Sir David Amess

[Ray B]

It's a sad day when a public figure is in fear of violence in any way. No matter if it is a MP, councilor or even a shop steward.
These jobs are something that many wouldn't do preferring to let some one else stands up and do their bidding.
Rip David Amess.

[Kendhni]

Absolutely disgraceful. Like Jo Cox, he was just doing his job.

Maybe it is just the way the news is reported but over the last couple of years my perception is that there is more violent crime, whether that be shootings, knifings, drive-bys, behind doors etc.

[Whynd1]

Terrible,terrible thing to happen.
When I saw the news I immediately thought of Jo Cox.
A very sad day.
He was a devout Christian and this sadly happened in a church.


Lindsey

[Gill W]

I heard that he'd been stabbed, and I was hoping he'd pull through. But I've just heard the news that he's died of his injuries. Just feel very shocked and saddened that he was killed while doing his job, just like Jo Cox. Terrible thing to happen

[barney]

Shocking.
Thoughts are with his family.

[screwy]

Very sad indeed RIP.

[Onelife]

Another senseless murder…time to reintroduce eye for an eye punishments.

[screwy]

Agreed and I would have had no Qualms about working the condemned cell, however there are those against the Death Penalty. How many more Senseless murders do we have to endure.

[towny44]

A shocking and senseless killing, his family must be devastated.

[Onelife]

The powers that be say the death penalty doesn’t deter crime, which may well be true, but it would certainly save the British tax payer millions by keeping theses scum bags alive. I personally would like to see crimes (such as we have witnessed recently) to be punished by death, but with a few stays of execution so that they can experience the fear of death several times over.

[david63]

Now been declared a terrorist attack

[Kendhni]

Another senseless murder…time to reintroduce eye for an eye punishments.

As a very wise man once said “An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind.”

State sponsored murder is never the answer - we have come a long way from being savages that condoned murder lets not take society backwards, especially since every year hundreds of people are wrongfully convicted. Derek Bentley was executed in 1953 despite being in police custody at the time of the murder he was convicted of. Then there are the self appointed vigilantes in society who are too stupid to know the difference between a pedophile and a pediatrician. State sponsored murderers are no better than the vermin they execute.

The only way that state sponsored murder should ever be considered is if there is a 100% guarantee that no innocent person can ever again be murdered by the state.

[Onelife]

As a very a wise lady once said “I think people would still be alive if there were a death penalty”

I don’t doubt that miscarriages of justice have taken place but in cases where 100% guilt is proven, such as in the case of Sarah Everard murder then the death penalty is justified IMO.

I think we need to move away from this…” Everyone’s right to life should be protected by law, including criminals”. I personally don’t see anything savage in disposing of vermin who brutalise, rape, and murder woman or indeed men in order to satisfy their perverted lust or warped religious indoctrination.

State sponsored murder/executions are fine by me if they are administered where !00% guilt is proven.

[Manoverboard]

I would only support the death penalty for crimes against the Police and for those that were proven to be guilty of acts of terrorism.

[screwy]

Derek Bentley was NOT in Police custody.! He WAS being detained by an injured Police Officer on the roof of the Store he and his accomplice were aiming to rob.
In his defence he was Mentally retarded but this was not taken into account.
The famous words he was allegedly said, “ Let him have it Craig “ could have meant one of two things,we’ll never know.

[Kendhni]

As a very a wise lady once said “I think people would still be alive if there were a death penalty”

Never heard that one before

I don’t doubt that miscarriages of justice have taken place but in cases where 100% guilt is proven, such as in the case of Sarah Everard murder then the death penalty is justified IMO.

Apart from revenge to satisfy the less civilised what does that achieve. You have wasted a lot of perfectly good harvestable organs.

I personally don’t see anything savage in disposing of vermin who brutalise, rape, and murder woman or indeed men in order to satisfy their perverted lust or warped religious indoctrination.

This is probably where we disagree. I see no difference. Lets leave the savagery to the less civilised parts of the world like Afghanistan, NK etc. to uneducated rednecks and hillbillies. Much I would love to see them executed, I am not a savage.

State sponsored murder/executions are fine by me if they are administered where !00% guilt is proven.

Despite all the safeguards allegedly in place about 1-in8 of those on death row in America are exonerated either before or after the death sentence is to be applied.

[screwy]

Whilst I agree on the Murder of police and terror my question is why is any other innocent persons life different.
Maybe we should look at the American system of first and second degree.?
100% guilty the chop, any doubt Life with the chance of parole or even aquital on appeal.

[Kendhni]

.. any doubt Life with the chance of parole or even aquital on appeal.

Did you mean 'with' or 'without'?
If you meant 'without' then what about the hundreds that are later found to be innocent, should they not be allowed justice?
BTW I have no issue with life meaning life and further I believe that all prisons should be 100% self-sufficient ... there are many jobs that could be done to help others providing a benefit to wider society.

[Mervyn and Trish]

I believe murder should attract a life sentence, meaning exactly that. Forever.

Should fresh evidence later prove innocence then they should be released and generously compensated. But there should be no release for any other reason.

[screwy]

Whilst I agree on the Murder of police and terror my question is why is any other innocent persons life different.
Maybe we should look at the American system of first and second degree.?
100% guilty the chop, any doubt Life with the chance of parole or even aquital on appeal.

Ok let me re phrase it.
Guilty without doubt— the chop.
Guilty with extenuating circumstances- Whole life term could be reduced to a maximum on successful appeal.

I’m interested in your theories of self sufficient prisons.? Prisons already carry out work for the ‘outside ‘ population. Who do you think packs the earbuds for your flights, prison laundries wash and dry Towels,sheets etc for hotels, my last prison did the laundry for P&O ferries.

[Kendhni]

I would go beyond the examples you have given to the point that they grow all their own food (I know some already do), possibly even running farm shops to get revenue for items they cannot farm themselves. There are many other tasks that the prison populations around the world do but could be expanded on e.g. train guide dogs, translation services etc., I even know of one chap who sold his artwork (created while he was an inmate). Once their efforts have covered the basic costs (food, clothing, heat, lighting, and officers) then excess money can be spent on the luxuries like personal TVS, Playstations etc. If they decide to riot then all that personal stuff gets sold to cover costs etc. (as done by a Texan warden).

I know this idea has been trialled but they couldn't make it work, but there is no reason why it should not be tried again with a target of (e.g.) 80% self sufficiency) with a view to attaining 100%.

BTW I knew about most of the tasks except the packing of earbuds (that was new to me - next time I must check for a free baggie of weed)!!

[Onelife]

Whatever your view on this, the fact remains that the real-life sentence is served by the victims’ families.

Those doing life sentences become institutionalised into the daily routines of prison life and while they have lost their freedom, they still continue to have their board and lodgings, better food than a large proportion of the UK population. And many outlive the victim’s parents, this isn’t justice, this is a system that fails the victim and their relatives and the reason I believe it is morally justifiable to kill these b*stards in certain cases.

[Manoverboard]

Apart from the Police and terrorists ... I believe that virtually everyone else who commits a murder does so for a valid reason in their own minds but that such rationale is neither understood nor accepted by normal living folk who tend to sit back in judgement.

The French have, or used to have, a tendency to be lenient regarding crimes of passion. People have problems that they cannot cope with and this can tip the balance of their minds, they are not mental in the wider sense but can get consumed with the passion and lose control of their rational thought processes in the short term.

Should the State execute them as an act of revenge, not for me they shouldn't.

[Kendhni]

Now been declared a terrorist attack

I didn't want to respond to this until I had read a few stories on it but I am disappointed in any decision to call it terrorism. That implies that there is some element of society that, irrespective of motive, will provide a justification for the murder ("one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" and all that). I prefer to think it was just a low life savage that didn't get his own way and should be condemned by all civilised people.

[Stephen]

Whatever we think should or should not happen, and whether we like it or not, the current law will take it's own course and give out punishment befitting the crime. We may not like it, but it is what it is.