Confront a yob on the top deck of a bus, or a bunch of louts loitering outside your front door, and you risk being stabbed, shot or kicked to death. With the increase in drugs, guns and lawlessness, Britain is awash with criminals who do not hesitate to casually and cruelly end a life. We constantly hear about police being shot, babies being raped, girls kidnapped, raped and murdered, and citizens robbed and killed. Re-introducing the death penalty in the UK is therefore a topic that is increasingly gathering steam. This message is the same from Gav′s POLITICS, UK CJ Weblog and Away with Mike, to Then Three Come Along, Commonwealth Watch, GraBlog and Musings of a blonde, from the BNP to the UK Independence Party, a Labour Councillor, a former police chief and a Shadow home secretary. If it is correct that we bloggers have political power, the blogs of the UK must unite around a rallying cry of 'Bring Back the Death Penalty'.
In England, the House of Commons concluded that capital punishment must be seen as inhuman and degrading and abolished capital punishment in 1973. The death penalty is now prohibited by Protocol 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Also Article 7 of the EU treaty states that action will be taken against member states where there is a ‘clear risk of a human rights breach’. However, we citizens also have rights and the death penalty should have a place in our protection as a last resort and reminder that there are crimes so heinous that only the ultimate penalty is sufficient.
New Labour won the 1997 general election with its flagship policy, “Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”. This initiative has long been lost, with crime on the increase nationally and across Europe, violent crime increasing, high homicide rates, sexual offences spiralling and large percentages of offenders being reconvicted within a two year period. It is therefore apparent that on average the criminal justice system does not achieve its objectives of deterrence, retribution, rehabilitation and protecting the public. It has previously been argued, "If the question is how we can restrain known, convicted criminals from murdering, raping, assaulting, burglarising and thieving?’ prison is by far the most effective answer short of the death penalty". As imprisonment alone has not worked in practice, we now need to go one step further.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - [MR]Chip
The crime statistic you've linked to is in absolute numbers, it doesn't compensate for population growth, other take into account other long term influences like economic cycles.
As for the things you constantly hear about - well, that's the media for ya.
2 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
jamal, with all due respect, this notion is sickening, abhorant an fairly ridiculous.
what you propose is state-sponsored vengeance, not justice by any stretch of the imagination. (someone else said that, the vengeance thing, in similar words, but for the life of me i can't recall who, although the fizzog of ol' Neitchze is most vivid)
the idea that the death penalty is a deterrent is just nonsense, nothin more. are we to assume that where the death penalty is present crimes are not? that the knowledge that oh, i'll be killed for this, stops people killing? i don't think so.
what you end up with is a system that kills killers for a multitude of reasons, certainly, the aforementioned vengeance, for political reasons, for distorted ideas of justice informed less by any JUSTICE and more by the political climate of the time, but no detterent under any definition of the word.
it's a horrendous idea, and what of the ol' mis-trial, what of the misscarriage of justice? how to rememdy these grotesque errors when the wrongly accused is long-since lain cross steel an needled-up front glarin witnesses? do we kill the judges, who murdered an innocent person for suposedly doing the same thing?
not to mention the effects of living in a society that routinely kills mentally ill criminals an suposes such wretched terrors to be just an RIGHT. if we look up to folks who solve problems by gassin an slayin an electrocuting anyone who steps over certain lines for whatever reasons, what the hell are WE suposed to think, how are WE supposed to react to slights on our persons?
Barbarism is still barbarism, whether operating under some perverted notion of justice or otherwise. Hitler operated under just that notion, lest we forget.
3 - Dave Nalle
Before the UK even considers the death penalty a far more effective measure would be the complete legalization of handguns for private ownership and the decriminalization of their use for the defense of self and property. As demonstrated again and again that would be a far more effective deterrent than the death penalty.
An armed society is a polite society.
Dave
4 - jamal
Mr Chip, its not just the media, these things actually occur. I work within the CJS so know better then most that the extent of serious crime in the UK is at a significant level.
As stated and contrary to Aaron's comments, I do not place significance on capital punishment as a deterrent. For the main fact that crime has constantly increased and not been significantly affected by any form of crime controls or punishments, there are therefore no significant deterrents. What I argue and support is that proper punishments must be delivered for relevant crimes. It is not about deterring or revenge, but about justice.
"In the interests of justice, the perpetrators of crime must receive punishments that are proportionate to the crime as well as equivalent. When offenders are sentenced to life they should serve life, and when they take life they should receive a sentence of death".
We see the two men convicted of killing and raping the girl in Thailand. Nothing will bring her back, but her family and many others will find some satisfaction in the fact that they will be executed for their crimes. This is much more satis factory and appropriate then the average 15 year sentence they would have received in the UK, where they would have spent in a prison where their cell contain home furnishings and electronical gadgets.
In a system with appropriate safeguards where such a punishment is delivered after great care has been taken to ensure a sound conviction, perpetrators of relevant crimes will be duely be punished for taking the lives of their victims and committing heinous crimes. This is much more appropriate then the 15 years on average served for a life sentence in the UK, which evidently fail to reduce crime, punish offenders, protect the public and acknowledge the suffering of victims and their families.
As with Islamic law, the victim’s family should also have a right to accept compensation from the perpetrator instead or indeed make use of clemency and, of course, the state should only have the right to apply the ultimate sanction if it abides by all the rules itself.
5 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
"Nothing will bring her back, but her family and many others will find some satisfaction in the fact that they will be executed for their crimes."
Jamal, this is certainly correct, but the price on the damn soul of the country, if such a thing is even plausible, would be greater than any individual sense of satistfaction could hope to cover.
desire for some sort of vengeance is a totally understandable emotional weight, but when it comes to matters of state and political & social policy, emotional weight HAS to be discarded, there's no way anything but utmost terror can result from a criminal justice system that places more emphasis on the emotional results of a punishment on those originally victimised than on the notion of justice itself.
to draw the notion to its conceivable conclusion, where does it end, this satisfaction? an orphan grows up to kill two children from a large family, for to give an example out thin air. said killer is killed by way of "punishment". is this ANY sort of fair deal for the family, if we're to assume that the crime is equal to the resultant punishment? if for the loss of two children loved dearly by a large family, we offer the life of one individual with NO family, with no-one especially caring one way or the other, is this REALLY a fair deal? isn't it just a slaying that offers no real comfort to anyone?
so if the notion of some sort of satisfaction offered is this shakable, when we think about it, surely it stands to reason that it's no grounds whatsoever for ANOTHER life being taken?
murder is murder. and if thats a punishment to fit the crime, then why don't we steal from thieves? why don't we rape rapists?
6 - jamal
Do we not take the freedom of theives and rapists, just as they take the property and sexual activity from others?
In the same sense we must take from the murderer, but the fact remains that there is no punishment proportinate or equivilent other then capital punishment itself. I agree that there are many side effects and casulties to such an option. But it can only be justice if murderers receive true punishment for their crimes, of which can only be execution.
7 - jamal
Just to add. Note I am only arguing such a penalty for crimes of murder. Life for Life. Nevertheless, if you look at Saudi Arabia, while they do quite a few unIslamic things there, crime is very low compared to other countries, particularly in Mecca, where it is not uncommon for shopkeepers to just leave their shops open if they left for a bit. So clearly the harsh punishments have an effect here. I do not argue this as a definitive case, considering in countries like Japan or Denmark there are low crime rates and no death penalty. Maybe these countries provide an atmosphere which prevents crimes at the root. Since this does not occur in the UK, we must begin somewhere and this should be in having clear and harsh penalties for the perpetrators of crime. Crime is out of control, the murder rate is increasing as is the blatent disregard for life. Therefore reintroducing the death penalty is the most positive way forward at present.
8 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
but can we combat what you refer to as a blatant disregard for life by having our leaders display just that disregard?
point taken on freedom being removed as punishment for material things being stolen, i was thinking that i was writing actually, but you can see how such an argument could be made.
i beleve the death penalty to be an abhorant, barbaric means of punishment whatever the case, but this isn't to say i don't sympathise in part with the calls of, say, family members of the murdered to have this kind of punishment administered. but a fella has to recognise the part emotions are playing here, which is not to undervalue them, i'd feel rotten if i DIDN'T have some part of me goin "that fucker needs hung" for example, as a knee-jerk reaction to some tragic crime of some sort. but that kind of thinking cannot be the basis for our justice system, it just can't, becuase for one thing, it's far too grey an area. to say that everyone charged with murder and found guilty IS in fact guilty is as demented a notion as saying everyone found innocent is innocent. it's just not the case, and the idea of someone being killed on account of these errors, i dunno how anyone could sleep at night knowing they played a part, at whatever level, in having this happen.
to propose the death penalty as A - any sort of positive movement, and B- as some kind of stepping stone to a better way is something i find very difficult to accept. and i don't, in fact. every single area of british life needs some sort of reform, education primarily. i think also things are a lot better than the doom-doused image painted in your post (which, whilst i disagree with it entirely, was an excellent piece, if one i find difficult to read). Education reform is at the core of a chain of events that need to occur, but the idea of reinstating a death penalty is a very, very dangerous step backwards, too far back to be in any way credible, or in any way permissable under any sorta progressive society.
9 - jamal
You make valid points against the death penalty. Any re-introduction is a dangerous step due to the grea areas. However, from what Ive seen in the middle east, it can work. I think that sometimes to move forwards we have to adapt, which can mean borrowing from the past.
10 - RedTard
I'm not sure of the repercussions of having or not having capital punishment. I certainly think it should only be administered in cases where physical evidence is overwhelming and there is essentially no question of guilt.
It may not be the popular view but I believe there are certain crimes that a human can commit that would forfeit their right to coexist on this planet. I have watched the confessions of serial child rape/murderers. I have seen them describe the hours and days of rape and torture ending in the death of the victim. After watching this I not only support death for the individual but would be more than happy to hand out the punishment myself.
I don't have some strong desire to see most of these people die, but I can understand and agree with the logic behind it.
11 - Pat
I am 59 and when I was in my teens supported the death penalty. Muder made front page news probably we heard of one or two A YEAR back then in the uk.The public was shocked and the murder was talked about for weeks /months.
Later I changed my mind about the death penalty and was anti hanging for no other reason than I thought I had grown up and have remained that way for some time , however I now feel very strongly about this and I think the UK should reintroduce the death penalty or life SHOULD MEAN LIFE WITH NO REPRIEVE.Our punishment system is a joke
We hear and see at least one murder reported every single day sometimes more. There were 4 on the news last night! No one cares any more we just say OH NO ANOTHER MURDER ISN'T THAT AWFUL AND GET ON WITH OUR LIVES.
These horrendous people have taken away inncoent lives, children from parents, parents from children and so on. They come out of jail anything from 8 yrs on that is not right.
I also believe we should see the reintroductuion of national service (bad lads army proves that point) and national service was cmplulsory in the days of the death penalty could the two be connected? The lack of Discline and the bad behaviour in general could perhaps have a lot to do with the increase in crime and murders.
I would like to see the figures relating to murders in the uk between 1943- 1973 when we had the death penalty and for the same period when capital punishment was abolished 1974-2004 but not including terrosim or wars for either period.I bet everyone would get a shock!
12 - paulbaj
I agree that capital punishment should be reintroduced in the U.K.
Everyone knows that society is too lenient on the killers of children and the elderly,after their sentence many of these animals are allowed to slip back into society only to be housed next to some more potential victims.
Trust in society has gone.
Tougher sentencing would deter the perpetrators of these crimes without a doubt because they are committed by cowards protected by the feeble do-gooders and p.c. brigade.
The time has come to get tough and execute anyone convicted of the murder of the young and elderly.
13 - Steve
Well, the death penalty might dissuade some people from pre-meditated crimes, but as far as I know, most crimes happen in the spur of the moment, i.e. when a person is not thinking rationally, so I doubt the death penalty would be much of a deterrence (it doesn't seem to be in the US anyway).
Although I suppose it does have a certain logic vis a vis justice as far as murder goes. However, I would be uncomfortable using it against any except repeat offenders, in case some are wrongfully convicted.
I think it is probably more important for the entertainment media to show positive, non-violent ways of solving problems, instead of showing the use of guns as the best way. Alas, I guess that doesn't sell as many movie tickets or get as high Neilsen ratings. Oh well, I guess entertainment is more important to alot of people than peace on the streets.
I think the UK's increase in crime is due to the acceptance of disrespecting people more than anything.
They used to have wonderful comedies in the past, but now, a few I have seen from the last few years have been quite pitiful, where the characters seem to spend most of their time putting folks down. I understand there can be laughs in dysfunctional families, but it would be nice if they would try to solve their problems once in a while, rather than wallow in them. The audience might even learn something from it.
14 - Ian Martin
The death penalty is a great idea in theory. So long it only applies to 'other people'. Of course, neither you nor anyone in your family or in your circle of friends would ever find themselves accused of murder or worse. Only deserving strangers would be executed by the state, so it's all good.
Yeah, right!!!
15 - BringbackdeathpenaltyUK
The UK law system is back to front, criminals get more support than its victims. Murderers are able to basically get away with murder, life should mean life not 15 years, or earlier if youve been a good boy or girl, this is a total waste of taxpayers money. I think if the evidnce is overwhelming against a criminal then they should be executed, not left to live a life of luxury in prison, why does it take so long to get a change
16 - Punish the evil
Vote for capital punishment, there are too many sick people who murder and walk away, or enter prison, and live a better life than they did before, just to be realeased with new names, new house and a new life when they don't deserve this.
Mr Martin, if a member of my family commits murder, i would be happy to see them suffer the consequences, they would deserve thier fate for taking someones life. The fact they are your family is a moot point and frought with bias, although you have a good poin none the less.
Its sickening and saddening to turn on the television to hear of the latest murder or rape/murder. My fiancee is away from home, and i worry for her every night, and i fear there isnt much to stop someone from raping and killing her for sport in the UK. The only thing i know that i could do would be to kill them myself, which would see my life in prison, miscarriage of justice and all!
I beleive any form of premeditation should require pentaly of death. The money saved froma life imprisonment (if only it were life) could be used to fund a much more efficient effective trial for the accused to ensure guilt, and to make sure the guilty part meets the correct punishment.
National service is an excellent idea, and may help to remove this ASBO culture too.
17 - TheDoc
The death penalty, as many of you have mentioned is (obviously) an extreame measure, but is it not true that many of the crimes that these animals commit are extreame also? I do support the death penalty, however it should only be used in cases where there is no question of guilt.
Im more supportive of other measures, such as the decriminilization of hand guns for defence, or greater still the reintroduction of national service I personnally feel that these steps would be more positive then the reintroduction of the death penalty.
Reintroducing the death penalty would be a radical step and not one to be taken lightly. Needless to say if there was a public vote tomorrow on this issue I would be voteing yes.
18 - F
I have been involved with recording crime scenes for the past 17 years including, amongst many others, those involving babies and children who have been abused, tortured, raped and in some cases murdered.
I started out thinking that I was doing something positive and fighting crime in my own way. I try to think of the person and their family (unless the family are proved to be the perpetrators)and to do the best job I can for them - and that keeps me going.
An earlier post said that "emotional weight has to be discarded" when discussing the death penalty.
WHY?
We are human beings, social animals with all that entails including emotions. The legal system, working without emotion, totally using reason can deduce whether someone is guilty or not. That is fair and just.
But you can either lock them up hidden away from society to meet other criminals, complete their OU degrees and live at your expense or rid society of them permanently. They serve no purpose in society, are a danger, their lives won't be enhanced or improved by incarceration. This is a reasoned opinion - nothing to do with emotion.
Amnesty International says the death penalty is "cruel, inhuman and degrading".
So if it is inhuman to kill the perpetrators of these kind of acts are inhuman and therefore don't have the same rights as other members of society.
The OED defines inhuman as "lacking positive human qualities; cruel and barbaric. not human in nature or character".
So the horror of these crimes, the damage it does to family and community, the fear it perpetuates, the unimaginable misery that their innocent and defenseless victims were forced to endure and the fact that their behaviour is not human seems to be a very poor third behind politics and the human rights of the criminal. We already have it on good authority (Amnesty) that murders aren't human so why have they got human rights?
So this is the reasoned argument for the death penalty.
The emotive one? Think of documenting up a little lifeless body, starved, burnt and bruised, recording their surrounds, no light, locked away, tethered to something to limit their movements but probably too weak to move anyhow. Born into the world for a short agonizing miserable life. Are Amnesty fighting for these victims lives? They are forgotten people, they hold no political importance for US based Amnesty and their lives have no value or meaning.
I carry on doing my job because it may help catch the perpetrator, prevent further crimes and is a way of showing some form of respect to victims who may have had little or no human kindness or respect in their lives.
19 - Ben
Yes, complete legalization of handguns for private ownership is needed. The dunblane shootings, if you do your research was the plot of freemasons. Not the lower blue lodge degree's but by officials in the higher degree's.
This was a plot to dissarm the british public. We need to get our guns back!
20 - chris turtner
maybe we should just hang the do gooders? after all its 40yrs of libralism that has brought us to the sad state we are in now .but on a realistic note yes i agree with the death penalty it wont take many to shake up the casual gun users in gangs it wont be big to carry a gun swinging from a rope will it? just a thought.
21 - Christopher Rose
Personally i'm in favour of executing all those who want to bring back the death penalty, especially when their reasoning is as defective as that of Chris Turtner above, who seems to think introducing the death penalty in the UK will have a deterrent effect even though it doesn't in the US. D'oh!
22 - Mo
All i can say is whoever thinks major criminals that murder, rape etc do not deserve to be sentanced to death are idiots. You take someones life you pay with yours. You do something disgusting like rape a baby or rape women, you wont stop at 1 you will carry on and to prevent you from doing this you will be sentanced to death. Not all criminals will stop commiting crime if the death sentanced was to be bought back but at least the ones that have will not have another chance to. Simple.
23 - Christopher Rose
Indeed you are simple, Mo. Personally I think people who write poorly thought out comments full of bad spelling ought to be executed, but it is all a question of where to draw the line. At least my way we don't have to worry about the legal system making mistakes....
24 - Nancy
I'd like to know what is wrong with vengence, either as a society or as individuals? Vengence is a perfectly natural, normal reaction to a crime against innocent others, and if nothing else, certainly gives the victims or their families & friends a sense of justice to which they are well entitled - especially when the government & the law are too spineless & tepid to adequately punish or deter the monsters who perpetrate it. If the government refuses to protect innocent citizens, then maybe it's time for vigilante justice? It could certainly be justified. Further, I deny that life - or specifically, the lives of such human vermin as commit violent crimes - is sacred. It's not, any more than the lives of rats or roaches, and furthermore has been proven to be so by the actions of the very individuals themselves: you commit a violent crime, you remove yourself from the ranks of humanity, together with any and all inherent rights & privileges.
IMO violent criminals ought to be used for medical & commercial (cosmetic) experimentation instead of animals. At least they'd be paying back a modicum of their debt to society, & their miserable existences would be to a degree justified. Otherwise they're just eating, sleeping, excreting piles of humanoid crap.
25 - troll
I'm with Nancy -
Privatize Justice