Pin-seeker
Well-known member
Might want to read my post again.
moors murderer dead
- Thread starter Norrin Radd
- Start date
Might want to read my post again.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
I'd of tortured both until they'd of told were the bodies were, then they should of been shot or hung and wiped off the face of the earth,
They tortured and murdered for pleasure and sexual gratification and I've no problem with using any neccessary means to get the information required.
bobmac
Major Champion
I hope you don't experience anything that would change your mind
ger147
Tour Winner
For me it's a simple economic argument.
It's well into 6 figures per year to look after the worst offenders in the country, people who will NEVER be released in any circunstances.
For example, how much money has been spent on Peter Sutcliffe all these years? Millions of pounds on a depraved murderer and rapist with no hope whatsoever of any rehabiliation. An injection resolves the problem and saves the country a fortune and that IMO would be a good thing.
chrisd
Major Champion
They both would have hung if their crimes went to court a year earlier. I only have a problem with the " no matter what the crime"
Kellfire
Blackballed
It costs a lot to kill someone, too.
Kellfire
Blackballed
And those reasons are exactly why anyone affected by a crime should have no say in the punishment; they're not impartial.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
I'm also against capital punishment - taking someone's life because they took someone else life to me just seems eye for an eye - torturing is just barbaric.
Why should we need to drop down to their level as a punishment - the idea of living in a civilised world is being above killing others - just because a criminal drops to that level should never be justification to kill again
I see it purely as a financial decision.
We put animals down, someone doing something like this is lower than them imo.
Pin-seeker
Well-known member
Ok I'll make it more clear as some seem to be struggling here.
Torture him to find out where the little boys body was so that his parents could put him to rest.
Torture him to find out where the little boys body was so that his parents could put him to rest.
ger147
Tour Winner
Not six figues a year for decades, deffo cheaper from an economic point of view.
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
And all those that voted for the abolition of hanging should of hung there heads in shame and queued up at the doors of the victims of there crimes and explained why.
D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Would you rather sit down with an offender and have a nice chat about why they did what they did?
Val
Ryder Cup Winner
I got you first time and 100% agree
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Nope they should be put into solitary for the rest of their life - minimum water and bread , zero comforts and one hour of light a day. Their rights taken away from them
I wasn't suggesting it was you that had said it. I also don't judge those that wanted it.
If they thought they could tirture him to find an answer, then that's different. Still not sure I'd have the stomach for it. But wouldn't feel any sympathy for him if it had happened.
How do you separate the 100% guilty from the miscarriages of justice? All people are sent to jail with people thinking they did it. Some are found not guilty years later when new evidence comes along. With hanging etc they are not around to enjoy their freedom, they are dead. For that alone capital punishment is wrong.
I'm with Kellfire on the other reasons for not having it but killing one innocent person is enough. For anyone under the mis-apprehension that it prevents crime then feel free to look at how many people are killed by the state in the US and China and also see their crime rates. It doesn't seem to stop people.
I'm with Kellfire on the other reasons for not having it but killing one innocent person is enough. For anyone under the mis-apprehension that it prevents crime then feel free to look at how many people are killed by the state in the US and China and also see their crime rates. It doesn't seem to stop people.
tsped83
Tour Winner
Hanging would have been too good for him. A drawn out and miserable ending still seems far from fair.
I would have fully endorsed his torture in pursuit of the whereabouts of Keith Bennett.
I would have fully endorsed his torture in pursuit of the whereabouts of Keith Bennett.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Don't think anyone suggested using it as a deterrent, but were not talking about one innocent life, they tortured defenceless kids, taped themselves doing it and took pleasure from it, call me a savage, inhumane, anything you like, there is nothing I would of stopped at to make them suffer, they never gave the rights of their victims and the victims families any consideration so therefore they lost the right to theirs imo.
Why is it when hanging etc is mentioned does deterrent or miscarriages of justice wheeled out as a reason against it, we never get an alternative answer to what we should do, these things are still happening and innocent children are being killed.
I mentioned deterrent as a pre-emptive comment as that is usually raised as a reason behind it. Killings happened when we had hangings, they are happening when we don't. They just happen unfortunately.
In the case of Brady there is clearly no doubt but then at the time the Birmingham bombers and the Guildford Four were also "no doubt" situations. Then the evidence became clear that they were not involved. How do you decide who is really, really guilty and who is just a bit guilty? Plenty of other cases. What if you, a relative, a friend was arrested, tried, found guilty and then hung when they were innocent? How can that be right? By keeping people in jail we leave open the door to those miscarriages so they can be corrected.
The other issue is whether it is right for the state to kill people. I don't believe it is. Keep them in jail, deprive them of their freedom but no matter how awful I don't believe we have the right to kill someone. I totally accept many will not agree with this.
In the case of Brady there is clearly no doubt but then at the time the Birmingham bombers and the Guildford Four were also "no doubt" situations. Then the evidence became clear that they were not involved. How do you decide who is really, really guilty and who is just a bit guilty? Plenty of other cases. What if you, a relative, a friend was arrested, tried, found guilty and then hung when they were innocent? How can that be right? By keeping people in jail we leave open the door to those miscarriages so they can be corrected.
The other issue is whether it is right for the state to kill people. I don't believe it is. Keep them in jail, deprive them of their freedom but no matter how awful I don't believe we have the right to kill someone. I totally accept many will not agree with this.
