Bring it back.

Started by Nick, October 16, 2021, 11:01:05 AM

« previous - next »

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

johnofgwent

Quote from: papasmurf on October 17, 2021, 02:38:00 PM
Blank message again John.
Not quite. THIS piece of code seems to have been inserted into the area near the pasted link, it forced my post into near-unreadabkle minimalism.

span style="" class="

The other thing i am getting well fed up of, is when I spot my phones spelling checker has overridden my intent and i try to modify my words, often a " size = 78 % " tag is inserted. As both these events happen using chrome for android on a phone, but not when using chrome on a chromebook, a linux box or a windows pc I can only assume this is a bug in the CSS or related front end wizardry. I ued to get shit like this all the time when doing front end development, now i stick to databases



<t>In matters of taxation, Lord Clyde\'s summing up in the 1929 case Inland Revenue v Ayrshire Pullman Services is worth a glance.</t>

johnofgwent

Quote from: Thomas on October 16, 2021, 01:50:00 PM

Every criminologist and experts opinion i have ever heard of state that the correlation between any set of figures you can conjure up are not very well understood , but there is little to no evidence to show the death penalty is any form of deterent in preventing serious crime or murder.


Ok


I will cede the possibility that the death penalty is of limitef value as a deterrent. Not least because the opponents of it day juries are reluctant to convict knowing a rope awaits.


But I know of 466 people who would have rather longer life spans had a similar number of killers faced a rope


Because what you cannot argue with is the fact it's a great way to prevent repeat offences


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308750475_Released_to_Kill_Again_An_Analysis_of_Paroled_Murderers_Who_Murder_Again_While_on_Parole



<t>In matters of taxation, Lord Clyde\'s summing up in the 1929 case Inland Revenue v Ayrshire Pullman Services is worth a glance.</t>

Thomas

Quote from: Nick on October 16, 2021, 09:15:56 PM
I believe in China if you're found guilty of a violent crime you get a bullet in the head on the way out of the court, whether it's official or 'attempting to escape' I'm not sure.

Nope, the chinese supreme court from what i read have the power to review death centences , and the chinese system has checks and balances within it.

apparently thius is the most common type of death sentence in china.

Death sentence with reprieve (simplified Chinese: 死刑缓期执行; traditional Chinese: 死刑緩期執行; pinyin: sǐxíng huǎnqī zhíxíng, abbr.: 死缓; 死緩; Sǐhuǎn) is a criminal punishment found in the law of the People's Republic of China. According to the criminal law chapter 5 (death penalty), sections 48, 50 and 51, it gives the death row inmate a two-year suspended sentence of the execution. The convicted person will be executed if found to intentionally commit further crimes during the two years following the sentence; otherwise, the sentence is automatically reduced to life imprisonment or, if the person is found to have performed deeds of merit during the two years, fixed-term imprisonment.[1]
An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t-Saoghail!

johnofgwent

https://barristerblogger.com/2020/12/29/how-could-priti-patel-reintroduce-the-death-penalty/

I have on multiple occasions pointed to the actions of Tony Blair whose abuse of prime ministerial prerogative was used to quietly approve two protocols that make capital punishment difficult to reintroduce

The above blog entry, triggered by a Tw** (sorry, tweet) from the Society of Black ThievingvScum (sorry Lawyers, I meant black LAWYERS) explains and points to the detail of the two measures Blair approved by statutory instrument in 1999 and 2003.

Worth a read.



<t>In matters of taxation, Lord Clyde\'s summing up in the 1929 case Inland Revenue v Ayrshire Pullman Services is worth a glance.</t>

Borchester

Quote from: Nick on October 16, 2021, 09:15:56 PM
I believe in China if you're found guilty of a violent crime you get a bullet in the head on the way out of the court, whether it's official or 'attempting to escape' I'm not sure.

Happily we don't live in China.
Algerie Francais !

Nick

Quote from: Thomas on October 16, 2021, 01:43:42 PMno criminal justice system in the world that im aware of that doesnt have checks and balances within it

I believe in China if you're found guilty of a violent crime you get a bullet in the head on the way out of the court, whether it's official or 'attempting to escape' I'm not sure.
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Thomas

Quote from: patman post on October 16, 2021, 01:11:42 PM
In 1965, the year of the abolition of the death penalty for homicide, the murder rate was approximately 6.8 per million population, by 2001/02 this figure had doubled to 16.6 per million. 
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN03805/SN03805.pdf.


There were 695 victims of homicide in the year ending March 2020, 47 more (7%) than the previous year; this figure includes the Grays lorry incident with 39 homicide victims – if this incident is excluded, homicide showed a 1% increase overall. 
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020   

Despite the rise in homicides around the UK, I guess the general decision is that the risk of wrongly executing innocent people outweighs the desire for retribution...



Nothing more than cherry picked meangless figures.

1901 had a higher homicide rate than any year of the first decade or more after abolition , and the  rate has varied wildly over the centuries we have had the death penalty.

Every criminologist and experts opinion i have ever heard of state that the correlation between any set of figures you can conjure up are not very well understood , but there is little to no evidence to show the death penalty is any form of deterent in preventing serious crime or murder.
An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t-Saoghail!

Thomas

Quote from: johnofgwent on October 16, 2021, 12:16:37 PM
and START remembering the fact Lord Bloody Longford allowed Ian f**king Brady and Myra f**king Hindley to enjoy decades of life at taxpayers expense when they should both have swung.

This insinuation of yours that the death penalty is cheaper to the taxpayer than life imprisonment is no more true today on this thread than it has been any other time you have insinuated it on any other thread or forum john.

We have literally done this over and over and over again and again , and the fact of the matter is there is no criminal justice system in the world that im aware of that doesnt have checks and balances within it , and as we have discussed many a time , its those checks and balances which leads to appeals and carefull considerations of implementing the death system that largely in countries like america render the death penalty more expensive to adminster than life imprisonment.

The fact of the matter john is the death penalty has largely disappeared around the world , certainly in the first world , and it isnt coming back.

Governments are no longer interested in appeasing baying mobs mindlessly calling for blood without thought , they want to be seen to  be fair and just while doing everything they can to tackle crime and the causes of crime , which is largely why they listen to criminologists who by and large are against the death penalty.

Even if somehow a miracle did happen from your perspective , and they did somehow reintroduce the death penalty , it would never be done on the kangaroo court now , hang them five minutes later system you have seemed to want to bring back.

An Fhirinn an aghaidh an t-Saoghail!

Borchester

Quote from: Barry on October 16, 2021, 01:12:33 PM
Sir David was pro capital punishment, as a matter of interest.

He was also supposed to be an affable bloke, so would probably be amused at the idea of his killer going to jail rather than the gallows. So there is at least a tiny spark of humour in this terrible business
Algerie Francais !

Barry

Sir David was pro capital punishment, as a matter of interest.
† The end is nigh †

patman post

In 1965, the year of the abolition of the death penalty for homicide, the murder rate was approximately 6.8 per million population, by 2001/02 this figure had doubled to 16.6 per million. 
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN03805/SN03805.pdf.


There were 695 victims of homicide in the year ending March 2020, 47 more (7%) than the previous year; this figure includes the Grays lorry incident with 39 homicide victims – if this incident is excluded, homicide showed a 1% increase overall. 
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2020   

Despite the rise in homicides around the UK, I guess the general decision is that the risk of wrongly executing innocent people outweighs the desire for retribution...



On climate change — we're talking, we're beginning to act, but we're still not doing enough...

papasmurf

Quote from: johnofgwent on October 16, 2021, 12:16:37 PM




I'll volunteer to pull the lever myself


AFTER the charge, trial, jury verdict and so on.

So would my wife and I.
Nemini parco qui vivit in orbe

Borchester

Quote from: Nick on October 16, 2021, 11:01:05 AM
After the killing of David Amess I think it's time to bring the death penalty back.
Taking someone else's life cause they commit a crime may not bring down crime, but it would deffo make me feel a lot better if it was one of my relatives.


Maybe. Not so sure myself. I think the real question is what sort of trade off do you get by sacrificing what will probably be some religious or political dimwit, for the life of a popular public figure. I doubt that it will bother the assassin. After the murder of Empress Elisabeth of Austria, her killer, Luigi Lucheni was enraged to discover that he would not face the death penalty. He wanted to die. He was nothing before and nothing afterwards and wanted to be made a martyr. About the only good thing that came out of the tragedy was that the pathetic nothing remained pretty much that for the rest of his life.

I guess I am a hypocrite. I am all for locking murderers up until there is 110% proof that they are harmless. In the meanwhile we can go about our lives while they watch what should have been the rich sparkle of theirs pass them by. But as for stringing people up, nah, it is a bit too final.
Algerie Francais !

cromwell

Energy....secure and affordable,not that hard is it?

srb7677

Quote from: Nick on October 16, 2021, 11:01:05 AMAfter the killing of David Amess I think it's time to bring the death penalty back.
Yawn. Hoiw many more times are the same old faces going to drone on about the same old things, emoting all over the place? Has not the issue been done to death now?

The actual thinking process that their emotings fail to adequately address is what about the fact that a death penalty will sometimes result in innocent people being put to death, but people do get wrongfully convicted.

The usual kneejerk response to this is to either claim that this would be impossible today - an act of faith grasped at to justify their emotive desire to kill someone whose crimes have angered them. Or to claim that the death of a few innocents is collateral damage and an acceptable price to pay. Anything as long as their desire for revenge is sated.

Rational and moral thinkers tend not to be supporters of the death penalty, because we think with our brains and our consciences, rather than with the more reptilian parts of our brains.
We are not all in the same boat. We are in the same storm. Some of us have yachts. Some of us have canoes. Some of us are drowning.