 
|
Andrew
 |
it should be introduced everywhere since we have DNA testing then we can prove beyond a resonable doubt who a criminal is. |
|
Ã?â?¥Ã?ÄPixie Queen~*
|
Do you really think we can trust the government to make a decision like that? I think not.....NOOOOOOO NEVER......... |
|
CLIVE H
|
The simple answer to this question is NO. Reason, is because when we had the death penalty in UK lots of innocent people got hanged when later better evidence or lack thereof proved their innocence. Also, I am old enough to remember that last woman, Ruth Ellis, being hanged at Holloway Prison. If you have a death penalty, this means that ultimately someone's mother is going to get hanged. I say NO to a return of the death penalty. |
|
Dave
|
No |
|
retep g
 |
This is a very touchy question but i believe as many do public flogging should be re-introduced at least |
|
iain
 |
Certainly not - this would be a big step back. Only to remind you
that one single undeserved execution knocks capital punishment
out of any debate. |
|
"Call me Dave"
 |
I think you mean Capital but yes.
but only for serious offences, like parking, or tipping powder over Tony Blair or calling a spade a ****** stuff like that. |
|
Boring
 |
no. legalised murder sets a bad precedent and doesn't work as a deterrent (look at US). also some innocent people would be killed.
however, we could change the law so that those sentenced to life without any chance of parole are allowed to kill themselves. suicide should be legal amongst the population and this includes prisoners. this would mean a sort of back-door route to seeing people die as a result of their crimes and would have the advantage of saving money, etc. |
|
waddyisme
|
No, because punishments do not act as a deterrent from crime. People still committed murder when you could be hung for it, and the Americans execute criminals who are (according to some) clearly insane.
We need to stop crime alltogether rather than spending time trying to punish it. |
|
melodytcromer
|
no killing someone does not solve the problem and half the people on death row die there anyways.Plus they are about half innocent to be sure we have proved here in the stated that it is a stupid policy. |
|
citalopraming
|
I would think that capital punishment has no place in an enlighten country. It is not a deterrent, countries that maintain capital punishment always have people on death row and in most cases the people that are sentenced to death are the people that could not afford or find a decent defence. America for example has a large amount of black people on death row something like 90% ,of which the majority killed a white person, but America sentences very few white people to death that have killed black people. If it was to to used in an unbiased punishment for the people that have commit ed the worse crimes then i would not have many objections to it being reintroduced |
|
AngelWings
|
No for the very reason that many people were executed who were later found to be innocent. For example Timothy Evans. |
|
Liz T
|
No it it shouldn't apart from the ethical and moral question the risk that an innocent person may be executed is still too high. If it was re-introduced you can be pretty sure that no rich white person would ever be executed. |
|
idhard2find&looking
|
cant EU rules and all that. |
|
ASHLEY
|
No, but hard labour should be bought in |
|
Sam
|
HELL NO!!! |
|
paul t
|
yes,if you intentionally take someones life then you should forfeit your own.Any doubt then life |
|
topdog
|
yes |
|
Jude
 |
No, this is totally out of the question in any civilized society. Apart from the obvious problem of executing an innocent man, just look at America it doesn't exactly help their crime figures does it. |
|
johnny boy rebel
|
yes as dont do to others what you dont want doing to yourself plus would take a lot of pressure of our jails which we are paying for by our taxes |
|
Alfie
 |
You shall not kill.
But how about putting vile murderers on public display - with an admission charge for people who want to pelt bad eggs and stuff at them, so earning their State keep? Or administering regular doses of punishment, physical pain, well-publicised? Or actively encouraging their do-it-yourself deaths, unpublicised?
(It was Caesar who was killed in the Capitol, capital provision for the bloke, by the way). |
|
Kitty
|
I don't live there but I am all for it. |
|
IAN B
|
No it should not. Better that nine guilty people go free than one innocent person be hung. |
|
artytype
|
No because it is Barbaric and we live in a civilised society. How does killing someone make them pay their debt back to society? |
|
shortdude42004
|
I'm an American so i won't say what you should do in your country but if those train bombers were in America we would execute them |
|
Uncle Joe
 |
No. |
|
Existence
|
No, it shouldn't be practiced in the US either. |
|
?
|
I Thought it already had by Gordon Brown , they don,t Hang you now , they tax you till your Bollocks drop of |
|
Veritas
|
NO! I can't be bothered to rehearse the arguments yet again. But, how do you tell innocent people that you are sorry, and why do people given genuine life sentences, so often want to commit suicide? What if it was you or a member of your own family, could you personally carry it out? Getting scary now isn't it? |
|
goban_saor2003
|
No. What about the Bermingham Six and the Guilford Four. They would have been executed had capital punishment existed in UK at the time of their "conviction". Yet they were all innocent. Just victims of British (in)justice! |
|
?
|
Only if it could be proved beyound ALL unreasonable doubt |
|
|
|
|
No Spam
Adult 
Gambling
Unfinished
Deception
Plagiarism
Not English
