I didn't choose my words correctly there! I just mean I didn't want it to turn into an argument if someone disagrees!
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
4% on Death Row are innocent, you clearly do not care about the fact that 4% of the people are getting put to death.
(No, I absolutely do not support the death penalty)
Bringing up cases from 40 odd years ago isn’t relevant
I am extremely anti-death penalty. It’s not for the state to take a life, no matter what the crime is. It’s beyond barbaric.
With the death penalty in place, the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six would be dead, despite being innocent, giving a fair trial and botched evidence, should they have been killed?
No, it's not. It's proving a point that despite a fair trial, the wrong person can get found guilty.
I have replied - I just meant I am here for a friendly discussion - just didn't choose my words correctly! Topics like this can get heated.Pro's and con's of state execustion is hardly light hearted chat now is it
No need for eyeroll emoji.
It was 40 something years ago.
We have come a long way with regard to police investigations, collection of evidence, forensics etc
Ched Evans, would have been dead, due to being jailed for rape, a retrial found him innocent.
Last edited:
Interesting topic and I’m not particularly one way or the other.
Death penalty appears to work well as a deterrent in some countries such as China and Singapore which are incredibly safe, yet not so much in others.
I’d be for death penalty if it’s 100% certain that the person being executed committed said crime and even then the crime would have to be proven to be one of an act of unprovoked cruelty. I mean, I don’t think someone who kills someone who tried to kill their family deserves that.
About the death penalty being more expensive than a life sentence, are we talking the penalty itself or death row? Surely the penalty itself is not as costly.
Death penalty appears to work well as a deterrent in some countries such as China and Singapore which are incredibly safe, yet not so much in others.
I’d be for death penalty if it’s 100% certain that the person being executed committed said crime and even then the crime would have to be proven to be one of an act of unprovoked cruelty. I mean, I don’t think someone who kills someone who tried to kill their family deserves that.
About the death penalty being more expensive than a life sentence, are we talking the penalty itself or death row? Surely the penalty itself is not as costly.
Some of these comments are ludicrous and show a complete lack of understanding for how the legal system operates.
And some people here trying to say that child rapists deserve to have their human rights upheld are also ridiculous.
Or the fact that we think killing doesn't do anything, it doesn't bring the victims back or ease their suffering. It's not about justice, it's about revenge. Killing someone, they're dead, like that. Having someone locked in jail, knowing they can never leave is better sense of justice.
Not one person has defended child rapists, as you keep trying to suggest. Stop being ridiculous.
Believing in human rights being inalienable and applying to all (as the law currently states) is not ridiculous.
Yes exactly this. Human rights are for everyone, not 'only people we like and who behave in a way we agree with'. Otherwise there would be no point.
Could not be rolling my eyes harder at the comments criticising appeals existing either, I'm sure if anyone here was wrongly convicted of a crime you'd be very very glad you can appeal. Juries are not infallible.
China uses the death sentence for drug trafficking and corruption, do you honestly think a country like China gives me people a fair trial. What is their definition of corruption, someone who doesn't like the government.
A person who rapes a child or someone who is a serial killer should not be given any human rights and frankly if people here think otherwise than duck me, I’m done.
I do too and also poor Timothy evans that christie helped to send to the gallows. But on the other hand I look at what Brady and hindley did, which is still raw where I grew up where the victims were from, and I think of how much they have cost the taxpayer in their years in prison.
If there is solid unwavering evidence of the crime being committed then why would we allow an appeal?
Ever heard of evidence not being correct?