Death penalty...

It was appalling, I will agree on that. I don't agree with the death penalty though. The cost of it with all the extra appeals and due diligence etc is high, mistakes can still be made so miscarriages of justice would occur, someone has to throw the switch etc, that's a horrible job and how can we say killing is wrong then have it as the punishment.

Personally I don't smack my children as I don't see how violence will teach them anything except that violence is the solution, and it isn't. The same with this, I don't agree with taking human life so I don't want the state to do it either. 

I don't know the answers but tougher sentences, better rehabilitation programmes to get people out the system and more support in run down areas would all be a start. Community centres etc. have so little funding now and they all need more on a ground level. Councils are penny pinching to keep mainline services running and that means the non essential stuff goes. The disengagement between the rich and poor and the state and the people is at worryingly high levels.

I can imagine you will disagree with all of the above Barney haha. 

I can see both points and am not a violent person myself.. Something needs to be done and soon. This country has changed a heck of a lot since I moved here in 98... But I do think if there is no shadow of a doubt he kills someone intentionally he/she should get the death penalty.. But If for any reason there is doubt then no ..

Much of it yes.... 

State driven retribution on behalf of the public.  Tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. What a great political platform. Tap into to the emotion of the wider public who will then endorse the death of another human being.

before I say anything else, it should be noted that I am not a tree hugging bleeding heart liberal who wants to make excuses for the criminal.

However I have looked in to the eyes of many people convicted of murder. Some are truly evil and should never be released from custody. That detention is not for the purpose of punishment or revenge, it is for the protection of the public.

Others however who made a mistake an error in judgement or were desperate and acted in the moment. They are judged by the courts and punished by society, they are not intrinsically evil and can be rehabilitated.

An interesting fact, most murderers are assessed as posing a low risk of repeating their actions?  Should they be killed on behalf of the victims family? Does that change anything or does society simply create another grieving family?

Like I said I work with some offenders who would be strung up and nailed to tree if the public or the mob were allowed access to them. I have to accept I probably would not Stand in their way!

However there are others who deserve a second chance, they can contribute to society and they do remain genuinely remorseful for their actions. I am not qualified or clever enough to decide who should die or not.

Well said Ray, I think it's a good society that can consider rehabilitation. 

Hmmmm..... doesn’t look like rehabilitation worked on Friday...... but hey, there’s still hope....

You are cross contaminating your argument Barney. The thread was looking at the death penalty.  Usman Khan Was never sentenced to death. He initially got an IPP sentence, (imprisonment for public protection).

Ironically it was a Probation Officer who assessed him for dangerousness. He obviously got that right and Mr Khan should have spent the rest of his days in custody. that snipet never made its way in to the papers did it?

However, in 2012 and in response to the rising population in custody the Politicians abolished the IPP sentence and on appeal mr Khan was given a determinate sentence and was entitled to an automatic release at the halfway point. Rehabilitation was not a condition of that release. Indeed I doubt that rehabilitation in this case was ever possible.

my point? Do we lock everyone up for ever? Do we execute everyone we think is dangerous even if they have not committed an act of violence? Who decides? What happens if we get it wrong, do you trust the politicians with the justice system. Are we moving toward recruiting ‘thought’ Police. 

professional assessment is at best a guess of future risk.  in this instance Usman Khan was correctly assessed as being dangerous. The judicial system as a whole failed to heed that warning and the politicians let him out. Rehabilitation had nothing to do with this tragic incident, political rhetoric and point scoring did. 

The politicians got it wrong? I'm shocked.... They should not be overruling cases as they're not trained and most of them probably don't have a clue about the judicial system. A big mistake on this occasion.