Your claim that 1-5% of executed people were innocent is an unsupported allegation. It sounds like balderdash to me.

Execution is well worth the risk. We already have a legal system where it is said that it is better for 100 criminals to be found not guilty than for one innocent to be found guilty. The over riding factor is the survival of the nation as a whole. I once watched a program on TV on the fighting on the Kokoda Track on TV. The fighting was very bad and the conditions the men lived in was atrocious. No prisoners were taken on either side. In one item, an old soldier recounted the most dreadful thing that he saw. A platoon of Australian soldiers were ordered to put in a feint attack in order to mask the real attack by the rest of the brigade.

The old soldier said that all of those men knew that they were going to die. They did not have a hope. The soldiers gave away to their friends their personal belongings to take back to their kin, in an act reminiscent of the scene in the movie “Gallipoli.” They were ordered to die and die they did. Half starved, exhausted and wet through for weeks, they did their duty. Their mothers did not give them a hug before the event.

No society can expect soldiers to willingly throw away their lives for the good of the community, if the rest of that community balks from killing the swine who are at war with our women and children, all because they are too chicken sheet to take an immeasurably small risk that an innocent might get executed by mistake.

Crime costs this country $32 Billion dollars a year. This is money siphoned from the welfare of our people. I find it incredible that people like you, who are forever complaining that the government can not find the means to fund your favourite causes, will shrink from getting permanently rid of the drug traffickers, armed robbers, arsonists, rapist murderers and terrorists who are pillaging our society.

An admission from Memumza that he would pay to see someone get tortured, sick satisfaction indeed. I love it, hopefully less Australians will support the death penalty when they see the company they're keeping.

And Redneck, you keep going on about drug dealers being at war with our women and children, blah blah. Ok, lets ignore the fact that people CHOOSE to use drugs. Lets assume instead that they are mindless fools who must be protected from themselves, and that the government should do this by killing those people who attempt to sell the drugs that might harm the mindless fools. With me so far?

Heres the confusing bit. Why does the government not do anything about the people who sell the legal drugs that kill many, many more people than the illegal ones? Do you realise that tobacco kills around 19,000 Australians every year? Try this link if you think this is some kind of pinko lefty propaganda http://www.cancer.org.au/content.cfm?randid=907897

And that some of those Australians are entirely innocent, never having CHOSEN to use the drug themselves, but dying of cancer due to passive smoking. Or what about the people like the young man I knew who was attacked by a gang of drunks one night when riding his bicycle home, thrown into a river, left for dead and is now permanently brain damaged. Not illegal drug users, drunks. Or another aquaintance of mine, recently having surgery for a fractured cheekbone after being attacked with a baseball bat by a gang of, you guessed it - drunk people, off their skulls on drugs they brought from the local bottleshop.

Why doesn't the government do something about this! These people, these alcohol and tobbaco pushers (and they are pushers, there is far more pressure in society to drink excessively than there is to take illegal drugs), why should they not be killed? Tell me why, Redneck, or any of your fellow death enthusiasts, I am very curious.

Redneck,

”Your claim that 1-5% of executed people were innocent is an unsupported allegation. It sounds like balderdash to me.”

Balderdash? Maybe.
Unsupported allegation? No.

I can’t remember the exact figure but it was a study done by law students at Harvard University. A further 40% were guilty but found not to have been legally deserving of the death penalty.

Redneck, you seem to think it is OK to squander the lives of a few innocents whom may be mistakenly executed all in the name of communal good. If by chance you found your son, brother or even yourself sitting on death row the night before execution and quite possibly there by the mistakes of our fallible judicial system would you then just simply shrug your shoulders and say "no problem, it's for the good of the community".

[Deleted for flaming and abusive Nick]

Memumza (etc.),
Aside from the ludicrous pseudonym, you demonstrate a contumelious disregard for the ethics of this forum. If you wish to take part in an adult discussion please act like an adult, for instance when attempting to refute another’s argument, particularly a well reasoned argument, please endeavour to fault their logic and research. Reversion to hyperbole and adolescent vilification of your opponent’s intelligence and sanity, are neither witty nor particularly effctive.

Whilst I do not agree with much of Pariah’s argument, basically I feel that any person in another country is in fact subject to their law, I do respect his reasoning and persuasive argument. The following is an excerpt from the speech given by Alastair Alcock, at the conferral of an honourary LLD on the Hon Justice M Kirby at the University of Buckingham;

‘More's impetuous future son-in-law, Roper has attacked More's legalism and in exasperation shouts: 'So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law'. More replies:

"Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? Yes? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you - where would you hide, Roper, the law being all flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast - Man's laws not God's - and if you cut them down - and you're just the man to do it - d'you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake."’

http://www.hcourt.gov.au/speeches/kirbyj/kirbyj_buck1.htm

As to your question regarding the driver of the Ferrari, it is unclear whether the loss of control was due to excessive speed, road or environmental conditions etc. However, it is unlikely that he would be charged with anything other than possibly dangerous driving causing death (if that), and this would be particularly difficult to prove, as presumably there is no witnesses?

Please make an effort to research;

Anti Death Penalty Links
http://www.derechos.org/dp/

Pro Death Penalty Links
http://www.dpinfo.com/