The British should implement the death penalty
 

I was against it, but fucking hell:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...thorities.html

Sometimes a human just goes bad, and you have to put it down like a rabid dog.

Feh. It wouldn't matter, they can't even implement the punishments they already have available for their use:

Life in prison is the best these assholes deserve.

I'll say.

From TFA:

Totally against the death penalty. Apart from having a problem with it in a moral sense; there have been far too many miscarriages of justice for me to trust the system to get it right. We've recently had several murder convictions overturned, showing a vast array of the things that can go wrong in the process.

Indeed, that's kind of the problem here, too.

Difficult to undo a death sentence though.

Just reserve it for the worst cases where there is tons of evidence, like this one.

Unfortunately, there have been several notable occasions where there was 'tons' of evidence. On one of those occasions a man spent almost his entire adult life in jail for a murder he did not commit.

Also: there have been a number of cases where compelling evidence for the defence was conveniently mislaid/witnesses ignored etc.

Sometimes these cases are politically motivated. The Birmingham Six being a classic example. Those men had a chemical on their hands which was supposedly clear and compelling evidence for their having used explosives. Turned out it was also clear and compelling evidence of their having handled a pack of playing cards. But ... it was a high profile case and politically fraught. A conviction was needed.

They were eventually cleared. But not before spending many years in prison.

There was a 'ton' of evidence convicting a babysitter of murdering her charge. She was convicted on the basis of expert medical witnesses and the compelling evidence given to the jury that the child's injuries were sustained by swinging his head against a bannister with equivalent force to him being hit by a moving car.
Turned out no such event had taken place. The child had an unknown medical condition which had caused the brain damage.

By chance, a doctor watching coverage of the case spotted in a photo of the child a slight turning in of one eye. When this was investigated (after three years of trying to get an appeal) It became apparent that the child had died of natural causes. The 'medical expert' who testified has also been implicated in several other miscarriages of justice including two mothers who were convicted of murdering their babies (it was said to be 'shaken baby syndrome') when it turned out that they had died of cot death. The 'expert' has since been struck off as a doctor.

Juries convict on the basis of the evidence theyre shown. There have also been several high profile cases whereby important evidence was simply not put forward; key individuals either not interviewed or their testimonies not included in the case; and outright tampering.

There is no such thing, in my view, of a totally safe conviction. Later appeals, or changes in forensic science and techniques can overturn an unsafe conviction at a later date; but that's cold comfort if the wrongly convicted person has already been executed.

One of the last men in Britain to be hung, was later (quite recently) cleared of murder.

If we accept that the death penalty is no more then life should mean life no time off for being good, no more parole for cases like this

I think if someone is still dangerous they should remain locked up. I can't see how someone committing a crime like this could ever be rehabilitated to the point that they were no longer a danger.

no more so than undoing a couple of murders......

also easier and cheaper to clean up after an execution and no further inquest necessary. that's not as flippant a comment as it sounds when you think about it -particularly the emotional mess.

Sure there is. Example: quality surveillance video of a thug shooting a gas station attendant during a robbery. If there is clear cut proof such as that which implicates the perpetrator(s) then how can that not lead to a safe conviction? If it is absolutely clear with no reasonable doubt that the person(s) charged are in fact guilty of an exceedingly violent or heinous crime (murder, multiple DWI's, child molestation, rape under threat of death or bodily harm, etc.), then a bullet to the head and a 2'x2' piece of stone are cheaper than a lifetime in prison, and IMO more appropriate. People who prove themselves to be destructive to those around them and deem themselves through their actions to not be capable of living in "civilized" society should be dealt with swiftly and accordingly.

Capital punishment is not a deterrent, as most murders are crimes of passion or of crazies like those guys.

People who receive the death penalty go through years of expensive appeals before the sentence is carried out. In the meantime, they do not participate in jobs that prisoners do that help offset the cost of running the prison, like working in the laundry or kitchen.

Personally, I think that if something happened to one of my loved ones I would want to see the person who did it die. I can see feeling that way. I also think that it's letting them off easy. Why should they be put out of their misery (and ours) instead of living out their lives in what would seem a miserable existence? Then, too, maybe some sort of good could be gleaned from them.

Screw it. Not our problem. Let the Brits figure out what they want to do.

Thank you Merc, I was going to say that but you beat me to it.