Sarah Everard's Murderer

[sp1814]

The current law in England and Wales states that the murder of a police (or prison) officer in the course of duty is a factor indicating a murder of ‘particularly high seriousness’, which must attract a minimum sentence of 30 years.

This is (thankfully) extremely rare, but if found guilty should the same apply to police / prison officers who murder civilians?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/29/sarah-everard-family-haunted-by-the-horror-of-daughters-murder

[naomi24]

Ellipsis, //I didn't mention pain.//

When you mentioned 'maiming thieves' I'm guessing that might smart a bit.

AH, //capital punishment is rooted in the eomtion of revenge//

Not at all. It's a permanent solution to a problem. As I said, that's why we put dangerous dogs down - so that they CAN'T bite again.

[Ellipsis]

> When you mentioned 'maiming thieves' I'm guessing that might smart a bit.

Is your objection to chopping a thief's hand off that it might smart a bit? Or do you consider it a barbaric thing to do?

[pixie374]

Exactly naomi. As far as "revenge" goes, capital punishment would be the least effective.

[naomi24]

Yes, Ellipsis, I do consider chopping hands off to be barbaric - as I said I wouldn't willingly cause pain to anyone, no matter what they'd done.

[Ellipsis]

If the hand was removed without pain, would that be OK?

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // Not at all. It's a permanent solution to a problem. //

So is incarcertation.

// As I said, that's why we put dangerous dogs down - so that they CAN'T bite again. //

That's fine - if you compare the life of a human to that of a dog.

Personally that's not a position I can adopt.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // I wouldn't willingly cause pain to anyone, no matter what they'd done. //

Clearly you would - you appear willing to execute someone, leaving their innocent loved ones to grieve over your actions.

I also have trouble reconciling the fact that you appear to be OK with killing someone, as long as it doesn't hurt them while you do it.

[davebro]

//Clearly you would - you appear willing to execute someone, leaving their innocent loved ones to grieve over your actions.//

At least it would be "closure" for them instead of having the murderer spend decades in gaol, wondering how he is coping, having to make periodic visits, living with the stigma while their relative is still alive.

[naomi24]

Ellipsis, you're going down a wonky route here. Your question assumes the result of one punishment would be equal to the other but it wouldn't. Chopping a hand off wouldn't stop a determined thief - and no, I wouldn't do it, painless or not.

[andy-hughes]

davebro - // At least it would be "closure" for them instead of having the murderer spend decades in gaol, wondering how he is coping, having to make periodic visits, living with the stigma while their relative is still alive. //

'Closure' as you put it, is perfectly easy to achieve.

I am estranged from my sisters, not because they have murdered someone, but because of family issues which I won't bore you with.

I have no problem whatsoever living my life and not thinking about them from one year's end to the next.

If either of them had murdered someone, i would have no problem not thinking about them, much less wondering how they are, or even considering for a moment visiting them.

As for the 'stigma' - no-one should carry any burden of guilt for the actions of a relative.

And if they did, it is unlikely that such guilt would be alleviated by the fact that said relative is no longer living.

[naomi24]

AH, my sympathy is with the victims and their families.

[Ellipsis]

My route is one that says we have a form of punishment - incarceration - that applies to all crimes.

Execution is a different form of punishment. It's more in the mould of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" ... or a hand for a theft. Bringing ourselves down to the level of the criminal. It's barbaric. We've left it behind, I hope.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // Chopping a hand off wouldn't stop a determined thief - and no, I wouldn't do it, painless or not. //

Why are you not comfortable with removing a part of a criminal, but you appear to be OK with removing their life?

Since you are adopting the position of someone who is OK with meting out punishments, why are you squeamish about mutilation, but not about execution?

[pixie374]

Ellipsis, nobody is suggesting torture. I can understand why some people would think that somebody "who deserves it", should be kept in a cage forever, with all the mental punishment that involves. But, we still have to live with ourselves, in how we treat criminals, too.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // AH, my sympathy is with the victims and their families. //

As is mine - but you infer that I sympathise with the perpetrator of the crime, rather than the victim, without any evidence to support such a presumption.

Added to which, your observation does nothing to answer my question.

[naomi24]

I've already answered those questions.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // I've already answered those questions. //

You have stated your position - but you have not answered my questions.

[davebro]

//I have no problem whatsoever living my life and not thinking about them from one year's end to the next.//

I find that very cold - I have a friend who is in gaol for 19 years for a murder he committed whilst blind drunk. He's a good man, never committed a crime before & never would again. I think about him a lot & write to him sometimes. Fortunately he has no close family but if he did I'm sure his incarceration would be a great burden to them. It's hard to say but perhaps execution might have been kinder although his crime would not merit it under my criteria.

[naomi24]

AH, at 09.12 you were concerned for their innocent loved ones. I'm not.

What's your question?

[naomi24]

AH at 09:26 I was talking to Ellipsis. My error in failing to make that clear.