Castanet

Lynching is too good for the guilty and maybe we could learn a thing or two from Sharia while we are at it. I believe some still chop off hands for theft. I'd love to chop off the hand of the scum who stole my luggage. I'm sure he'd mend his ways and never do anything like that again, since it's hard to pick up luggage without hands.

Maybe we could bring back stoning people too, or even the Roman circus! Wouldn't it be glorious to watch criminals being torn limb from limb by bears (this is Canada after all)? The spectacle of tens of thousands baying for blood from the stands, watching with glee as the guilty are torn apart for our amusement, sorry, for their sins, can't you just see it. The royalties from screening it (it would have to be pay-per-view) could fund the courts, the circus and even a small payout for the victims' families. Of course a percentage would be given to the judges to ensure an adequate supply of subjects for the circus.

Sorry, but I find the idea of capital punishment to be sickening. We are supposed to be better than that. Too many people have died wrongfully, too many mistakes have been made, even in cases which often appear to the public as open and shut cases, we get it wrong. Not only do we get it wrong, but the best and brightest legal minds get it wrong. But, even if we could always get it right, why would we want to kill someone rather than lock them up? I guess if you want criminal punishment to be blind retribution, go for it, but don't pretend to be civilised when you do, because for a society to be a civilised one, it must, when it acts as one, behave in a manner which it aspires for all its members. A society which itself kills out of desire for retribution is one which condones killing by its members for similar base motives.

My grandmother was a judge, and we discussed this issue, the purpose of punishment and the problem of recidivism a few times. She was patient to explain things (the law was a passion of hers, for some reason) and I was young and foolish. I'm not going to go into anywhere near the detail she went into, but she explained that gaol was not for retribution, that such a purpose would be folly, that we do not seek to do unto the criminals that which they have done to us. Rather, it is to discourage them from doing so again (deprivation of liberty and attempt at rehabilitation), to discourage others from following in their footsteps (deterrent) and to provide some small degree of closure where possible for the victims. A life in prison is no less a deterrent than becoming a celebrity on death-row. The latter gets to go out in some glory, with media circus and frequent exposure. The former is boring, forgotten in a few weeks and pathetic.

As for those who plead innocent by reason of insanity, it is rarely accepted by the courts without a huge amount of evidence. The fact is that as a claim, it essentially puts the burden of proof on the defendant. It is highly unlikely to succeed in bogus cases.

I would recommend that anyone considering the merits of capital punishment read about Derek Bentley, or just watch the film "Let Him Have It" if you want some lighter entertainment.

Seriously if you look on the internet you can find statistics to support just about any side of any debate
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence ... rder-rates

Right here in Kelowna, a woman came home and asked where her son was and her boyfriend said, "sleeping." He forgot to add permanently and oh, he had murdered five or six years earlier and had gotten out of jail for good behavior.

So to all you wrote, and do I respect you deeply, you're posts are always challenging and insightful, I say, "meh."

We need to start putting an end to letting them do it again.

Queen K wrote:Right here in Kelowna, a woman came home and asked where her son was and her boyfriend said, "sleeping." He forgot to add permanently and oh, he had murdered five or six years earlier and had gotten out of jail for good behavior.

So to all you wrote, and do I respect you deeply, you're posts are always challenging and insightful, I say, "meh."

We need to start putting an end to letting them do it again.

At no point did I advocate for letting murderers free, especially those who pose any significant threat to society (good behaviour be damned). Capital punishment isn't the only way to make sure someone never leaves gaol, but it is a good way to guarantee that we as a society kill innocent people.

Further: these cases are terrible and nobody should ever have to suffer such and I know that at times when I discuss these issues I can come across as a heartless *bleep*, but I try to shake off the emotional empathy and see beyond it. I'm not always good at it, but I detest the decisions I make when emotion clouds better judgement, especially when driven by hate, fear, anger, etc. This can make me sound completely unsympathetic, but believe me, I am not in the least.

I know you didn't and I'm saying in clear cut circumstances, lIke say Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo and that guy recently convicted of killing a grandmother/grandfather and grandson in Calgary, those are the ones where there is no mistake.

And now there's a random killer of a teenager on the lower mainland.

So many actually,

I say it's about time we rethink our policy not to do it.

Queen K wrote:I know you didn't and I'm saying in clear cut circumstances, lIke say Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo and that guy recently convicted of killing a grandmother/grandfather and grandson in Calgary, those are the ones where there is no mistake.

And now there's a random killer of a teenager on the lower mainland.

So many actually,

I say it's about time we rethink our policy not to do it.

I can understand the want to do so, even if I very strongly disagree with such a policy change.

Queen K wrote:I know you didn't and I'm saying in clear cut circumstances, lIke say Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo and that guy recently convicted of killing a grandmother/grandfather and grandson in Calgary, those are the ones where there is no mistake.

And now there's a random killer of a teenager on the lower mainland.

So many actually,

I say it's about time we rethink our policy not to do it.

exactly,hang em high

I am absolutely serious about brining back the lash. Some of these serial criminals just laugh at the system. They do a few months in jail and come right back out and hook up with their old pals (which is probably a parole violation..... but who cares). They then go right back to their old behaviour. They need a good spanking. In public.

yup, they-criminal goofs only understand and respect, , violence

Queen K wrote:I know you didn't and I'm saying in clear cut circumstances, lIke say Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo and that guy recently convicted of killing a grandmother/grandfather and grandson in Calgary, those are the ones where there is no mistake.

And now there's a random killer of a teenager on the lower mainland.

So many actually,

I say it's about time we rethink our policy not to do it.

None of these people are ever getting out. What is your reason for the death penalty?

If the person knows they will be hung, they might just figure to go all out since there's nothing worse than death.
Thus, once you know, you might as well go on a spree.
My first reaction is a public kicking, followed by a stoning where I sell rocks.
Unfortunately the answer isn't cut and dry.

johnny24 wrote:

Queen K wrote:I know you didn't and I'm saying in clear cut circumstances, lIke say Clifford Olsen and Paul Bernardo and that guy recently convicted of killing a grandmother/grandfather and grandson in Calgary, those are the ones where there is no mistake.

And now there's a random killer of a teenager on the lower mainland.

So many actually,

I say it's about time we rethink our policy not to do it.

None of these people are ever getting out. What is your reason for the death penalty?

Oh no, a lot of those people do get out. Repeat offender anyone?

Just in Kelowna alone, we have a good reason to reinstate capital punishment. And Oak Bay. Five people murdered.

Now Due process is being set up for the accused and good. We need due process. But if found guilty, we also need a better closure.

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#217437

Three skeletons found in his planters? He's going to claim "criminal insanity" or "I had no idea they were there!"

Why are we so accomodating? Burden of proof can be difficult I am aware. Especially in this case. Maybe there really was a stranger coming on to his property and burying dead men in his planters and he knew nothing about it. That would get him off from being an accessory to covering a crime, right?

Absolutely. I do believe that Correction Canada should be allowed, and given budget, to try and CORRECT people entering their system. But if they re-offend or kill serially, then death is the best solution. I recently read about a guy who murdered somebody and he was on mandatory release after serving part of his sentence.

And, of course, I believe that the lash should be used on multiple repeat offenders of crimes less than murder.