Funny how those who oppose the death penalty are the first to vote for the murder of the unborn. In their eyes a repeat pedophile offender is of more value than the unborn. Not surprising I suppose when our amoral society is so brainwashed by the Secularist.

o sung wu,
I understand what you are saying, but it appalls me to think that the Crump and Bakers and the Murphys of this world still get to enjoy nice things even though they have lost their freedom.

They get to enjoy music and art of their choice,nice tasting food, maybe even laugh at some TV comedys and conversations with others.

I honestly think that they do not deserve anything nice at all.

I have a friend who is a police officer and he tells me that when in the dock being charged, these fiends are usually smirking at each other.

Foxy says we need to decide what sort of a world we want to live in. Well I want a world where we know that these bastards no longer exist and there is no chance of them commiting further attrocities.

Hi BANJO...

What you say is true with respect to the insolence and contemptuous attitude some of these creeps display - both during the charging process and even in a court of law, particularly post sentencing !

I not sure what one can do about it these days. It would seem most folk couldn't care less what happens with these 'ne'er do wells'? Providing of course, it doesn't have a personal impact on them or theirs. Out of sight, out of mind.

The authority, in fact the 'Majesty' of the blue uniform, once held a degree of respect, even fear. Today though, coppers are despised even reviled particularly by younger offenders. The fact is they're forever informed of their rights but never the responsibilities they have to the community.

As I've often said. I'm so glad that I'm out of the job now...retired with a modest but adequate pension. I've got great concern for those who have newly graduated from the Academy. Armed with a perception of a great career and vocational future, and to make a difference! With boundless energy and buckets of idealism, they go forth into the world in order to protect the innocent and detain the guilty. I'm out of the job thankfully............more or less still alive.

Veronika “I didn't miss it, I just don't buy it.”

Then you are addressing a separate and different issue.

The reason for the caveat was to stop the usual confusion which muddies the death sentence debate of “certainly of guilt”.

If you would like to answer the question, do you support the death penalty and the reasons for feeling so. Please don’t bother if all you want to do is tell us how ‘imperfect’ the trial system is.

Foxy thank you for your contribution.

I realize and appreciate you are dealing with the subject with more gravity than some posters.

What would qualify as “extreme aggravating and mitigating circumstances.” ?

Celivia “also because I view civilisations that still apply the death penalty as more or less retarded.”

Why do you perceive them so?

“emotions should have no place in a fair justice system.”

Agree, but atonement for a crime and penalty are not emotions and both parts of the sentencing process

“It’s also not logical to fight violence with violence.”

Sometimes there is no alternative but that is a different debate.

i disagree with your view regarding witnesses, otherwise we would all be hostage to every criminal.

I guess for your final point, the voluntary euthanasia the murderers victim had no choice, I see no merit in offering a killer the choice : - )

CJ Morgan, I refer you to my response to Veronika

O sung wu, pressing the point, I am after your reasons for not supporting the death penalty, when you so readily recognize how some killers are deserving of it.

Interesting view runner

Banjo, you and I agree although I seek no personal revenge, I would expect efforts to be in place to ensure the execution be the most humane possible, an injection of sedatives before a the fatal drug. The execution for me, should be neither a public display nor a matter of public rejoicing.

Personally, I would support reintroduction of the death penalty.

Because, as a libertarian, I do believe personal responsibility and accountability accompany personal freedom.

And criminals need to be held accountable.

Given the Libertarians’ natural distrust of government decision making, it is remarkable how vehemently Col defends state sanctioned killing and the broad range of crimes he deems punishable by death.

Of course it is human to be contrary and one can only see human frailty in Col’s stance as one of a personal issue, given that he can’t distinguish between the crime of dealing marijuana and that of a mass murderer.

However, Col has asked us to provide our reasons pro or con the death penalty.

There are crimes so heinous that the perpetrators should never be released from imprisonment. Throw away the key for the likes of Ivan Milat or the 9/11 bombers.

What I don’t believe is that the death penalty achieves any of the following:

Deterrent: Many studies have been made, yet there is still no evidence that capital punishment acts as any deterrence at all. The death row sections of prisons in countries as diverse as Indonesia and the USA are fully populated. In terms of anthropological history, the death penalty never worked in the past either.

Vengeance: State sanctioned killing does nothing to bring back the victims nor alleviate the suffering of living victims. Vengeance is an emotional response and has no place in a civilised community. Revenge is the response of the immature.

Determination of guilt: There is no 100% effective means (even with the advent of DNA testing) to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. As has already been posited by others; a single execution of an innocent can never justify the killing of many guilty.

The Executioner: Someone has to do it. I have always found this the most morally distasteful aspect of state killing. That the state is granted the power to appoint a human being to kill another human in carefully premeditated steps is chilling. It cannot be compared to warfare, where, ideally killing is in defence of a person or persons.

The executioner, in fact, is granted an exemption that is far beyond the rights and freedoms of any other citizen.

Great points, Fractelle.
I’d find it quite creepy to have an executioner as a neighbour.

Col,
“no merit in offering a killer the choice”
The only thing that counts is that a criminal has no access to society for the rest of his life, and if that person prefers to die rather than spend life in jail without parole, I can see the merit.
The voluntary euthanasia option might well prevent a suicide, which can add unnecessary stress to the prison guard who finds the body and the people who have to clean up the mess of the suicide.
If you do want to see the return of the death penalty, offering this choice has even more merit otherwise the criminal who was sentenced life in prison without parole would have a motive to kill a guard or prisoner in order to be sentenced to death for this murder.

Re Civilisations that still apply the death penalty are retarded.
”Why do you perceive them so?”
Although it is natural that we want vengeance by putting to death criminals, in a civilised society we should be more advanced than to act upon our primitive responses. Killing without consent doesn’t belong in an established democracy where civil rights are valued because there are alternatives and killing is unnecessary.
Gandhi said: "An eye for an eye will only make the world go blind."

“atonement for a crime and penalty are not emotions”
Killing unnecessarily shows that emotion has come into the picture.
It’s sufficient to keep a dangerous criminal away from society. I regard using the death sentence as an overreaction, and overreactions are emotional.

“Sometimes there is no alternative”
But there is an alternative to the death penalty, which I think, is far superior: life imprisonment without parole.
Firstly, it keeps dangerous criminals are kept away from society.
Secondly, criminals can work, for the rest of their lives, and their earnings can go into a restitution fund towards their incarceration, to compensate survivors of crime (or families of murder victims), and into violence/crime prevention programs.

A dead murderer contributes nothing.