism, murder has one of the lowest rates of recidivism. As far neurologists, or moreover neuropsychologists, being able to confirm psychopathy, it is only possible to confirm very broad indicators and correlations. For example, there are many that can have high scores on tests of psychopathy, yet have no criminal intent whatsoever. The science is still very much in its early days, from what I understand, to be able to confirm definitive diagnoses.


----------



## treefrog (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Whiskers said:


> I thought it worth while regurgitating this thread again given the recent admission that the Hicks prosecutor said that he wouldn't have brought charges in the first place and particularly yet another proved innocent by DNA and released after serving time for a crime he did not commit.
> 
> No doubt about Texans. If they can't shoot you for something, they'll find a way to lock you up somewhere for something.




whisk. - seems to me to be some blurred vision here. I can't see the point in the emotive outpourings over a few westerners while ignoring the many thousands of asian, middle east and third world "legal" and illegal executions/killings.
and how many bleat about the death penalty the same time they buy a few more BHP or woodside etc shares and support those co's to support those situations.


----------



## Whiskers (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



treefrog said:


> whisk. - seems to me to be some blurred vision here. I can't see the point in the emotive outpourings over a few westerners while ignoring the many thousands of asian, middle east and third world "legal" and illegal executions/killings.
> and how many bleat about the death penalty the same time they buy a few more BHP or woodside etc shares and support those co's to support those situations.




Yeah I know what you mean treefrog, what with mugabe and the unrest and iron fist of China to mention a couple.

But my point is to point out the hypocrisy and short comings of the US, who portray themselves to be the ultimate home of freedom, liberty and justice, even international policeman. The cap don't fit and I think they are kidding themselves about the way they think the rest of the world sees them. 

They really do undermine the philosophy of freedom, liberty and justice as a better option than what many countries have now.


----------



## treefrog (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Whiskers said:


> Yeah I know what you mean treefrog, what with mugabe and the unrest and iron fist of China to mention a couple.
> 
> But my point is to point out the hypocrisy and short comings of the US, who portray themselves to be the ultimate home of freedom, liberty and justice, even international policeman. The cap don't fit and I think they are kidding themselves about the way they think the rest of the world sees them.
> 
> They really do undermine the philosophy of freedom, liberty and justice as a better option than what many countries have now.




agree totally. Have been to US several times, several areas, - they are truly an amazingly introverted society - very few original thinkers, nay, they seem to bully their own free thinkers into compliance - including capital punishment.


----------



## Pronto (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

It's difficult to come up with anything new on this subject as the pros and cons have been thrashed out interminably. 
The subject seems to resolve itself only as a matter of personal opinion (much like abortion). 

I have always believed in the death penalty. It seems to me that a caring society needs mechanisms to cull out those among us that can not abide by the generally agreed rules. It then becomes a matter of degree, and some crimes are just so horrific that no penalty other than death is appropriate. Whether it is a deterrent to others or not is then besides the point. 

Will injustices occur? Probably, but no human system is perfect and this should be so infrequent (particularly with modern forensic methods) that it doesn't concern me. Discretion should be always available where sufficient doubt exists anyway. Contracting cancer or being killed accidentally is equally unfair but it happens and far more frequently.

The method can be debated but I suggest that this should should be such as to maximise the possibility of harvesting the body parts for use by others. This exludes lethal injections. A  gunshot to the back if the head is likely the quickest, cheapest and most painless approach.


----------



## megla (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I am against it, except, I think where a CEO ruins my life savings and gets a million dollar payout for stuffing up, then drives off in his merc to his mansion - there I think public hanging has a place!! :


----------



## Julia (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I'm morally and philosophically against the death penalty, but every now and again there is a crime so utterly horrible that I don't think anything else is appropriate.


----------



## Kauri (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Nope... it's barbaric... for mine anyone who supports it deserves to be strung up..

  :behead:  

  Cheers
............Kauri


----------



## tigerboi (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

The death penalty resolves a very important issue:recidivism...

There has been instances where someone has served a life sentence then killed again...death penalty in the first case would have solved that problem..

However i am mindful of the fact where the police verbal suspects/fit ups such as the birmingham 6(in the name of the father,d.d.lewis...great movie)the guilford 4,you only had to be irish & you was a gonner...TB


----------



## tigerboi (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

I'll tell you what is barbaric  this grub should of had his neck broken in 1968,had that happened this lady would be alive today,it was barbaric that he didnt get hanged...tb

*Frankston murder suspect faced noose*

By staff writers
April 29, 2008 06:21pm

*

Prime suspect sentenced to death in 1968
Stabbed a 17-year-old girl to death
Detectives continuing to hunt gunman
*THE prime suspect in yesterday's callous killing of a Frankston mother was sentenced to death in 1968 for the stabbing murder of a 17-year-old girl. 

Police have named Leigh Robinson, 60, as the prime suspect in the shotgun murder of  Frankston mother Tracy Greenbury, 33,  The _Herald Sun_ reported. 

Robinson's death sentence for murdering the teenager was commuted in 1969, and he was released on parole in 1983. In 1991 he pleaded guilty to 14 charges of handling over $100,000 worth of stolen goods. 

He received a two-year sentence with a minimum of 18 months. 

Actor Gil Tucker - who played a policeman in the popular TV drama _Cop Shop_ - gave evidence on Robinson's behalf, saying Robinson's life had been ''a great tragedy'' and that he had made a "made a great fist of having a go at it" after being released for the 1968 murder. 

Detectives are continuing to hunt for Robinson who they describe as "armed and dangerous" more than 30 hours after he blasted the mother of two to death with a shotgun yesterday. 

Ms Greenbury was shot in the head as she tried to get help from a neighbour after fleeing her home in Frankston.

Ms Greenbury had told her family she feared for her life after being told the man had killed and raped before. 

Ms Greenbury's father Max said his daughter alerted him to the suspect’s violent nature about a week ago. 

“'Dad, she said, 'he kept me for two hours in a caravan and I tried to get away',” Mr Greenbury told 3AW radio. 

“He dragged me in by the hair and he produced a gun, put it to my head and then he took the gun away and pulled the bullets out of the gun and said, ‘Don’t push my buttons, you’re pushing me too far’. 

“I said to her we’ve got to go to the police, and she said, ‘I’m too frightened Dad’, she said, ‘just let it go, he’ll probably go away’


----------



## tigerboi (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Heres another kill get out-kill again story...you know being a copper having to knock on a strangers door to tell them their daughter has been shot is a very tough gig,also finally telling them the person has done it before would be horrible(my 17 year old girl has her heart set on being a copper)..tragic..

The death sentence may well be barbaric to some but go tell that to the parents of  anita cobby & janine balding...tb

*Transcript*
*[SIZE=-2]13/8/1999[/SIZE]*
*[SIZE=+1]Diminished responsibility in murder cases[/SIZE]*

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]KERRY O'BRIEN: A murder case in Queensland has ignited debate over the controversial legal defence known as "diminished responsibility". Under diminished responsibility, the judge, in sentencing, takes into account the circumstances that may have helped provoke the crime.[/SIZE][/FONT]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Using this defence successfully in 1991, Les Brown was found guilty of manslaughter in Queensland instead of murder after viciously stabbing his first wife to death. Six years later, shortly after his release from jail on parole, Brown strangled his second wife. Some legal authorities and families of victims are now calling for urgent changes to the manner in which diminished responsibility has been applied.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Genevieve Hussey reports.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]PHIL CLEARY, FORMER INDEPENDENT MP: Well, there's a great history in the criminal justice system of women being killed by the men in their lives -- the men running provocation, diminished responsibility, "I was depressed" lines and being found guilty only of manslaughter, and often because judges allow these kinds of cases to be run.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: A court case in Queensland is fanning a heated debate about the use of a legal defence known as "diminished responsibility".[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Criminal lawyers argue it's not easy to win, but perfectly valid.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]MICHAEL QUINN, CRIMINAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION: It would be one of the most diff icult defences to run in a court. You've got to satisfy a jury, who are naturally sceptical of psychiatric evidence. And no, it's not run every day.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Every now and then it's run. In 1992, Les Brown was imprisoned for stabbing his wife of 23 years, Denise, to death. He'd had a history of suicide attempts and claimed he'd lost control due to a temporary abnormality of mind.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LES BROWN, 'FOUR CORNERS', ABC-TV, 1993: I still can't remember, you know, stabbing Denise. I remembered I had a broom, and then I reached for the dustpan and dustbroom and then we were arguing over that.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Denise was saying things like, "I've done that, I can clean it up. You don't have to clean it up, get out of the way," and that's the end of it then. I thought that WAS the end of it, you know, that we'd just argued over a broom. [/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]But no, she'd died.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]JOURNALIST: Did you ever intend to do it?[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LES BROWN: No, I never intended to do it at all.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: Seven psychiatrists gave evidence. In this case, Brown's defence of diminished responsibility was successful and resulted in the charge being reduced from murder to manslaughter.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Les Brown was sentenced to eight years. Psychological evidence said there was little risk of Brown repeating his actions.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LES BROWN: And I won't make any excuses for why I did it, because I honestly don't know.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: Three years later, Les Brown met his second wife, Doreen, when she went to visit her first husband in prison. They married. After serving a total of five years, Les Brown was released on parole. Doreen's children were frightened of Les Brown.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]TERRY SCOTT, VICTIM'S SON: Look, we'd be going to work and he'd say, "I had an argument with your mother today. I've killed before, I'll kill again."[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Doreen made calls to Corrective Services, concerned about his behaviour. In October 1997, just 10 months after he'd been released from prison and while still on parole, Les Brown strangled Doreen. The Victims of Crime Association says more should have been done to protect her.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]LYNNE HOLDEN, VICTIMS OF CRIME ASSOCIATION: This man obviously had not addressed the issues of a nger management, because now, we have the loss of another life.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It's very frightening to see this trend that Corrective Services tends to push these people, these very serious offenders, back out into the community with no support structures.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: The Corrective Services Department won't discuss individual cases.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]They say department officers follow the orders of the courts, but they argue you can't always predict human behaviour.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]ANGELA MUSUMICI, QLD DEPT OF CORRECTIVE SERVICES: You look for signs, you look for indicators. In most cases, when something happens that you're not aware of, it's because the change, the stressor has occurred very quickly and they've reacted to it very quickly.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: However, some lawyers think it's time to look at whether the diminished responsibility defence is being misused. They argue there should be more emphasis on any prior history of domestically violent behaviour.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]ZOE RATHUS, WOMEN'S LEGAL SERVICES: What it means is that violent men who have a habit of being violent to their partners and to their children can raise defences like diminished responsibility or provocation and have murder reduced to manslaughter -- as if that act of violence which led to the death was aberrant, was abnormal, was something out of character for them. Whereas in fact, it's just the end of a continuum of violence.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: Former Independent MP Phil Cleary, whose sister was killed in a violent attack, argues the defence allows the legal system to favour men.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]PHIL CLEARY: We've got to be sympathetic and we've got to understand human frailty, but the problem is we're very respectful of alleged male human frailty in relationships, but we're not respectful of the position and the rights of women.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: But criminal lawyers warn against turning the issue into a gender dogfight.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]MICHAEL QUINN: I have defended a number of women on murder charges who have murdered their partners, and they have been found not guilty of murder by the defence of diminished responsibility.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It should never become a gender issue -- it's a defence that's open to both male and female, and I think it's really unhelpful to any reasonable debate to reduce it to a gender issue.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: Both a Federal committee and a Queensland task force are looking at whether there should be changes to the laws surrounding diminished responsibility and provocation.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]JOCELYN SCUTT, BARRISTER: It is important that we do review provocation , self-defence and diminished responsibility and make sure that they are operating fairly in relation to all people within the community -- and I mean 'fairly' in terms of those who are potentially possible victims of killings, as well as fairly to those who may kill.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]GENEVIEVE HUSSEY: After being convicted of this second killing, Les Brown has now been sentenced to life, which carries a non-parole period of 15 years.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]TERRY SCOTT: It's about time, isn't it? I'm stoked, and I think the rest of the family will be happy, too.[/FONT][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yeah -- in the end, justice has been done. Thank God for that.[/FONT][/SIZE]


----------



## Dukey (30 April 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Basically I'm against taking a life in revenge ...  but occasionally there are some extreme cases - how about Hitler for example??   I've No problem with death penalty there.

Dunno enough about this one yet - but one thing is clear... at the very minimum, he should never have been let out.

Never to be released - should mean exactly that - irreversible - and while inside these thugs should be working their guts out on 'charitable' projects.

GPS tracking implants - you bet.
Remote controlled electric zapper GPS implants... even better .


----------



## Pronto (15 May 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Although forty years ago we surrendered the right of the State to impose the capital sentence after a fair trial in a court of law, the State still reserves to itself the right to take life. The recent shooting death of a fleeing armed criminal by police in Melbourne raises yet again the irony of the State, having outlawed execution with trial, continuing to permit execution without trial.

The State arms the police as part of its duty to protect us. The criminals of course routinely arm themselves so as to stand a sporting chance. There are tough sentences for those who carry guns in the commission of crimes whether they use them or not. 

But with many serious murderers being released from jail after ten to fifteen years, even the most stupid criminal reasons that he has nothing to lose by pulling the trigger, since he would stand to be punished just as severely for not doing so.

As far as our politicians are concerned, they continue to favour jail over execution for even the most heinous crimes, including serial killers, child murderers and cop killers. We, the governed, obligingly fulfil our part of the deal and continue to be murdered.


----------



## spartn (15 May 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

Hi guyz

I am personally a firm believer in the death penality, but only in extreme cases. 

If you put a murder in jail for the rest of his life he might show remorse but his life will still go on. However, if I were a murder the days and weeks leading up to my execution would be to me a hell of a lot worse in many ways than knowing that i will never get released from jail.

Spartn

:viking:


----------



## disarray (15 May 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*



Pronto said:


> Although forty years ago we surrendered the right of the State to impose the capital sentence after a fair trial in a court of law, the State still reserves to itself the right to take life. The recent shooting death of a fleeing armed criminal by police in Melbourne raises yet again the irony of the State, having outlawed execution with trial, continuing to permit execution without trial.




it was hardly an execution. the drug dealing criminal with a history of violent offences fired at police while being chased and was hit by return fire. good riddance to bad rubbish and we should show more support to police who have to face these violent, mainly ethnic thugs. giving the vic police decent weapons would be a good start.


----------



## BradK (15 May 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

As a general rule, I dont believe in the death penalty. 

However,  it should be reserved for one group of people - paedophiles. 

Brad


----------



## Happy (15 May 2008)

*Re: The Death Penalty. Do/would you support it?*

As a general rule, I believe in the death penalty.



BradK said:


> However,  it should be reserved for one group of people - paedophiles.
> 
> Brad




We could make a list of those who do not deserve to live with us on our overpopulated planet with dimnishing resources and possibly global warming hanging over our heads.


----------



## noirua (27 May 2018)

Maybe the death penalty is an answer:
*"She was tortured because of me": Boyzone founder whose obsessed ex beat, starved and murdered French nanny says he's 'haunted' over death*
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/she-tortured-because-me-boyzone-12604767


----------



## noirua (25 October 2020)

Whether a person is for or against the death penalty may depend in some people's minds whilst others are absolutely for or against no matter what. Some might be for if there could be absolute certainty of an error not being made and others only for the most horrifical of crimes. This crime is one of those seen as horrific.








						Fanny Adams - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




*The Butchering of Sweet Fanny Adams*








						The Butchering of Sweet Fanny Adams
					

This is the true story of the kidnapping and brutal murder of young 8-year-old English girl Fanny Adams, straight from the Wikipedia page. Fanny Adams (30 April 1859 – 24 August 1867) was a young English girl murdered by solicitor's clerk Frederick Baker in Alton, Hampshire. The expression...




					creepypasta.fandom.com
				




Justice Mellor invited the jury to consider a verdict of not responsible by reason of insanity, but they returned a guilty verdict after just fifteen minutes. On 24 December, Christmas Eve, Baker was hung outside Winchester Gaol. The crime had become notorious and a crowd of 5,000 attended the execution. Before his death, Baker wrote to the Adams expressing his sorrow for what he had done "in an unguarded hour" and seeking their forgiveness. Baker's execution was the last to take place at Winchester.

Where does the English phrase "Sweet Fanny Adams" come from? From what I'm told, it's a lot like the American term zip, for nothing. However, there's got to be a story behind this.




__





						Frederick Baker | Murderpedia, the encyclopedia of murderers
					

Murderpedia, the free online encyclopedic dictionary of murderers. The largest database about serial killers, mass murderers and spree killers around the world



					murderpedia.org
				








	

		
			
		

		
	
By Peter Trimming - Flickr: The Grave of Fanny Adams, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15304604

Alton, Hampshire, South of England: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alton,_Hampshire


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 October 2020)

noirua said:


> Some might be for if there could be absolute certainty of an error not being made



It certainly wouldn't be the first time that someone seen as innocent or even of high standing years later came to be known as a criminal of the worst kind when the truth finally came out.

Likewise the reverse, someone thought to have done something terrible is later found to have done nothing wrong at all.

So long as death remains irreversible, I'm opposed to it for that reason.


----------



## sptrawler (27 October 2020)

Smurf1976 said:


> It certainly wouldn't be the first time that someone seen as innocent or even of high standing years later came to be known as a criminal of the worst kind when the truth finally came out.
> 
> Likewise the reverse, someone thought to have done something terrible is later found to have done nothing wrong at all.
> 
> So long as death remains irreversible, I'm opposed to it for that reason.



On the other hand, there are also those who are caught, punished, released and then re offend.
Complex issue.





						Counting the risk of murderers re-offending | University of South Wales
					






					criminology.research.southwales.ac.uk


----------



## noirua (14 January 2021)

Lisa Montgomery: First federal execution of woman goes ahead in 67 years after appeal lost (msn.com) 

Kansas woman Lisa Montgomery, 52, was pronounced dead at 1.31 am (6.31 am GMT) on Wednesday after receiving a lethal injection at a federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana.


----------



## PZ99 (14 January 2021)

Do/would I support it?

If I was an axe wielding serial killer I would say no.

If I... or someone close to me was a potential victim of an axe wielding serial killer I would say yes 

PS... why all the fuss about it being a woman ? They all wanted equality right ?


----------



## wayneL (15 January 2021)

To me this is a totally vexed question and since I am sitting here, three sheets to the wind on a Friday arvo, I'll do what I have sworn that I will never do, and offer my opinion on this topic.

My opinion is... f***** if I know.

The question is could I take that person's life myself. I'm quite confident that if it is on behalf of the legal system I could never do it, not in any sense or form.

However if someone had taken the life of someone dear to me, I ask myself the same question, could I take their life in retribution.

My answer is, that I don't know. Thankfully, I've never been placed in that position.


----------



## sptrawler (15 January 2021)

I guess most on here would be against it, unless it was Trump, then they would be sitting in the front row with the knitting out.🤣🤣🤣🤣


----------

