Death penalty

[Macktheknife]

I have said it before and I say it again, DEATH to those who are repeat serious offenders. No excuses, no appeals, no mercy. If you have killed/raped/savagely beaten others 3 times (for example) end of the line buddy- you get off here.
I don't care what has happened to them as a child, youth, adult, etc; you do this and get a chance to go straight after serving time done the old fashioned way- hard. But you get this chance once or maybe twice in exceptional circumstances. 3rd time? I don't think so Tim.
People say it is not a detterent, you are correct but it is not meant to be a deterrent. It is meant to be for the rest of us to sleep at night and know that these freaks are not out there doing it again and we don't have to pay even more for their behaviour.
It costs over $75,000 per prisoner, per year in New Zealand to incarcerate people, plus costs and privileges. I think a much better use of that money should be to save the ones that can be; educate everyone to the best of our ability; ensure our hospitals are well equipped and staffed; provide good parenting courses; and get rid of the deadweight.
I have no issue with releasing the rest of society from the burden of these complete scumbags. In fact lets make them useful in death at least and use the organs for transplants where suitable, and sell whatever we cannot use, should help to defray the costs of their initial imprisonment.
Before anyone asks, yes I am serious.
I do not say this for any single offence, just for the ones who have shown they are not fit to be part of our society several times.

[SARGE]

did i miss a news story on NZ bringing in the DP?

[Ocean1]

Being (in the most basic terms) a 'christian' society we have to believe in redemption because it is fundemental to our belief system. The death penalty is thus abhorent to us and yet - evil people do exist and are rarely ever reformed... Is this the fault of the system or are some people just plain born BAD? Again, being born bad is not something most religions are comfortable with, we are created in gods image so how can you be born bad or evil?

Nature or nurture? What creates a criminal (no - not speeders or over parkers but seriously bad killers etc) and more importantly what should we do once these people are identified?

Having won WW2 and thus vilified Mr Hitler and co it does not sit well with us to stop the bastards breeding or profiling a group disposed towards antisocial behaviour so instead we fall to our fundementals and belief in redemption. of course we can reform them - we just have to try harder..... Perhaps....

Or perhaps, we are just civilising ourselves into the grave as a society, lacking the barbarians at the gate we have found a way to create them internally.

I believe self reliance, manners, courtesy, selflessness and self discipline are the cornerstones of harmonious society and I see no reason to excuse extreme behaviour. At times, some individuals go so far over the line of acceptable behaviour that there is simply no alternative but to remove them permanently from society - the law allows for this BUT as a society are we willing to take that penalty to its logical extreme - I suspect not. This is one time I disagree with society because it is my considered opinion that religion should not come into it - acts are committed that are beyond the pale and should be avenged.

I support the death penalty as long as we also have degrees of murder and a solid appeal system.

Religious beliefs are relevant only for those whose faith precludes killing.
I don’t recognise any other valid reason to withhold any means that represents the minimum required to separate violent offenders from my family.

I don’t care about redemption, correction or why the offenders behave as they do. If you are interested in any of those things then join the church/charity/psych course or support group of your choice, and pay the costs of your hobby yourself.

For the rest of the tribe it’s a simple cost/benefit calculation: Is this person going to behave violently again? If the answer is yes then the tribe’s best interests are served by removing him from the tribe. It’s neither revenge or an attempt to rehabilitate them, I’m not interested in either, by the time they’re in that position they’ve had enough charity, no more chances.

You don’t have to kill them, it’s far cheaper but you can lock them up if you’re squeamish or if your god forbids you to kill. Even then I don’t see any reason why they should continue to be a burden on the tribe, they can have whatever secure accommodation and benefits they can afford. The whole point is to remove them as a member of our tribe because they not only failed to contribute they caused harm, why should we work to support them?

[Skyryder]

This book is about the Scott Watson case. I haven't read it but have just read a review. In summary, the reviewer says that the book raises some valid and disquieting questions. However he also notes that it is full of the authors opinions which are at times pesky and uninformed.

Who is the reviewer? The one I read is by a lawyer. My daughter bought it home from her work. It's also interesting that Pope will not respond to the book. Just read the book then make up your own mind on whether Watson is innocent or guilty.

Skyryder

[scumdog]

I've said it before: 'Smoking gun' murders (where the offender is caught in the act of the evidence is so compelling and overwhelming - not just circumstancial) should be death.

For those not comfortable with that all I can say is:
If YOU want them kept alive YOU pay for their existence - I sure as hell don't want to waste my good tax money keeping a waste of space alive for 10 to 20 years.

[Hitcher]

Ahh, but taxpayers don't get the right to decide how their taxes should be allocated. Otherwise my hard-earned contributions to the Gummint's coffers would be funding a Royal New Zealand Armoured Corps with proper armour! And motorcycle-only roads. And free beer for the over-50s.

[jazbug5]

you dont watch CSI do you?

Oh.. you mean all those flashy graphics and clever computer programmes that tell you who the baddie is in the amount of time it takes to toast a slice of bread actually do exist? Oh, goodie.

No, actually- a fair point in some ways, but DNA evidence requires there to be DNA left behind. Certains types of revolting murderer who plan these things have also been watching CSI, and know all about fingernails and the removal of fibres and hairs. From what I understand, DNA testing actually takes absolutely ages and is prohibitively expensive. Can any of the police officers here tell us how often DNA is recovered and tested? And how long it can potentially take? Then it depends on a match, which partly depends upon luck etc, by which time the f*cker could well have been having a lovely time for years...

The thing is- most murders and most child abuse/murder cases (and that's the one that really gets everyone's blood boiling) are perpetrated by people known to the victim- in fact, they are most often family members.
They won't be getting executed, you know. They will most likely cop a temporary insanity plea. For me, this is a current concern as my good mate's two children were murdered two weeks ago by a close family member. We are waiting to hear this used in the defense, and it's BS. I've thought a lot since about whether this is going to change my opinion on the death penalty (just personally, I can't talk for the remaining family). As much as I want this person to suffer for what they did, I still remain very uncomfortable with appointing the state as executioner. How many of us think that the state is God-like and infallible in its doings? Do we want to give it the power of life and death?

Murder and other dark, 'bestial' acts are frightening and confusing; certainty and moral absolutism often seem to offer security of a sort... but at what price? We can't just 'clean away the evil'. It seems to be part of our species, unfortunately, on a very primal level.

[SARGE]

Oh.. you mean all those flashy graphics and clever computer programmes that tell you who the baddie is in the amount of time it takes to toast a slice of bread actually do exist? Oh, goodie.

No, actually- a fair point in some ways, but DNA evidence requires there to be DNA left behind. Certains types of revolting murderer who plan these things have also been watching CSI, and know all about fingernails and the removal of fibres and hairs. From what I understand, DNA testing actually takes absolutely ages and is prohibitively expensive. Can any of the police officers here tell us how often DNA is recovered and tested? And how long it can potentially take? Then it depends on a match, which partly depends upon luck etc, by which time the f*cker could well have been having a lovely time for years...

no .. the flash graphics and stuff are Hollywood bullshit, but the science behind them is real enough..and i dont believe that DNA testing is prohibitively expensive NOR does it take forever ( in a first world country)..

there is no longer such a thing as the "perfect" crime.. somewhere along the line.. the perp WILL leave a trail of breadcrumbs for those who know what to look for will find.. weather its a DNA Sample, a fingerprint, an eyelash, a shoe print or a picture on an ATM Machine Camera.

all it takes is dedicated, well funded and supplied and well motivated police officers and Crime Scene Investigators..

how many times has your house been broken into and the cops take DAYS to respond?.. i dont know about you , but i have 3 very touchy-feely kids that will totally fuck a crime scene in 20 minutes if it isnt roped off..

[Ocean1]

Ahh, but taxpayers don't get the right to decide how their taxes should be allocated. Otherwise my hard-earned contributions to the Gummint's coffers would be funding a Royal New Zealand Armoured Corps with proper armour! And motorcycle-only roads. And free beer for the over-50s.

Hitcher for President!!

What about some aircraft for the flyboys... and free whiskey for the over 60s?

[Skyryder]

there is no longer such a thing as the "perfect" crime.. somewhere along the line.. the perp WILL leave a trail of breadcrumbs for those who know what to look for will find.. weather its a DNA Sample, a fingerprint, an eyelash, a shoe print or a picture on an ATM Machine Camera.

all it takes is dedicated, well funded and supplied and well motivated police officers and Crime Scene Investigators..

The perfect crime is an unsolved crime. There's plenty of them here in Godzone. Mind you when Popes is the Police Commissioner he'll just fit someone up so has to increase the clearance stats and get a knight hood for his troubles.

Skyryder

[rwh]

Yeah funny that; we noticed on some lame cops and robbers show the other night (Motor Way Patrol or something) that some native in a yellow Anglia was carting passengers on a restricted, no WOF, no Rego and he was given a sticker to go home and get it sorted. WTF? If that'd been you or me (bro) we'd be looking at about a grand! If that's not racist I dunno what is. That level is where a lot of shit starts.

Don't think it's racist. Saw the same thing a few weeks ago with a couple of white kids in a clapped out Torana. I think it's more about trying to raise the public perception of the cops - pity it's only in the eyes of the criminals.

Richard

[SARGE]

The perfect crime is an unsolved crime. There's plenty of them here in Godzone. Mind you when Popes is the Police Commissioner he'll just fit someone up so has to increase the clearance stats and get a knight hood for his troubles.

Skyryder

this poor girl who was found off Hillsboro 2 years ago in a park.. 60 suspects ??? FFS..

and 2 years later they PUT UP POSTERS!

how bout dragging 58 of the suspects into the station and violating a few civil rights?.. there is a 3 year old boy without a mom because of this ..

shamefull

[scumdog]

You're all more cynical than I!!

AND are expecting a Thunderbird performance on an Escort budget.

[Ocean1]

You're all more cynical than I!!

AND are expecting a Thunderbird performance on an Escort budget.

My expectations are heavily coloured by my experiences with the local constabulary in the deep south when I was a kid.

One of the local cops always turned up at school rugby practice.

Truancy was rare, the local cops would see you more often than not and escort you home by the ear.

The black Mariah waited in the pub car park at closing time, not to ping transgressors but to give the few die-hard regulars a lift home.

Every second Friday they'd track uncle George down mid evening and put him in the cell for the night, (tough job, usually took three of them). In the morning they’d feed him and send him home. This was the same guy they’d call if they needed a search boat down the coast, at no charge.

The kid up the road got caught riding a "borrowed" pushbike, summary sentence was cutting all the firewood the widow down the road needed for a month.

Unworkable today? Probably.
What's the difference between then and now? Respect, we respected the authority of the men themselves, not their office. And they deserved it.

Oh there was the odd arsehole in the local station but even they had the basic cultural principles hard wired: they were there for the community, not the force. If a bit of applied "natural justice" could teach a boy that there are always consequences then maybe he's less likely to encounter the official version a few years later.

How can we respect the current enforcement policies? Who are they designed to benefit? What are those members of the police who put a successful conviction ahead of honesty teaching us about how we should behave?

I doubt the change I've seen in the way our police carry out their jobs has much to do with budget. Maybe it's a response to a less disciplined, less considerate population.

So, which happened first, the chicken or the egg? There's a saying that always grates with me: "Don't sweat the small stuff".
I wonder if we understood our place, learned our responsibilities better when the local cops paid more attention to the small stuff, before it got serious.

[kro]

I have debated this elsewhere and it has always divided whole Kingdoms and set friend against friend wife against husband, and idiot against politician.

On the surface I am against it, but I can not honestly say what I would do if some mangy piece of shite took the life of one of my family, and was shown on TV sticking his tongue out, smiling, and waving to the reporters. I think at that point, the father in me would go apeshit, and scream veangeance.

My question would be , do you think harsher "deterrents" will bring the crime rate down?. Personally, I think they would, and this is a hot topic presently with the "life" sentence topic being thrown about. It seems a large percentage of our country dont think we are hard enough on criminals.