bring back hanging yes or no?

[old alal]

Why not, I am sure Sky would pay over the odds for the rights to air.

Actually I think no government (in the UK) would want to be the one to do it. How would you live with yourself if a miscarriage of justice was found after the event.

I also doubt it would act as a deterrent these days as quite a lot of offenders are "off their face" on some narcotic or other.........thinking on Hang all the drug dealers.

[beutelwolf]

Originally Posted by old alal

I also doubt it would act as a deterrent these days as quite a lot of offenders are "off their face" on some narcotic or other.........thinking on Hang all the drug dealers.

The death penalty does not work as a deterrant for your typical this-is-worth-the-death-penalty kind of crimes.

Murderers would normally just bet on not being caught, especially murderous sex offenders. Drug pushers have some minions at the front line anyway. Etc. You would really have to push the boat out to which crimes the death penalty applies (rogue traders at banks?) to get any kind of deterrant effect. Or push the boat out in another way: you extend the death penalty to any close relatives of theirs, along the lines of: if your son commits a crime like this you and all your descendants will be killed by the state. To cut this short: this is out of the question in a Western democracy, even death-penalty-loving USA.

What the death penalty does do are two things: (i) it gives the public/the victims a sense of closure (you may call it revenge), and (ii) it ensures the particular offender will not offend again. A potential further issue is that it could reduce costs, i.e. avoid keeping someone alive for 40+ years in jail. That however requires a legal system that is capable of applying death penalties swiftly, but again in a Western democracy this is such a big IF.

How much these "benefits" are really worth is another matter.

[tamsmith]

Hanging is wrong.

Far better to put convicted criminals in a luxury prison with three square meals a day. Best of medical care. Comfortable bed, flat screen TV, games consul, free gym access and plenty of visitors. Maybe even your own phone.

Of course, if you really wanted to punish them, without resorting to hanging or similar, you could incarcerate them in a care home but then that would probably violate their "human rights" as being inhumane.

[windymiller]

There are certainly some despicably evil criminals who undoubtedly deserve to be executed so on that level I find it hard to argue against capital punishment. But mistakes are made, and sometimes they are due to the deliberate actions of some of those involved in the criminal justice system, from the police all the way up to the judiciary. When the mistakes come to light the general public who, goaded by the gutter press, had been previously baying for blood just look at their shuffling feet and point their finger at anyone and everyone except for themselves.

So I would support bringing back hanging with the proviso that when mistakes do come to light that the police officers who lied or fabricated evidence are also hung, that the judge who disallowed evidence that supported the case of the accused or misdirected the jury towards a guilty verdict is also hung, the journalists who knowingly reported false information on the case are also hung and just for good measure, round up a few of the ring leaders of the outraged mob and hang them as well.

[trailmaster]

I am in favor of bringing back hanging as a suitable punishment for murder. In fact I think it should be televised.

[ConstantOgler]

Originally Posted by otokonomidori

I expect the Law to be dispassionate when justice is being administered - individuals in highly emotional states cannot be expected to be reasonable or sensible.

Very important point. Maybe biggest factor in diff between US & Euro on capital punishment. What is proper role of victim emotion?

In 1988 US Presidential debates, the answer of the Dem. Dukakis to a moderator's question was widely viewed as his doom:

"Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"

"No, I don't, Bernard," he said. "And I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life."

Dukakis lost election badly, other factors also. Does not change that so much US press & pundits agreed, this was fatal. He did not show any emotion. There was more to his answer, technically, but didn't matter. Background that Bush campaign pounded him as soft-on-crime, this was the Willie Horton thing, posters, etc.. Not hard to imagine a better crafted answer, but would it have mattered?

30 years later, any different? In blogs in US I still see it in spades. It still rules as the Great Question, the "Killer Question." Where Europeans see the dangers in emotion, Americans are put off by lack of emotion. ! Pretty basic, no?

[crinolynne]

Originally Posted by trailmaster

I am in favor of bringing back hanging as a suitable punishment for murder. In fact I think it should be televised.

I think you should be the one to pull the lever.

[bozomask]

Death penalties take too long to be carried out, therefore the deterrence aspect is lost and so is ridding society of a monster as we keep the inmate around for years at the taxpayer's expense.

The question of method therefore is moot, because it seldom happens. Hanging is horrible, for the prisoner and for the audience. Our idiots in charge of the procedure came close to the right method with the lethal injection idea, but they messed it up like everything the government tries to manage, that is why there is always so much controversy every time they try to use it. If you must kill someone, do it humanely. The government came up with three drugs to inject with some sort of trouble using them. The most effective method would be a hot shot of fentanyl, or heroin. A sure and painless death in a few minutes or less.

I would rather see all prisoners on work farms or working in Amazon warehouses or similar. Threaten those who won't behave with lobotomies and carry them out if they misbehave, then put them to work.

[hoss]

Oh, this is not a thread about priapism?

[Old Jud]

Originally Posted by bozomask

Death penalties take too long to be carried out, therefore the deterrence aspect is lost and so is ridding society of a monster as we keep the inmate around for years at the taxpayer's expense.

The question of method therefore is moot, because it seldom happens. Hanging is horrible, for the prisoner and for the audience. Our idiots in charge of the procedure came close to the right method with the lethal injection idea, but they messed it up like everything the government tries to manage, that is why there is always so much controversy every time they try to use it. If you must kill someone, do it humanely. The government came up with three drugs to inject with some sort of trouble using them. The most effective method would be a hot shot of fentanyl, or heroin. A sure and painless death in a few minutes or less.

Maybe that is the problem with hanging in the USA, it certainly wasn't when we had it in the UK.
To put it bluntly, the executioners in the USA are bloody clueless as far as hanging is concerned.

The problems have been the long drawn out time the condemned has had to stand on the scaffold before execution (as much as fifteen minutes?)
UK executions would take place in under 20 seconds, that's from the executioner entering the condemned cell to the actual drop.

The 'drop' in the UK was scientifically calculated, allowing for body weight, height, and general physique.
US executioners seem to adopt a standard length drop for all, leaving some condemned prisoners to take several minutes to die an agonising death.

As for spending years on death row, in the UK an execution would be carried out within weeks on sentence being passed (pending any appeals).