Oh dearDancing Queen wrote:Peter Sutcliffe and Ian Huntley were both in solitary and they were got at ..where there's a will !!Silver_Shiney wrote:You are right, as usual, my friend, but I suspect he'll be in solitary for the rest of his life, or at least banged up with others of his ilk who wouldn't give a stuff.
Arguably there is ALWAYS room for doubt and it has been well known for people to admit to horrendous crimes they did not commit.Silver_Shiney wrote:There is a vociferous lobby that says it is wrong to execute people. It is inhuman. Civilized people do not do this. There have been many tragic cases when an innocent person has been killed and this must be avoided at all costs. This is why the death penalty has been abolished
However, with modern methods of forensic science, DNA testing etc, the chance of a mistake is almost eliminated. In such cases, the convicted should be put away for life, on the slightest possibility there has been a wrongful conviction. On the other hand, there are cases where there is absolutely no room for doubt over guilt, such as this.
Sorry, Ken, not sure what you are saying here. If the death penalty is meted out to those who banged to rights, there is an immediate harvest of all appropriate organs.Kendhni wrote:I used to be very pro death sentence but now I would be against it ... an awful waste of perfectly harvestable body parts ... and there is not even a need to pay for anesthetics.
I agree - I've always felt that, where appropriate, those who can continue their day job should be able to do so and spend their non-working hours in prison, their salaries/wages going to cover the cost of incarceration and help maintain any home and family they have. Alternatively, other work should be provided, to be self-financing and, possibly, even as rehabilitation training. For example, I understand that confiscated cars are destroyed. That strikes me as a waste. Why not have workshops in prisons to either refurbish them for sale, or strip them down for saleable parts - income generating and possibly training future car mechanics. On a similar note, I understand there is a prison somewhere in the UK that has a restaurant, which employs the inmates and trains them for the catering industry.Kendhni wrote:... I always thought that prisons should be 100% self sufficient and if they want their luxuries in life then they should earn them ... not only would that free up a lot of money but it could also supply a steady stream of free labour to provide additional help looking after the elderly in homes .. thereby freeing up the nursing staff to do more 'nursing'.
LoLoldbluefox wrote:I once had a child who was really excited. When I asked him why he said he was going to see his dad. I asked him where his dad lived, presuming that his mother and father had parted. He said he lived in a castle. I was really impressed. I had never known anyone whose dad owned a castle.
It later transpired that his dad was in jail in Lancaster Castle and he was going on a visit!!!
Don't be ridiculous, Keith, that means using an obsolete notion called "common sense". We did away with that years ago.Onelife wrote:I think one of the biggest problems we have today is that our judicial system is afraid to punish those whose responsibility is to teach their children right from wrong. We should introduce a system whereby parents are left in no doubt that should their child commit offences then they themselves will find themselves in front of the courts facing the penalties of their neglect.
The message would soon hit home that it is far cheaper to install some values in their children (from an early age) rather than face hefty fines because their child has grown older but none the wiser.
