NOW is the Time for Britain to Reinstate the Death Penalty

It has never been more appropriate a time for the UK to reinstate its long-held death penalty (last used in 1964). With the trial of the Muslim fanatic killers of Lee Rigby, this perfectly is why the death penalty is necessary.

These 2 dirtbags, with no regard for human life, filled with hate, and confused as to who good guys and bad guys are, are walking time bombs. To let them live is to akin to insuring the more people will be killed, from their insane Muslim radicalism.

Life in prison has always been inappropriate for convicted killers, but it is especially wrong in the case of these deranged Islamic lunatics, as more than confirmed by their statements, and mindsets.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...bolajo-and-Michael-Adebowale-court-hears.html

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rison_is_it_safer_to_be_jailed_than_free.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_Kingdom

 

Do you really think these clowns should be allowed to live, at taxpayers expense, all the while spewing their hate messages on forums like this, if not killing someone, all over again ? Well, do you ?

 

We abandoned the mediaeval practise of hanging people because of several well-documented wrongful executions of innocent men.
We don't want to go down that road again. We'll leave barbarism to America and Iran.
Oh, and by the way those "clowns" are in jail, and in no position to gain access to any internet forums!

 

The death penalty is basically stupid. Its most prolific user is the Communist government of China, after all! What the death penalty really says is that the Old Testament is better than the New Testament so those in favor are not really Christians. Quite apart from getting off on the whole revenge thing, there is always the question of where you stop when applying the death penalty (I refer you to China and/or history) and how many wrongly convicted people are executed (look up the history of the death penalty in the USA in the last century).

 

Even if they decided to reinstate it, it would be applied to this case.

 

I no more feel like I should tell the UK what they should do than I would listen to a Brit tell me what we should do in the U.S.

 

Wrongful executions, huh ? Well, anything is going to be a wrong thing to do if you're STUPID. Point is, don't be stupid. Executions are only for cases that are 100% positive (DNA, on video crime, heavy evidence with confession, etc)

As for internet access, I don't know what that's mentioned for, but privileges vary greatly between one prison and another. I know in some prisons even gang leaders (capable if putting hits on people) are allowed communication to the outside. Ridiculous, IMO.

 

As I just said in my previous post > "Executions are only for cases that are 100% positive (DNA, on video crime, heavy evidence with confession, etc)"

Just as pertinent a question is how many people are being killed because some killer did NOT get the death penalty. How many have have died as a result of the killer being spared. Some criminalogists believe that Al Capone may have killed dozens more people after his incarceration, and he's just one example. "In 1980, the homicide rate in US state prisons was 54 inmates per 100,000. The homicide rate for the general population outside prisons, in 1980 was 10.2 per 100,000."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rison_is_it_safer_to_be_jailed_than_free.html

 

Problem is, Islamic jihad transcends countries. Especially with the loose visitation and immigration policies the US has, today's British terrorists could easily be tomorrow's American problem.

Also, after receiving thousands of decisions (if not demands), for years, from foreigners about what the USA should do, I now mention what another country should do for the first time (I think) in 10 years posting, and what do I get ? Someone inferring I shouldn't decide what another country should do.

HA HA! I just have to laugh a little, that's all.

 

The problem is that the death penalty isn't for only those types of cases. And appeals tend to overtake the cost of actual imprisonment. And it's easy to say "don't be stupid" on some Internet forum. Real life is more complex than rhetoric; we are talking about taking a human life here.

 

People of all different colors and religions commit murder in Britain but it takes two Muslims to make you change your mind about the death penalty?

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/lat...ath-after-vigilantes-branded-him-a-paedophile

These two white men from Britain BURNED an innocent man to death. Do you think they should get the death penalty too? If your answer is no then it's very clear what you are.

 

No, we are talking about taking a human life vs. allowing human lives to be taken because of NOT taking that human life. How many people will be killed by the convicted killer while he is allowed to remain alive, and able to kill again ? Sure, we must be 100% positive in the case of any execution, and it must be for ONLY these type of cases. But we must not overlook the RISK to the general public of NOT executing someone, and for delaying his execution for much too long, as so often is the case in America. Every day that goes by is another day that the convicted killer could strike again, and history shows they do just that.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rison_is_it_safer_to_be_jailed_than_free.html

 

How? They would be in prison the rest of their lives.

That argument could be made for ANY murderer.

That's impossible, you don't seem to understand how judicial systems work or how evidence and proof works.

Oh, you mean cases dealing with Muslims?

What history? How would these men be a risk to the general public in prison? And again, we don't delay executions, we allow people to appeal decisions. There's a reason why we don't allow raving lunatics that yell "Hang them all!" in juries. Your clearly biased and emotional rhetoric is the exact reason why people are so against the death penalty.

 

I really hate talking to irresponsible posters who not only don't click links and read them, but in your case, you're not even reading the posts. See Post # 8. Better yet, here a copy/paste of it >> Some criminalogists believe that Al Capone may have killed dozens more people after his incarceration, and he's just one example. In 1980, the homicide rate in US state prisons was 54 inmates per 100,000. The homicide rate for the general population outside prisons, in 1980 was 10.2 per 100,000. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...than_free.html

Sure. And that's who I make it for. ANY murderer (but especially those like gang leaders or those with a high probability to kill again)

Would you say it's impossible in the case of killers who's crime was video recorded ?

Nope.

The history that has already been provided to you in this thread, but that you were too lazy to read it. Participate properly in the thread, and you won't have to make a fool out of yourself asking foolish questions.

So once again, for you and all the other lazybones who don't read. (God, what ignorance!!) >> Some criminalogists believe that Al Capone may have killed dozens more people after his incarceration, and he's just one example. In 1980, the homicide rate in US state prisons was 54 inmates per 100,000. The homicide rate for the general population outside prisons, in 1980 was 10.2 per 100,000."

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rison_is_it_safer_to_be_jailed_than_free.html

 

If the limeys don't want the death penalty, that's their businesses.Let them handle this case as they see fit.

 

So, they may kill other people in prison. You said that they were a threat to the public, not a threat to other incarcerated prisoners.

Okay, at least you're consistent.

As a defense lawyer, sure.

"Can you prove that it is my client in the video?"
"Can you prove that this video hasn't been tampered with?"

That has nothing to do with the "general public".

 

It has EVERYTHING to do with the general public, AND prison inmates BOTH.

HERE is what I said >> "Just as pertinent a question is how many people are being killed because some killer did NOT get the death penalty. How many have died as a result of the killer being spared. Some criminalogists believe that Al Capone may have killed dozens more people after his incarceration, and he's just one example. "In 1980, the homicide rate in US state prisons was 54 inmates per 100,000. The homicide rate for the general population outside prisons, in 1980 was 10.2 per 100,000."

The words in bold do not specify whether the people who might be killed are prison inmate or people on the outside. Both are at risk whenever killers are spared. This is the point that ignorant death penalty opponents are constanly oblivious to, as you appear to demonstrate right here.

As for the general public (how many times do I have to say it), prison inmates can kill somebody with a telephone, a letter, an email, just by saying kill "Joe Blow", and then his outside colleagues do it. Are you naive ?
Ever watch the TV show "Lockup" ? It's the real thing. I saw one episode where a leader of a gang ordered hits on 12 people on the OUTSIDE, all from inside the prison, and all 12 were carried out. Welcome to the real world.

PS - did yu think I meant Al Capone killed dozens of people INSIDE the prison ? HA HA HA. Pheeeeww! (high-pitched whistle).

 

What is being STUPID is to advocate for the very outcome that terrorists DESIRE - their deaths at the hands of the West!

Its sad that so MANY Islamophobes know NOTHING about the kind of war is being fought, and constantly and consistently push OUR countries for the EXACT response the terrorists desire - that free countries should engage in oppression, expulsion, mass murder and change their very nature to become exactly what the jihadists describe us to be!

Executions creates martyrs. It increases recruitment, is oh so heroic and romantic an appeal for the unemployed, angry or bored young people in some of these countries!

A lifetime in prison prevents "martyrdom". It is the most ignoble end we can supply for fanatical people embracing ignoble acts! Even if it DID cost more to keep them locked up than to execute them, it would be worth every extra penny.

People who advocate the STUPIDITY of "killing people who have sworn to die" responses to crimes are simply "useful idiots" supporting the terrorist causes even more than the terrorists can ever do,

 

Just because someone is in a prison, doesn't mean it's OK for him to be killed. Prison inmates deserve protection from murderers just as much as anyone else. And they often don't get it, as long as the convicted killers didn't get executed, as still represent a risk.

http://www.jailsergeant.com/Prison_Inmate_Deaths.html

 

SO?

Because our prisons are vastly overcrowded, understaffed hellholes is NOT a "reason" to execute anyone - its a reason we should stop sending people to prison for non-crimes and stupid stuff., so the prisons have time and budget to deal with real criminals.

 

NONSENSE! Posts #s 19 and 21 answered this silly post, and martydom is a joke. Did we say we couldn't kill our enemies in World War II, because they might become "martyers" ? Oh brother! How stupid. Imagine Eisenhower telling his troops to leave Hitler alone because he might become a martyer. HA HA HA. Osama bin Laden, al Zarqawi, and al Awlaki, all al Qaeda leaders all got dusted by US military. Now nobody even mentions their name.

Here. Check this out. One of my favorite pictures >>

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4557824805833945&pid=15.1&w=189&h=126&p=0

And stop using that false word "Islamaphobes." There is no such thing as Isamaphobia, and that word is an insult and offensive to all of us who suffer from the REAL mental illnesses known as PHOBIAS (in my case, I have agoraphobia)

There is no such thing as Islamaphobia. A "phobia" is an irrational fear based on nothing. But fear of jihad (violent or non-violent) is perfectly rational, as established by 20,000 violent, Muslim, jihadist attacks since 9/11, and thousands of instances of Islamization in schools, universities, workplaces, various branches of the government, airports, private homes, and the public streets.

 

I didn't say that was a reason to execute. YOU brought it up, I didn't. And what you say here has nothing to do with what I've said. I've made my case quite clear why/how executions are warranted, and under what circumstances. Did you see what I said about Al Capone, and the modern day gang leader prisoner shown on "Lockup" ?

Are you reading the thread ?

http://www.jailsergeant.com/Prison_Inmate_Deaths.html

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rison_is_it_safer_to_be_jailed_than_free.html

 

No, but the words that you used in the post PREVIOUS to that were:

"But we must not overlook the RISK to the general public of NOT executing someone"

I know exactly what you're talking about. Benjamin Davis, 211 crew founder. Do you know why he was in prison in the first place? Robbery and assault. Are you saying that we also are going to have to kill anybody with ANY violent history behind them?

Another counter-point: Do you want me to give you examples of people who were murderers and then changed their life around?

Considering that the context you included was data about homicides IN PRISON, yeah, that would be the logic that your post conveys.

 

I agree.
Britain should toss out EU human rights laws and hang these dangerous idiots.

 

Actually, we're talking about taking the life of a serial killer who would kill again(for mundane, 'political' or 'religious' "reasons"(which don't apply to common logic). Such people are beneath us, not equal to common humanity.