A confused Society?

There was a programme on Channel 4 Television entitled "The Execution of Gary Glitter" which was described in Channel 4's own words as follows:

"Set in an imaginary Britain in which the death penalty has been re-introduced, this feature-length drama confronts viewers with the possible consequences of capital punishment in the UK"

Fortunately the last executions, by hanging, took place in 1964, prior to capital punishment in Great Britain being abolished for murder in 1964 and in Northern Ireland in1969.

However, there are many people in this land of ours who cry out for a "return to  the death penalty" for everything from murder, paedophilia and treason.  Yet these same people scream in outrage at the "barbaric Moslems" for executing their own murderers, paedophiles and traitors.  Having said that it is also possible to see this seemingly growing band of latter day Cromwellian Levellers also ranting when some of todays "modern controversial comedians"  upset them with a "sick joke" that they themselves would have no trouble telling themselves if some "less deserving" case was the target of their particular rage.

It seems that minorities, the less advantaged or the defenceless are "fair game" to this confused society of ours as long as, and I have no problem with this myself, soldiers (unless they are officers), police officers, fire-fighters, ambulance crew or "have a go heroes".  So while TV personalities insult the Monarch and the looks of young international swimmers they suffer near apoplexy that Jimmy Carr should make a somewhat tasteless joke about some of our wounded soldiers.  Needless to say this particular joke may have originated from these brave men but don't let a "civvie" dare repeat it! 

I have watched anti European rants about Human Rights and the interference of "the ******* EU" but then I see that these same critics have no problem demanding parity and a switch to the Euro or that there is a better health service there or that we are so far behind Europe.

Sorry, lets get back to the Death Penalty.

I for one do not support the return to the death penalty mainly due to the possibility that some of the "levellers" I mention above could indeed be  in the Jury and also that no Court, Judge or Jury is infallible.  Mistakes happen!!   Police evidence can be flawed, witnesses either unreliable or indeed corrupt all of which could lead to some unfortunate defendent dangling on the end of a hangman's rope.

Lets look at some of the reasons there is a desire to execute people; revenge, punishment or deterrent.  To be honest I don't have a clue which reason is more compelling but there again I suppose that is because I fundamentally disagree with the death penalty given that there is no evidence whatsoever that it is actually effective as a deterrent.  As far as I know, there were no fewer murders (I omit treason or military executions) in the 50 years leading up to 1945 than there have been in the 50 years since.   There was some anecdotal evidence I once read about that suggested that the crime of murder did in fact increase in Britain for period that the American Army was here in large numbers leading up to D Day 1944.  

So, lets just assume that we have had the same number of murders since 1945 without a death penalty the fact is that there were NO more during the period there was a death penalty so in my mind it has no effect on society other than too provide some form of judicial yet barbaric act revenge.  This of course would leave us no better than the so called barbaric nations of the world at large.

I lifted this little matrix from a source on the internet but it serves to illustrate my case.

Should the death penalty be a banned form of punishment?

Yes

No

Financial costs to taxpayers of capital punishment is several times that of keeping someone in prison for life. It is barbaric The endless appeals and required additional procedures clog our court system. We as a society have to move away from the "eye for an eye" revenge mentality if civilization is to advance. It sends the wrong message: why kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong. Life in prison is a worse punishment and a more effective deterrent. Some jury members are reluctant to convict if it means putting someone to death. The prisoner's family must suffer from seeing their loved one put to death by the state, as well as going through the emotionally-draining appeals process. The possibility exists that innocent men and women may be put to death. Mentally ill patients may be put to death. It creates sympathy for the monstrous perpetrators of the crimes. It is useless in that it doesn't bring the victim back to life.

The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much.(Revenge) It creates another form of crime deterrent.(?) Justice is better served. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. It provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence.(not proven) DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill.

For me this is enough to justify in my mind that any return to the death penalty would be an enormous backward step in our tolerant British society and also make us little better than some of the more lawless regimes in this world today.

But a word to the proponents of this, look hard at what you write and what you wish for in this life.  Think twice before condemning Islam while demanding a return to a death penalty here.  Think about voicing violent thoughts to people who you disagree with yet cry foul when violence is perpetrated on someone else. 

Oh, and on a lighter note make sure your spelling and grammar is as correct when you write this stuff down as it is widely read! 

(Apologies for any speeling or grarmatical errorrs i may have maid.)