ChatterBank4 mins ago
If Ever There Was A Case For The Death Penalty In The UK
Surely this is it?
http://
Waste of taxpayers money. Bullet through the back of the head and a shallow ditch would be more appropriate IMHO.
Helmet on, incoming..............
http://
Waste of taxpayers money. Bullet through the back of the head and a shallow ditch would be more appropriate IMHO.
Helmet on, incoming..............
Answers
56 previous offences too. I'm with Philtaz on this one. Bullet/ditch or swing him. Little Tyler didn't have a choice. Cannot agree with the No Capital Punishment brigade.
10:41 Tue 15th May 2012
And of course, another damning indictment on social services et al who had plenty of 'missed opportunities' to save this poor wretch.
Someone high up will doubtless be sacked after a 'review of all the circumstances' and there'll be the obligatory wrongful dismissal case with a large payout at the end.
Cynical? Moi?
You bet your life I am
Someone high up will doubtless be sacked after a 'review of all the circumstances' and there'll be the obligatory wrongful dismissal case with a large payout at the end.
Cynical? Moi?
You bet your life I am
A 'textbook case'; it is so often the partner who is not the father of the child who beats it or kills it; and it's a pity that social services didn't learn from the 'textbook'.
Depends what you want the death penalty to do. If it is seriously thought that this man, evidenly in a fit of violent anger, would ever think 'if I happen to kill the child I'll die ' and not embark on the beating,then that is a thought which is erroneous. If it were true, then there'd have been no murders when we had the death penalty, for every sane murderer would have been deterred.
If it's meant as retribution, "an eye for an eye", then there's an argument, though perhaps not one supported by Christianity.
If it's seen as cost-cutting, that killing the murderer is cheaper than jailing him, that depends on finance only, which is hardly an argument in itself for hanging someone. It can't stand as the only reason.
If it's seen as preventative, that he won't be able to repeat the crime, then that is achieved by jailing him until such time, perhaps only his death, when that is no longer a risk.
It's quite likely that this man was convicted of intending gbh , which led to the death, rather than intending to kill. Either intent is sufficient for murder. When we had the death penalty for all murders, whether the convicted person was hanged or not depended on the opinion of the Home Secretary. With this argument over intent, this man might have been spared. Had he had a premeditated intent or established plan to kill, he would probably would not have been.
Depends what you want the death penalty to do. If it is seriously thought that this man, evidenly in a fit of violent anger, would ever think 'if I happen to kill the child I'll die ' and not embark on the beating,then that is a thought which is erroneous. If it were true, then there'd have been no murders when we had the death penalty, for every sane murderer would have been deterred.
If it's meant as retribution, "an eye for an eye", then there's an argument, though perhaps not one supported by Christianity.
If it's seen as cost-cutting, that killing the murderer is cheaper than jailing him, that depends on finance only, which is hardly an argument in itself for hanging someone. It can't stand as the only reason.
If it's seen as preventative, that he won't be able to repeat the crime, then that is achieved by jailing him until such time, perhaps only his death, when that is no longer a risk.
It's quite likely that this man was convicted of intending gbh , which led to the death, rather than intending to kill. Either intent is sufficient for murder. When we had the death penalty for all murders, whether the convicted person was hanged or not depended on the opinion of the Home Secretary. With this argument over intent, this man might have been spared. Had he had a premeditated intent or established plan to kill, he would probably would not have been.
Depends what you want the death penalty to do.
------------------------------------------
Quite simply in this case I want it to rid society of someone who has murdered a defenceless child in barbaric, tortuous circumstances and is beyond or not worthy of rehabilitation, who thus gives up all rights to life IMHO.
------------------------------------------
Quite simply in this case I want it to rid society of someone who has murdered a defenceless child in barbaric, tortuous circumstances and is beyond or not worthy of rehabilitation, who thus gives up all rights to life IMHO.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.