View previous topic | View next topic

E-Petitions and the Death Penalty

Page 2 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Spud McLaren
836773.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:04 am Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
...e-petitions ...
and he also wrote:
...the first hot topic is to be the re-introduction of the death penalty.
and further, he wrote:
... a call to not re-instate the death penalty.
What on earth is the point of either of these petitions? Any law passed in the UK to reistate the state's right to kill certain classes of criminal* would be ultra vires in any case, under European law. It can't happen - why ask for it?

*I've never viewed this as a penalty - if you're dead, you're hardly in a position to reflect on how your foolish actions put you in this unenviable position.

 
Neotenic
836776.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 8:43 am Reply with quote

Well, quite.

For whatever reason, certain sections of our society seem to think that going to prison and going to Pontins are broadly the same thing, and that even if they do go, they'll be out in 20 minutes rather than 20 years. So, the obvious choice is to hang them by the neck instead.

It's probably not unconnected that the various anti-EU causes are also generating a certain amount of interest, including the repeal of the human rights act. Because, after all, it's not as though we've fought long and hard for those rights, or that there are people dying literally today because of their ongoing fight for them.

Oh.

I do think, however, that the 'not' one does actually serve more of a purpose. I think it provides fairly clear evidence that the voices of 'the people' channelled through the Daily Wail's bile-flecked prism are not representative of the country as a whole.

 
djgordy
836781.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:16 am Reply with quote

Spud McLaren wrote:
Neotenic wrote:
...e-petitions ...
and he also wrote:
...the first hot topic is to be the re-introduction of the death penalty.
and further, he wrote:
... a call to not re-instate the death penalty.
What on earth is the point of either of these petitions? Any law passed in the UK to reistate the state's right to kill certain classes of criminal* would be ultra vires in any case, under European law. It can't happen - why ask for it?


Because after the Daily Mail readers have finished calling for the death penalty they can them grumble about "Europe" not allowing them to have it.

 
Spud McLaren
836785.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 9:26 am Reply with quote

Then I think I concur with your earlier point.

 
suze
836797.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 11:29 am Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
It's probably not unconnected that the various anti-EU causes are also generating a certain amount of interest, including the repeal of the human rights act. Because, after all, it's not as though we've fought long and hard for those rights, or that there are people dying literally today because of their ongoing fight for them.

Oh.


Oh, indeed. Sadly, I fear that the paragraph which follows is indicative of a large proportion of British opinion:

"I, the person on the Clapham Omnibus, am all in favour of Human Rights. So long as we define "human" to mean 'white people whose ancestry is entirely English, Scottish, or Welsh'. Since suze is white and has English as her first language, she's slightly better than all those others."

Of our political parties, only the BNP actually says this sort of thing in public. But when I'm at home in Kent, I hear it every day (and from people who would be horribly offended if you accused them of being racist).

 
Prof Wind Up Merchant
836841.  Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:16 pm Reply with quote

The only people that will be given the death penalty are terrorists, multi-murderers and multi-rapists if it comes. I am however frightened of the prospect and would be a backward step.

 
soup
836915.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 5:49 am Reply with quote

Prof Wind Up Merchant wrote:
The only people that will be given the death penalty are terrorists <snip other groups>


What like the "Birmingham six", "Guildford Four" and "Maguire Seven"?
Do you think the media was obsessed with numbers in the 70s?

You can release people from jail with a "sorry about that " and a wodge of compensation , hard (unless your the star of a 2000 year old middle eastern soap) to do that when you have killed somebody.


Last edited by soup on Sat Aug 06, 2011 5:55 am; edited 1 time in total

 
exnihilo
836917.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 5:54 am Reply with quote

Well, it's their own fault for looking shifty, innit?

 
CB27
836931.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 7:29 am Reply with quote

Putting aside for the moment the concept of miscarriage of justice, my main opposition to introducing the death sentence is that it's not a form of punishment, it's a form of revenge.

We will happily prosecute someone for seeking physical revenge on someone who wronged them, yet it seems acceptable for some that we take colloective revenge on some individuals. I find it hypocritical and uncivilised.

That's my personal opinion.

 
soup
836932.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 8:03 am Reply with quote

I thought it was meant as a deterrent not as revenge or punishment.

 
CB27
836934.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 8:41 am Reply with quote

So killing someone is a deterrent?

 
Spud McLaren
836941.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 10:25 am Reply with quote

Hmm..well... if I were proposing to carry out a particular action and the authorities told me they'd kill me if I did, I might well be deterred, yes.

 
CB27
836950.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 11:53 am Reply with quote

Something tells me that if someone is willing to commit murder or carry out an act of terrorism, knowing the current methods of punishment, is not going to be deterred by the death penalty.

 
Neotenic
836952.  Sat Aug 06, 2011 12:08 pm Reply with quote

I think that something is that fact that nowhere that has the death penalty has a zero murder rate.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/29/opinion/l-death-penalty-hasn-t-cut-texas-murder-rate-350486.html

 
bobwilson
837302.  Mon Aug 08, 2011 9:27 pm Reply with quote

post 836797

Methinks you doth protest too much suze.

You may be right in your presumed opinion of a large proportion of UK public opinion – I doubt it, but that’s merely my opinion. If you replaced “person on the Clapham Omnibus” with “opinionated, half-wit writer (with special needs) employed by major media outlet” I think you’d be closer to the truth. And I also think you’re exaggerating somewhat when you say that you hear this everyday in Kent (if that were true, life would be utterly intolerable for a decent person – which I’m sure you are – as you’d spend most of your time telling your acquaintances that they were small-minded pillocks. Having – albeit relatively briefly – experienced a situation approximating to what you’re claiming I can confirm that it does become wearing to constantly tell people to stop making shit up).

I’m quite prepared to spend a day (or a week) hovering in your vicinity (but not connected to you in any way) to overhear these statements. I think it’s much more likely that you’re guilty (yes, that charged word again) of an inverted racism – the presumption that white people in Kent hold views with which you disagree.

There isn’t a great deal of difference between stating (as you do paraphrased) “White Kent people.....” and “West Indian migrants......” – both rely on generalisations, both define people according to some arbitrary criteria, both are fundamentally indicative of a racist attitude.

Do report on any actual conversations overheard or in which you participated – but to feed this generalisation about an arbitrarily defined group is just as reprehensible as anything put out by the BNP.

As you know, I sojourn in Eastbourne – not a million miles from Kent so the practicalities aren’t insuperable – and given my rather unusual professional status, my availability to conduct experiments is fairly flexible. Eastbourne isn’t particularly noted for it’s multi-ethnic population or it’s tolerance of liberal views (although I’m reliably informed that it now has a Liberal MP). It does, however, have a hefty influx of European students during the summer months – and their mores are reputedly at odds with those of the native population.

I do hear a lot of whining about the apparent inability of the students to queue to get on a bus – I hear nothing in the way of a general complaint about Germans/Spanish/French to queue. I could give other examples – but essentially the point is that the complaints are about a well-defined group and are not translated to a wider presumed group.

As I say – I’m quite happy to shadow you discreetly and to experience the intolerance of the local population at first hand – as you experience this “daily” it shouldn’t take long. Unlesss, of course, you’re doing a Littlejohn? (As they say – scratch a liberal and you’ll find......)

The presumption that the majority, or a significant minority, of UK residents, or UK nationals, or even UK white nationals resident in Kent – favours an interpretation of Human Rights legislation which prefers white UK nationals and presumes against anyone not in that group, is a significant statment that requires something more than vague claims.

Anything less than actual evidence can only be treated as what it is – an incendiary racist statement. I look forward to you providing the evidence, withdrawing your claims about the people of Kent, or accepting my offer to experience this situation first hand (which I will faithfully record and report).

 

Page 2 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group