Should we bring back the death penalty?

[Rue]

I am with Wes on this. If you could show me without a doubt someone is guilty of terrorist acts causing murder or cold blooded, pre-meditated murder, then I would say  a reluctant hesitant yes. The problem is there have been so many people convicted of murder who did not do it or were framed I don't like the idea of killing the wrong person. I also don't like the idea of killing people in the general sense even if its because they killed. I think we want to kill them because we have been otherwise letting them go too early or disconnecting what they did from having them sit in a prison. Instead of killing them I would like them in those cases where they were cold blooded terrorists/murderers to spend the rest of their life doing something paying back society, i.e., building roads, houses or they do not eat.  Easier said than done-to do that  would be against the Charter of Rights which today would also  be used to prevent any law attempting to reinstitute capital punishment as well.

[CITIZEN_2015]

5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Government shouldn't be executing its own citizens, unless in dire emergencies acting in self-defense like when there's an active shooter etc....but that's not really execution.

Prison is enough to keep the public safe from bad criminals.  Execution is unnecessary and excessive.  Let the criminal work their butt off for the rest of their life to repay their debt to society...send some money to the victim or their family even.

No prison is not enough to keep public safe. We have many cases of repeat offenders. Even murder many times don't get life sentences and not t mention even life sentences go free on parole after serving half the time in many cases. Public safety must come first not to mention that execution for repeat rapists and mass murderers is also acting as a deterrence rather than a tax payer paid hotel prison.

For those who may worry about non-guilty cases, note that I am advocating for REPEAT offenders. A rapist for a third time must be very unlucky (or impossible) to be convicted wrongfully three times and a repeat murder a second time.

Edited November 29, 2019 by CITIZEN_2015

[cannuck]

On 11/29/2019 at 4:00 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said:

No prison is not enough to keep public safe. We have many cases of repeat offenders. Even murder many times don't get life sentences and not t mention even life sentences go free on parole after serving half the time in many cases. Public safety must come first not to mention that execution for repeat rapists and mass murderers is also acting as a deterrence rather than a tax payer paid hotel prison.

For those who may worry about non-guilty cases, note that I am advocating for REPEAT offenders. A rapist for a third time must be very unlucky (or impossible) to be convicted wrongfully three times and a repeat murder a second time.

Worth pointing out that the terrorist who just killed 2 and injured 3 on London Bridge at age 19 had been in jail a short while from being convicted of terrorism...only to be released into a world that monitored his position (ankle bracelet) but did little to prevent him from further crimes.  Also worth noting that he was restrained from further mayhem by bystanders and stopped costing the UK much more money and risk to society by the police (they shot him - fatal outcome).  So, what do you DO with a radicalized terrorist?  (other than the obvious Trudeau solution of giving him $10m reward for killing our allies).   His first crimes would not have had the death penalty in most of the developed world, so even that would not have been a deterrent.  

Edited December 1, 2019 by cannuck

[Army Guy]

On 11/29/2019 at 11:45 AM, cannuck said:

I tend to agree with Army Guy...but would need a LOT more definition on what is an "open and shut" case.  Milgaard, etc. all were called that by the courts - until LONG after they would have been dead.

"Prison is enough to keep the public safe from bad criminals"????    Yeah, while they are inside, they are only likely to harm or kill other inmates or staff, but what they ARE doing while inside is learning from and making connections to those who will be part of their ongoing criminal life when they get out.  Prison is not punishment, it is not about reform it is about career development for genuine bad criminals.

Open and shut case in my opinion would be multi pieces of evidence that are undeniable. IE clear image and  positive match on cameras, DNA, finger prints, any other medical or forensic evidence.

Why is it we can't kill someone that has been convicted of taking another life ? but we are good with sending them to prison for less than 20 years, and while our most violent killers spend most of there time locked up in isolation, for 23 hours a day....Which studies have proven with out human contact convicts develop major cases of PTSD, anti social personalities, the list goes on, now take a look at the other convicts, who are forced to change everything they know in ref moral values to survive in a max security prison, surrounded by more killers and a completely different set of rules....And then wonder why they turn to crime once they get out....we are good with all that but can not just end a life....

If the only thing holding us back is sending a innocent man to his death, then why can we not concentrate on improving our methods of investigation I mean DNA was a huge jump there must be other ground breaking methods out there....or we develop a system that is similar to ours today, but does not preclude the death sentences for exceptional cases, like killing a police officer, mass killings, serial killers, repeatable child molestations. Perhaps we also change the way we judge these people, maybe there is no jury, but a panel of judges "professional lawyers" that are experienced in homicides... I'm grasping at straws right now, but instead of just sitting there excepting todays entire justice system there must be a better way...