Col Rouge:"All you do is pile on ad hominens, this acknowledgement exceeds the recognition your contemptuous post deserves."

Yes, it was contemptuous, fools seldom deserve any more consideration. When you can answer the questions I put and which you are seeking to avoid thinking about by crying "he's picking on me", I may be less contemptuous.

Col: "Veronika... You missed the reason for my caveat..."

I didn't miss it, I just don't buy it.

I love the way you posed the question, then bagged everyone out because they didn't answer in the way you wanted. Now everyone is accusing everyone else of ad homming them. Ah, the beauty of an internet forum.

Anyway, if you really are interested in "personal views to the validity of the sentencing option", then I, personally, find the death penalty lacks validity as a sentencing option.

Aside from all the excellent points other posters have made, it certainly doesn't, in my opinion, indicate "respect" for the victim or their family. On the contrary, it assumes they can only think about judgment through the prism of their own experience.

There was a fantastic Australian Story about Dr Khulod Hassan, a doctor who was brutally murdered by on of her patients. The patient was schizophrenic and posssessed of the idea that she had infected him with a fatal virus when she treated him some time ago. He was sentenced to 25 years in a psychiatric facility. Outside the court, her daughter Nawaar Hassan said, "It's a sad situation for everyone. Obviously it's tragic for us and for the community, but it's also tragic in that we have this person who is very, very ill and needs treatment and so, this verdict, it's the best way not only to protect the community but to make sure that he gets the treatment that he needs."

I found her intelligence and dignity and understanding incredibly inspiring.

For those that didn't see it, the transcript is well worth a read: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/waitingroom/default.htm

Dear Col,

I've always been against the death penalty
in the past.

I felt it was barbaric and sent the wrong
message. Killing people who kill people,
to show killing is wrong.

That's like belting someone into "goodness."

If our civilization was to advance, I felt we
had to move away from "an eye for an eye,"
mentality.

However, watching the Bali bombers on television
pushed all my emotional buttons - and I reacted
strongly on another post.
"Shoot the S.O.B's" was my initial reaction,
until other posters made my re-think my outburst.

I guess what I'm trying to say is - this is
a controversial issue and our views aren't
set in concrete. Who knows how each of us
would react if a heinous crime was committed
against one of our family.

We can only hope that reason would prevail.
The death penalty doesn't bring the victim back
to life, but admittedly it gives closure to
the victims families.

Today, DNA testing and other methods of modern
crime scene science effectively eliminates
almost all uncertainty as to a person's innocence
or guilt. Although some jury members may be
reluctant to convict if it means putting someone
to death.

Col, it's a tough issue. And, to me, ultimately
a moral choice. I personally would find it
extremely hard to vote for the death penalty.
It would have to be under extreme aggravating
and mitigating circumstances.

That's about the best "personal view" I can give
you.

Interesting topic, Col!

“So who thinks what?”

I’d like to discuss the death penalty persé without going into the reasons or the particular crimes that would justify it. Discussing drugs would be too distractive; I find the death penalty and drugs topic complex enough issues without combining them (for now).

My stance is that Life without Parole should be the highest punishment- there would not be a need for the death penalty.

Firstly, I think nations should avoid violence, and the death penalty seems to glorify it.

Secondly, even though emotionally I don’t give a rat’s about the death of some criminals, and I admit that it would give me some satisfaction to see all serious criminals executed, I cannot allow myself, my emotions, to justify such barbaric punishment, also because I view civilisations that still apply the death penalty as more or less retarded.

People’s emotions towards criminals such as hate, revenge, and anger are understandable but emotions should have no place in a fair justice system.
The important thing should be that the criminal is taken away from the community. Microchip ‘em all in case they escape, then lock ‘em up safely away from society.

“For me the issue is not simply about retribution but about the issue of respect. Respect for the killers victim(s).”
I’ve been thinking about that as well, but came to the conclusion that resorting to the most primitive and barbaric solution is not all that respectful.
It’s also not logical to fight violence with violence.

What I’m also worried about is: would any witnesses of murder be in more danger with the death penalty in place? It would reduce the risk for a murderer to murder any witnesses as well.

Foxy said, “We need to examine the type of society we want Australia to be.”
I don’t want Australia to be a primitive, retarded nation where civil justice has no importance.

But…
Perhaps allowing criminals, who were given the Life in Prison without Parole sentence, a choice between Life in Prison or voluntary euthanasia is something that needs consideration.

Col Rouge: << So if we dispense with the issues of “doubt” and assume the legal system only convicts those who are guilty... >>

But we can't dispense with doubt, because every legal system on the planet gets it wrong sometimes. As others have pointed out, once someone's been executed there's no possibility of correcting the legal error if they were incorrectly convicted.

However, Col inadvertently provides an even better reason for not having a death penalty, when he advocates execution for drug dealers because in his idiosyncratic and uninformed view they are apparently as bad as mass murderers. I think that most reasonable Australians would disagree with that view, yet there are plenty of third world jurisdictions that take Col's position, including some of our closest neighbours, for example. Like Foxy and others, I'd like to think that Australia is more civilised than that - and for that very reason.

Celivia: << Perhaps allowing criminals, who were given the Life in Prison without Parole sentence, a choice between Life in Prison or voluntary euthanasia is something that needs consideration. >>

Having said that, Celivia beat me to the other point I wanted to make :). In principle, I have no objection to someone choosing suicide over life in prison.

Good evening All and to you too - COL R...

The Death Penalty debate - always creates much discussion.

As usual COL R. you present a most interesting point of view. You cited several individuals who would immediately qualify for the 'long drop', Mr Julian KNIGHT being one.

I'd like to mention another two gentlemen that instantly comes to my mind - Messrs. Alan BAKER and Kevin CRUMP. Two of the worst *@&$#* maggots that ever walked upon this earth. I don't know if many of you good people remember the Mrs. Virginia MORSE murder, of Moree in NSW ?

I won't even attempt to describe the specific details of what these two individuals did to that poor woman, before they mercifully killed her ! Surfice to say, it was absolutely beyond heinous, wicked, or egregious !

Personally, I DO NOT support the Death Penalty per se ! However, I'd be at a loss to mount any arguement whatsoever, for leniency for these two, if capital punishment were still on our statutes.

Both these individuals are still in gaol. With recent 'special legislation' enacted by the Govt. of NSW ensuring they're N E V E R released. This is consistant with the original trial Judge's sentence and attendant comments. Gee with live in a horrible world when you think of it !?