http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty Comments on 'will write to the Prime Minister demanding the revokation of the EU's capital punishment bill and the restoration of the Death Penalty in the UK for capital crimes' en-gb team@pledgebank.com 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 2 hourly http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_57702 I tend to agree with Dave Silvester's comments on the death penalty and the corruption amongst those in power, but I disgree with the rest of his views. We cannot allow demented and violent people to have the freedom to ruin society, yet I cannot agree that killing them is a solution (Dave has clearly explained the reasons for anyone that cares to actually attempt to understand them). I disagree that life imprisonment is a solution either, as a reduced sentence in exchange for good behaviour is all that prevents prisoners from continuing to act barbarically while banged up (who'd be a prison warden if a prisoner had nothing to lose by jamming a screwdriver in your eye?) I think hard labour offers a decent route out of this argument, as one could argue that in a high percentage of cases, violent individuals are often from a background of either insufficient or excessively random discipline. A structured and reliable form of extreme discipline would perhaps correct the mental problems some of these people have, while proving useful to society (assuming the hard labour was clearing canals etc). Obviously keeping these people in prison overnight would still be needed, so the impact on the prison population might be quite serious. 20 years of hard work serving society is a good way to pay for a violent crime. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_52731 This pledge is disgusting and ignorant. Yes, the chances of an innocent being harmed by a criminal are higher than the chances of executing an innocent person. This is irrelevant; one innocent person executed is one too many. We are fortunate enough in this country to have a system capable of punishing offenders without sinking into barbarism. The taking of human life for any reason is disgusting and I cannot believe that there are so many people willing to condone and support this pledge. It honest to god gets me so angry, you all ought to be ashamed. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_46544 Dave Can I have your computer then? Mine's on the blink. I can pick it up tomorrow. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_30525 Minor detail: Many murders are commited by someone the victim knows well in a moment of passion. Should someone lose their life for that mistake? Obviously this arguement doesn't count with people like Harold Shipman. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_16551 If we brought back captial punishment and you were mis-tried and found guilty of a crime you DID NOT committ, you would DIE. This could happen to ANYONE. It makes absolutely no difference who you are. Many many people have been found guilty of crimes and were later proved to be TOTALLY innocent (one very famous example being the Guildford Four). Our justice system is NOT INFALLIBLE. Far beside the humanitarian arguments against captial punishment (all of which I agree with), this is the single greatest reason NEVER to bring back capital punishment. Do you want to die? I know I don't. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_16378 There's something entirely unhinged about the death penalty: it's the end of justice, it's vengenful, animalistic and simplistic. I'd rather someone who deserves it suffers for the rest of their life in prison then condone state-murder. Governments should never have the power to kill. Being a nice liberal I can understand where the instinct comes from, I can understand that if someone close to me was murdered I'd feel muderous myself - but I'd deal with that. I wouldn't want the state take my anger and sanitize it and make it formal. Criminals should have time to reflect, time is precious and the world ends at death. Blah-de-blah anyway: this is a bad pledge! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_15920 No Nick, we are not supporting murder - you are. Who are you to judge another human on their actions? What makes you so morally righteous that you would condemn someone else to death? You need to think outside of the box for a minute. What gives you - even a large group of you - the right to condemn someone else to die? Extend that to it's natural conclusion (the idea that it's morally OK for a large enough group of people to "vote" that someone else should be put to death) and you have nothing short of the purest form of fascism. The reason we don't support the death penalty is because it *IS* murder, and is therefore every bit as horrific and condemnable as any other murder. What's more, it's an utterly fascist (meaning "the state has absolute power") idea, that has no place in a supposedly "free" society. Nobody, and especially not the state, should be allowed to kill a person. When you understand who makes the laws, you will understand why the death penalty isn't referred to as murder - because those who make it law can call it by another name. Just as how civilians who are killed by our troops are "collateral damage" - capital punishment is just a euphemism for "state approved murder". Just as how eg. "tax" is a form of robbery that just isn't called robbery. Capital punishment *IS* murder, because killing a human *IS* murder. War is murder. Soldiers are murderers. Politicians who start wars are murderers too (and in my mind, under your system they should be put to death). But of course, they won't call it that, because they make the laws to suit themselves, to "justify" and "excuse" their actions - to make their murders seem like a righteous and good thing. Funny how the downtrodden in society are always seen as parasites on the system - when in fact, if you think about it, who is more of a parasite: politicians and bosses, or someone who was made redundant in order to protect the profits of a company, and now lives on the dole? Who is the real parasite? You see, those in power get to make up the rules, so they can call things whatever they like. If it wasn't for a corrupt system dependent on exploitation at all levels, THERE WOULD BE NO CRIME AT ALL. *ANYONE* who would kill another human clearly has something very wrong with their mentality (in whatever way), and therefore requires help. That's not a "soft touch" approach - that's identifying messed up people and giving enough of a shit to help them not reach breaking point in the first place. In a truly caring society, potential murderers would be given the help and care to ensure they never reached that point. (Or do you think it would be better to euthanase all mentally handicapped people at birth?) Would a sane person commit murder? Hardly! Therefore, the only possible conclusion is that anyone who believes murder is OK, is clearly not all there, and in need of serious help. The FACT is, that within a system that puts some people above others, forces everyone into a rat-race just to survive, it's inevitable that we end up with some people getting extremely messed up by all that. Those who have a predisposition to mental illness end up not being cared for, because in the rat-race there's no space and not enough money or time to look after misfits. Brush 'em aside and forget about 'em, as long as they don't stop us making money. Equally, those who get shafted by the system and in despair turn to the escapism of drugs or living in a total "sick fantasy" world just to cope with being alive - they too should never have to reach that point, because someone should be there to give a shit about them before it happens. Because we, society, do not give a shit, is why we have murders. Collectively, we cause it all - by not caring until their problems directly affect us, at which point we label them "murderer" and punish them. See it how it is: Politicians and bosses are the real parasites in society - the real criminals, who routinely exploit the rest of us for their own gain. ALL crime is a direct result of a society that pushes people to breaking point, because some live in luxury at the expense of others who live in poverty. (Without society's obsession with material wealth, would there be robbers, burglars, muggers? Hardly! They're just looking for a quick way up the ladder, and casting morals to the wind to get there. Powerful white-collar robbers such as fat-cat executives do the same, but simply call their form of robbery something else, because they have enough influence over the law of the land to get away with it.) ALL murderers, without exception - even those who act out of pure cold hatred - are very messed up people, and require mental health care and help, not death. All of us hold responsibility for the violent crime that takes place in society. If we're not doing it ourselves, we're causing it to happen. It's a direct cause-and-effect relationship! For us to live easy lives, surrounded by vast material wealth, someone else has suffered and been exploited immensely for that to happen. With that much exploitation around, it is inevitable that some poor bastards are going to go off the rails and end up in hopeless situations. See it how it is: we're ALL of us responsible for the crime and murder that takes place in our societies, because we allow the imbalance of power and lack of care for other people that causes it to exist. An uncaring society is the real criminal, and putting to death those who suffer the most at the hands of that type of society is the biggest, most callous crime of all. The death penalty is murder, plain and simple. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_15913 At the end of the day, capital punishment works as a deterrant - if this became law, people who end up killing would obviously be fruitcakes and most killers would end up in a mental home knowing this country's soft touch, not getting the death penalty. And all you people who say capital punishment is wrong, then you are supporting MURDER! And i can start a sentence with 'and' - see, I just did it... twice! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_12802 Sally, I couldn't agree more! I've already mentioned this on this thread, so I'm going to explain it again, a little differently: Capitalist society and corrupt "leaders" of all types (including the corruption that has been known as "communism" in the past) creates and defines the crimes! If you want an end to crime, you must first end all forms of exploitation. That means ending power, ending corruption, ending exploitation, ending property and ultimately (as a result of all these) ending poverty and creating a truly equal society. In a truly caring society that put people's needs first, there would be no need to rob, steal or be envious of other's "property", since all items would belong to the whole community and be distributed based on needs. I can almost taste the revulsion in those of you who define yourselves by your property, but it's really not as bad as it sounds. You won't be "robbed" because your needs will be met. You won't live a life of luxury, but neither will anyone live a life of poverty. All humans will work together as a community for the mutual benefit of all. As for true psychopaths (those completely incapable of empathy), they should be cared for and looked after around the clock by a small community of helpers, not left in isolation to go off the rails and potentially murder others. The reason we have "psycho killers" at the moment is because they are downtrodden and discarded by a society that does not give a damn about anyone else until something terrible (and thus a potential threat to the self) happens. The ONLY reason we have crime is because we live in an uncaring society, based on exploitation and unfairness at all levels, across the entire globe. I sincerely believe that an Anarcho-Communist society (meaning one in which there is no social heirarchy, and all individuals are of equal worth in the wider community) is the only solution to our problems. It would not be "chaos" with no direction - it would be about the nearest we could ever get to living in a true utopia. No greed - if you need something, the community will provide you with it. No "work", at least not as we know it - everyone just does enough to cover their own needs, and contributes to the wider community to a mutually beneficial level. You get back what you put in. No exploitation, no coercion - if something is agreeable and mutually beneficial, do it. If not, drop out and lose the potential benefits of taking part - it's entirely your choice. Anarcho-communism is the real solution, although it doesn't pretend to have all the answers. Life is dynamic, and the problems we encounter will have to be solved in an organic manner. Politicians, leaders and bosses will never suggest this, because it involves getting rid of the whole lot of them, as well as the whole establishment. Now please, try and control your gut reactions and think about this with a clear, non-judgemental mind for a minute. I know "anarchy" and "communism" are words that trigger instant bad reactions in a lot of people - but consider why this is the case. Those in power (which incldues the media) have incredible influence over the masses, and so they have naturally used that powerful influence to tarnish and rubbish alternatives to the current establishment in order to maintain their positions of power. They live by exploiting ALL of us (including you) in order to maintain their own interest in living an easy life at the expense of others. You want to know why there is poverty? Take a look at the rich folks living the high life - THAT is why there is poverty (or did they get that rich by being nice to everyone)? You want to know why there is crime? Take a look at the amount of exploitation going on around you, and think about how much that can mess people up. You yourself are almost certainly exploited: What exactly does your boss do in order to make money, if not take something you've contributed to, and sell it at more than the price it cost you to make? Work as we know it now *IS* a form of coercion, exploitation and robbery - it's just one that is protected by the system. A system created by the powerful, to preserve their position. Capitalism is not the answer - by definition it relies on the existence of poverty and exploitation. Capitalism creates "crime", by allowing exploitation at all levels that suit it to go unpunished. It defines other "crimes" that come about as a result of this exploitation - for example, someone robbing you to steal your money. Socialism is not the answer - still way too much dependence on power, leadership (think exploitation again) and personal property. Liberalism is not the answer - again, there is still an "elite" group who depend on their advantage (and thus control and exploitation) over the masses. Liberalism allows them to get away with this too easily. Traditional "communism" (as you know it), and any other form of system with "leaders" is not the answer, because all leadership situations create an imbalance of power, corruption and thus the same problems of exploitation. The ONLY solution that will work is to put people in direct control of their lives, as independent free humans in a wider community of mutual benefit by general consensus. This is the very definition of anarchist communism! (In short: "A community of equal members with no heirarchy".) Capital punishment and other similarly fascist (meaning the state has absolute power, including over life and death) concepts are nothing but the symptoms and products of a completely broken system. Desperate measures that yeild no benefit to anyone, but allow the system of injustice to remain in place. While there is exploitation (in whatever form: capitalist, communist, fascist, anything), there will ALWAYS be crime! The two go hand in hand. To end all crime, you MUST end all exploitation and return society to one that cares, and puts ALL people equally above ALL else - where nobody is trampled for another's gain, and where all are of equal importance. An anarchist-communist society is the only way that can be achieved. So, if you've managed to stem your gut reaction to those two words for long enough to still be reading (whether you agree with me or not), perhaps you'd like to read more on it... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-Communism ... at least before you write it off completely. If you're saying "nice idea, but will never work", bear in mind that these kind of societies were in existance for millennia, and it's only in the last 5000 years or so that we've had heirarchical society based on power. If they hand't worked, we wouldn't be here now! I maintain that the following stands true: If you want to live in a society where your status is defined by your posessions, then it is your decision to live with the consequences of that; namely that people, possibly including yourself, will be harmed in various ways, and possibly even killed by others intent on taking a short-cut route out of a poverty that you are directly responsible for contributing to. That kind of uncaring society causes "crime". That kind of uncaring society defines the "crimes" by it's own standards in order to maintain the status quo. If you REALLY want to end "crime", you have got to create the kind of society where crime cannot exist, and the ONLY workable solution to that is a people-oriented, mutually caring, sharing society: an anarchist-communist society. The death penalty for those messed up by society is not a solution - it fixes no problems, cares for nobody and benefits none except those already in power (by various means). They are the real criminals - robbing you and I of a full and worthwhile existence. Get rid of them (by which I mean remove from power, and reduce to the same level as all other people), and all "crime" will vanish overnight. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_12592 The signees to this pledge reflect the success that the fascist British establishment has had over the ignorant enslaved people. Criminals are created by the establishment which is why punishments are weak and policing inept. Its simple divide & rule tactics and you signees have fallen for it. You're enslaved by the taxes that you pay; the lack of leisure time; the encouragement of social ill will and a dumbing down education. These signees are those who would join the SS. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_12573 However those of you who are against the death penalty on the basis that it wont reduce crime are wrong! If you search on the internet you will see that the murder rate (i.e. deaths per set number of population) went up (more than doubled) during the time that the death penalty was suspended in the US. However within a few years it had halved (or back to its pre-suspension level). As far as I am concerned that is proof that the death penalty works, and furthermore that the maximum number of potential mistaken executions is far far smaller than the number of people saved by the deterrance of the death penalty. Meanwhile Murders go up and up in this country. And we are hearing of more and more cases where convicted criminals are being freed early only to kill innocents. Enough is enough, if you kill someone knowing that potentally you could be killed, you know the risk, you were aware of that, so by your actions you accept death. No arguements. Not only that but those of us in the UK apparently live in a Democracy, and time and time again the public, in polls, give our support to the death penalty, how is it democratic if the views of the people are not recognised? http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10801 A country with the death penalty is not a civilised country! Simple as that. It's also impossible to justify murder (with or without trial)! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10314 for the undeducated in the audience: homicide= the killing of a person; murder= the UNLAWFUL killing of a person. hence dave, it is perfectly possible to execute murderers without becoming a murderer yourself. just as it is possible to kill someone in self-defense without becoming a murderer. as for the laughable idea that death is preferable to prison, why don't all lifers commit suicide (as well as anyone with anything like a long sentence)? as for innocent people being wrongly convicted, the main cause of this is the low level, and type, of evidence required for a conviction but even so, it ultimately comes down to probabilities and, in those countries that have the death penalty, innocents have a much greater chance of being killed by a murderer than they do of being wrongly executed by the state. and why oh why do people always bring the usa into the argument? the usa only re-introduced the death penalty relatively recently and guess what (and i quote norman dennis)? "There were more than 2,300 murders a year in New York in 1991 and well over 100,000 street robberies. London, by comparison, had 181 murders and 22,000 street robberies in that year. Last year, there were 538 homicides in New York. That means the murder rate has decreased by a factor of five over the past 13 years. London's murder rate has not reduced at all over the same period: there were 186 homicides in the capital last year." http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10238 Alan: You don't make a very convincing case for the reintroduction of the death penalty. Seems that your only reason for (apparently) wanting it is that murderers aren't currently locked up for life. If that's your view, why not just call for them to be locked up for life? The last paragraph of your posting is nothing but a straw man. The present system is failing to protect the general public from the present system!! It takes a sick society to breed sick people - how about we fix THAT, because clearly adding yet more hatred and violence to the mix has never worked, and will never work. It is my honest belief that if we truly addressed the imbalances, exploitation and hardship that our society forces on people, with the exception of total psychopaths (meaning those who are utterly incapable of empathy with other humans), very few crimes, and ESPECIALLY very few murders would actually take place. If it wasn't for the way a materialist, capitalist society relies on exploitation and suffering, leading to poverty, desperation and a huge class divide, PC Sharon Beshenivsky would not be dead. In fact, she would never even have become a police officer, because it's largely only due to capitalism that there exist the type of imbalances and exclusion that can lead to average people resorting to crime, creating the "need" for a body to prevent that crime. Get rid of capitalism, all forms of exploitation and remove the means of those who would declare themselves our "boss" or "leader", and you will not need a police force to prop up the broken system. In a truly caring society, there will not exist the imbalances that lead to crime, therefore crime will not exist among normal people. As for the psychopaths, in a truly caring society, they would be looked after with understanding and compassion, not excluded and swept under the carpet until it's too late and they end up in isolation with their problems, killing people. You want an end to crime? Fix the society that causes it, by ending exploitation and poverty, and making everyone's existence fulfilling and worthwhile. Of course, politicians will NEVER come up with this solution, because the only way it can work is if we get rid of them - THEY are the problem! Still, that's my solution: fix society, remove the seeds that lead to exploitation and people not caring about others, remove the scenarios where crime can occur by living in such a way that nobody ever reaches desperation or poverty, and there will be virtually no crime. Don't believe humans can exist in an egalitarian way? How come we're here today then, despite the fact that class societies with laws have only existed for around 5000 years? Humans clearly can and DID largely live in an egalitarian way outside of the existence of wealth, exploitation and laws, otherwise we would have wiped ourselves out millennia ago. The death penalty is a broken solution to a problem that should NEVER EVEN EXIST - a problem that has been directly created by our present capitalist system. It is that system which we must dispose of, not those who get messed up by it. You want to live in a capitalist, possession-obsessed society? Then live with the by-products of it: the fact that someone might murder you to steal your possessions. In a right-wing, wealth-based society, with laws to protect that wealth and further the divide, you will NEVER be truly safe. Why won't the people who want to kill murderers acknowledge the total hypocrisy of their stance? Who are they to declare their moral "right" to murder someone else - even if that person is themselves a murderer? Death penalty supporters: you are the biggest hypocrites around! Anyway, I think I'm going to stop wasting my time replying here. The death penalty will never be reintroduced in the UK, because despite what you vocal supporters might think, the vast majority of people in this country are not in favour of it. This was certainly the case last time it was on BBC Question Time, which was the week right after PC Sharon Beshenivsky was murdered. The death penalty is the epitome of hypocrisy, and thankfully it seems that most people in this country understand that. What they sadly don't seem to understand (yet) is that if you want an end to crime, you must first end capitalism. "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" - yeah right, don't make me f*cking laugh! Politicians and the broken system they uphold ARE the main cause of crime!! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10217 The opponents of the death penalty all seem to think that prison is the answer. It might well be...if muderers were locked away for life, but all too often we hear how they are let out early to repeat murder. Clearly the present system is failing to protect the general public from the offenders in the first place and then discracefully allowing others to become victims to the same offenders. Why don't we keep them in prison and just chuck them a fresh victim in every now and again....maybe the people bleating for the human rights of murderers would like to line up and volunteer? http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10026 It's simple. Killing people is bad. Whatever your motive. In spite of which, even the pragmatic (for which, read "amoral") argument fails - the evidence all shows that the death penalty doesn't reduce murder or violent crime. Why the **** was I pointed at this pledge? Is the Pledgebank website having a laugh? http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_10000 But in that sketch the name is mistaken several times! Also if he were alive you would be 14 years older than him? If you really are 83?!?!?! Not that anyone would have reason to doubt you Mr hip hop grandpa! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_9910 Without wanting to make this a battle against Sir Arthur Grebe-Streebling - Not only is he a pledge obsessive, but also a character in a Peter Cook/Dudley Moore sketch! http://www.davehitt.com/july99/frogskit.... <http://www.davehitt.com/july99/frogskit.html> LUCKY HIM!!! Back to the original point: Capital punishment is sooooo wrong! Not going to go in to the reasons (they have already been stated, and stated well) I would however like to add the thought of where/when is the line crossed? If the fascists out there really wanna go down the "they killed so we'll kill them route", where does the eye for an eye crap stop? Does the legal system hire a gang to administer rape to rapists? Another to take stuff from a robbers house? SOOOOO wouldn't work. I agree that punishments must be made to law breakers, but by far the fairest (for us as well as the criminal) is prison. After all what more punishment than to stew for life with nothing but your own mind? - Even the most sane and innocent person couldn't hack that!!! http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_9833 On the subject of Facists and DJs, it may be of acute interest to our 83 years old DJ- Mr Arthur Streebling to know that the Facist BNP are in desperate need of a non-ethnic DJ to play at one of their hate rallies to drum up support for the forthcoming local elections in May. Interested Mr Streebling? I hear the BNP's furher Nick Griffen pays well. http://www.pledgebank.com/deathpenalty#comment_9809 You've got the wrong man, mate! I'm with John Jorgenson who said, "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind!"