War hero soldier stabbed to death - Polidicks

That's fucking shit, the guy survives a bloody war to be stabbed by some disrespecting tosser in his own country

Hmph. The killer would be better off being executed, though. Life in and out of a Scottish prison is pretty much the same.

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18024274]The three main reasons I'm against the death penalty are : 1) It's actually cheaper to let them rot in prison 2) They rot in prison 3) Being wrongly sentenced to death when innocent must be the absolute worst thing ever.[/QUOTE] 1) Only an overly sympathetic idiot thinks that it costs more to cloth, feed, and keep clean a person for 15 years than it does to buy a single bullet and end a life that doesn't deserve to live. 2) Who fucking cares if they rot? If he is going to die in the end why give him longer life? Besides, I've talked to people from Scotland. The place is a shit hole, and the guy is probably being better fed in prison than he was on the streets. 3) Only execute him when there is no doubt, it is not like every case is some drama-laden episode from CSI where the criminal is actually innocent. [quote] Yeah kill him then he'll suffer and really learn from his action You really don't know how long 15 years is, when you hit 15, pm me and tell me how long that felt like. [/quote] Yea, because putting him in prison for 15 years is justice, and killing a man who STABBED someone to death is TERRIBLE. And it is really more like 10 or 12 years on good behavior. Also, I'm 18 years old buddy, try again. Lol @ people on Facepunch acting like they've "been around" and are knowledgeable. You sound like a tool.

[QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]1) Only an overly sympathetic idiot thinks that it costs more to cloth, feed, and keep clean a person for 15 years than it does to buy a single bullet and end a life that doesn't deserve to live. 2) Who fucking cares if they rot? If he is going to die in the end why give him longer life? Besides, I've talked to people from Scotland. The place is a shit hole, and the guy is probably being better fed in prison than he was on the streets. 3) Only execute him when there is no doubt, it is not like every case is some drama-laden episode from CSI where the criminal is actually innocent. Yea, because putting him in prison for 15 years is justice, and killing a man who STABBED someone to death is TERRIBLE. And it is really more like 10 or 12 years on good behavior. Also, I'm 18 years old buddy, try again. Lol @ people on Facepunch acting like they've "been around" and are knowledgeable. You sound like a tool.[/QUOTE] 1) It actually costs more to kill, since sadly we don't live in Ex USSR/China where you can just kill people. 3) It's not, but innocent people get killed if everybody is just executed

What's so costly about a bit of wood and rope? i.e., prettied up gallows.

[QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]3) Only execute him when there is no doubt, it is not like every case is some drama-laden episode from CSI where the criminal is actually innocent.[/QUOTE] Good idea! While we're at it we can have warrantless wiretapping and home intrusions, but only if they're definitely a criminal. And abduct and torture American citizens but only the government is absolutely sure they're a terrorist! That way, there will never be any abuses of power. You're a brilliant boy. [editline]05:20PM[/editline] [QUOTE=angelangel;18025787]What's so costly about a bit of wood and rope? i.e., prettied up gallows.[/QUOTE] Appeals.

I wonder what the suspect looks like.

[QUOTE=Jessesmith1;18024073]it was a hit not everyone can take out a 28 year old seasoned soldier. albeit he's part of Scottish military.[/QUOTE] Well, if he stabbed him in back, there isn't too much he could do about it. [editline]06:10PM[/editline] As backstab means instakill

[QUOTE=TH89;18025805]Good idea! While we're at it we can have warrantless wiretapping and home intrusions, but only if they're definitely a criminal. And abduct and torture American citizens but only the government is absolutely sure they're a terrorist! [/quote] How can you compare invasion of privacy and torture with the justice system? That's like saying if you allow a cop to arrest someone for drunk driving that automatically means people will start having their licenses revoked because there is a chance they are going to drink and drive. There is no correlation.

[QUOTE=Jonnerz3D;18023277]Makes me sick. Source: [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8325702.stm[/url][/QUOTE] What should make you sick is that anyone gets stabbed to death at all ever.

heh... Guardsman McGee...

[QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]1) Only an overly sympathetic idiot thinks that it costs more to cloth, feed, and keep clean a person for 15 years than it does to buy a single bullet and end a life that doesn't deserve to live.[/QUOTE] Life in prison is only cheaper because they insist on "death by lethal injection". But you're right, a softpoint bullet through the heart and turn the body over to the family of the deceased, cheaper than life in prison. Quite frankly I don't see the difference between the two in terms of suffering

[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;18026838]Life in prison is only cheaper because they insist on "death by lethal injection". But you're right, a softpoint bullet through the heart and turn the body over to the family of the deceased, cheaper than life in prison.[/QUOTE] Um no Appeals

[QUOTE=RR_Raptor65;18026838]Life in prison is only cheaper because they insist on "death by lethal injection". But you're right, a softpoint bullet through the heart and turn the body over to the family of the deceased, cheaper than life in prison. Quite frankly I don't see the difference between the two in terms of suffering[/QUOTE] Yeah shoot him or inject him with cyanide oops he wasn't guilty Fantastic justice system you Yanks have

[QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]1) Only an overly sympathetic idiot thinks that it costs more to cloth, feed, and keep clean a person for 15 years than it does to buy a single bullet and end a life that doesn't deserve to live.[/QUOTE] You wouldn't expect it, but it actually does cost more due to appeals. [editline]07:41PM[/editline] [QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]2) Who fucking cares if they rot? If he is going to die in the end why give him longer life? Besides, I've talked to people from Scotland. The place is a shit hole, and the guy is probably being better fed in prison than he was on the streets.[/QUOTE] Would you rather very quickly end this guy's life or let him spend the next 12-15 years locked up, thinking about what he did? Which do you think is a worse punishment in the end? [editline]07:43PM[/editline] [QUOTE=StormHammer;18025600]3) Only execute him when there is no doubt[/QUOTE] You can't have a situation where there's "no doubt".

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18028565]You can't have a situation where there's "no doubt".[/QUOTE] Then by your argument, couldn't Osama Bin Laden possibly be innocent?

[QUOTE=David29;18028775]Then by your argument, couldn't Osama Bin Laden possibly be innocent?[/QUOTE] If you really really want to go there, then statistically, it's not completely impossible. But that's not my point. If you only ever executed criminals in cases in which there was "no doubt", you wouldn't be executing as many as you do execute per year. From [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution[/url] "At least 39 executions are claimed to have been carried out in the U.S. in the face of evidence of innocence or serious doubt about guilt."

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18029356]If you really really want to go there, then statistically, it's not completely impossible. But that's not my point. If you only ever executed criminals in cases in which there was "no doubt", you wouldn't be executing as many as you do execute per year.[/QUOTE] That last part confuses me. It doesn't make any sense. But anyway, the whole idea holds up perfectly well as long as it is correctly used. If a man is caught stabbing a man, his wife and their child and is caught on two CCTV cameras, as well as being witnessed by several people, then capital punishment is justified. Otherwise, even if there is a shred of doubt, standard punishments should be handed out. Also bear in mind that currently the British prisons are hardly fit to be used for punishment. I don't mean that they are not in good in good enough condition for it, rather that they are in too good condition. Prisons are equipped with all the luxuries of the standard home and not only are prisoners not being punished properly but they probably enjoying it. Also, the upkeep is increased which costs the taxpayer more. We need our prisons to be less like the Hilton and more like Nova Prospekt.

:ohdear: That really sucks.

[QUOTE=David29;18029721]That last part confuses me. It doesn't make any sense. [/QUOTE] Well, it's hard to understand so here is something I made just for you. [img]http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/6382/graph2q.png[/img] Uhh the line should go to the other way but you get my point.

[QUOTE=David29;18029721]But anyway, the whole idea holds up perfectly well as long as it is correctly used. If a man is caught stabbing a man, his wife and their child and is caught on two CCTV cameras, as well as being witnessed by several people, then capital punishment is justified. Otherwise, even if there is a shred of doubt, standard punishments should be handed out. Also bear in mind that currently the British prisons are hardly fit to be used for punishment. I don't mean that they are not in good in good enough condition for it, rather that they are in too good condition. Prisons are equipped with all the luxuries of the standard home and not only are prisoners not being punished properly but they probably enjoying it. Also, the upkeep is increased which costs the taxpayer more. We need our prisons to be less like the Hilton and more like Nova Prospekt.[/QUOTE] Okay, I know I said I was finished, but you're being civil about it (unlike the other guy) and besides I agree with you on some things. You say if there is "even a shred of doubt" then capital punishment is not justified - which I very much agree with. But wikipedia (depends if you believe it or not, but I do) says that a number of possibly innocent people were sentenced to death, which would indicate that there are not already such rigorous standards of trialling (which there are, but even these were apparently not enough to stop these deaths.) I agree with you that British prisons shouldn't be nearly as comfortable as they are, and that the taxpayer shouldn't have to foot the bill. However, believe it or not, due to the appeals process and a lot of bureaucratic issues, capital punishment is actually [I]more expensive than keeping prisoners alive[/i]. At the core of the issue, however, I believe that a life sentence is more punishing in a lot of ways than a quick death. If you're an atheist, your belief dictates that dead people's minds simply cease to exist. Is it not better, then, to let them live out the rest of their lives in isolation (and possible atonement for their crimes) than to let them escape it and die forever?

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18030236]You say if there is "even a shred of doubt" then capital punishment is not justified - which I very much agree with. But wikipedia (depends if you believe it or not, but I do) says that a number of possibly innocent people were sentenced to death, which would indicate that there are not already such rigorous standards of trialling (which there are, but even these were apparently not enough to stop these deaths.) I agree with you that British prisons shouldn't be nearly as comfortable as they are, and that the taxpayer shouldn't have to foot the bill. However, believe it or not, due to the appeals process and a lot of bureaucratic issues, capital punishment is actually [I]more expensive than keeping prisoners alive[/i]. At the core of the issue, however, I believe that a life sentence is more punishing in a lot of ways than a quick death. If you're an atheist, your belief dictates that dead people's minds simply cease to exist. Is it not better, then, to let them live out the rest of their lives in isolation (and possible atonement for their crimes) than to let them escape it and die forever?[/QUOTE] I don't really want to comment on the wikipedia thing as, personally, I don't trust wikipedia (from personal experience as well from being told not to by various proffesionals) and as we have differing opinions on it's reliability I will move on... I do agree that bureaurocracy would cause large costs but in an ideal world I would have the system as simplified as possible (e.g. you have been found guilty beyond all doubt, therefore you get no appeal at all and you are off to the gallows) but unfortunately this isn't an idea world and bureaurocracy will always exist, so I suppose you are right to an extent. On the other hand, I won't write it off completely without all the financial figures being shown to me. Regarding your last point, I would actually agree but unfortunately we hit the same wall again where current prison conditions don't really make life sentances that horrifying.

[QUOTE=David29;18030534]I don't really want to comment on the wikipedia thing as, personally, I don't trust wikipedia (from personal experience as well from being told not to by various proffesionals) and as we have differing opinions on it's reliability I will move on... I do agree that bureaurocracy would cause large costs but in an ideal world I would have the system as simplified as possible (e.g. you have been found guilty beyond all doubt, therefore you get no appeal at all and you are off to the gallows) but unfortunately this isn't an idea world and bureaurocracy will always exist, so I suppose you are right to an extent. On the other hand, I won't write it off completely without all the financial figures being shown to me. Regarding your last point, I would actually agree but unfortunately we hit the same wall again where current prison conditions don't really make life sentances that horrifying.[/QUOTE] Fair enough, I'll leave it at that then.

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18030556]Fair enough, I'll leave it at that then.[/QUOTE] Good man, glad to be able to have a civilised debate.

[QUOTE=David29;18030583]Good man, glad to be able to have a civilised debate.[/QUOTE] Indeed. I love it when debates don't end in name-calling. Sometimes rare on Facepunch.

[QUOTE=David29;18030534]I don't really want to comment on the wikipedia thing as, personally, I don't trust wikipedia (from personal experience as well from being told not to by various proffesionals) and as we have differing opinions on it's reliability I will move on... I do agree that bureaurocracy would cause large costs but in an ideal world I would have the system as simplified as possible (e.g. you have been found guilty beyond all doubt, therefore you get no appeal at all and you are off to the gallows) but unfortunately this isn't an idea world and bureaurocracy will always exist, so I suppose you are right to an extent. On the other hand, I won't write it off completely without all the financial figures being shown to me. Regarding your last point, I would actually agree but unfortunately we hit the same wall again where current prison conditions don't really make life sentances that horrifying.[/QUOTE] Wikipedia is just a summary written by somebody in the class, usually normal kid has done it, but sometimes a retard has operated the pencil, so you need to look the sources too. But it's correct very often, various professionals know jack shit. (Professionals are just those who can remember what they have read from a book) The correctional facilities are to make the prisoners go on a correct way, not to be a way of revenge. Those who go out on a rampage and kill a dozen of people don't belong to the prison, they belong to the mental institutes. Not saying that we should flood the streets with inmates, just that they should get the help they need, not get executed.

Execute the guy who stabbed him.

[QUOTE=evilking1;18030650]Wikipedia is just a summary written by somebody in the class, usually normal kid has done it, but sometimes a retard has operated the pencil, so you need to look the sources too. But it's correct very often, various professionals know jack shit. (Professionals are just those who can remember what they have read from a book)[/quote] I was nodding in agreement up until I read about what you put about the professionals, as they happen to be the Dr's I am working with at university and would hope they know what they are talking about... [quote]The correctional facilities are to make the prisoners go on a correct way, not to be a way of revenge. Those who go out on a rampage and kill a dozen of people don't belong to the prison, they belong to the mental institutes. Not saying that we should flood the streets with inmates, just that they should get the help they need, not get executed.[/QUOTE] Agh, 'correctional facility'. I hate that word. I'm sorry but I get the general impression that you are the type of person who believes that you can make someone not do something by simply telling them not to. Ok, yes, I agree some people do actually need help and should be treated if they have a mental problem, but more often then not a lot of crime comes from people believing they can do stuff and not worry about the consequences. That is what punishment is about, deterence by saying "if you do something bad then bad things will happen". It's natural. If I know that a certain action will result in a bad experience, I don't do it - hence why I don't go intentionally putting my hand in fires.

[QUOTE=David29;18030928]I was nodding in agreement up until I read about what you put about the professionals, as they happen to be the Dr's I am working with at university and would hope they know what they are talking about... Agh, 'correctional facility'. I hate that word. I'm sorry but I get the general impression that you are the type of person who believes that you can make someone not do something by simply telling them not to. Ok, yes, I agree some people do actually need help and should be treated if they have a mental problem, but more often then not a lot of crime comes from people believing they can do stuff and not worry about the consequences. That is what punishment is about, deterence by saying "if you do something bad then bad things will happen". It's natural. If I know that a certain action will result in a bad experience, I don't do it - hence why I don't go intentionally putting my hand in fires.[/QUOTE] Well I would hope so, and they probably do. Wikipedia shouldn't be any bible, but rather a handy reference to anything. It's accurate enough for personal usage and other doodely diidley like this. You need to be an idiot to think that 25 years is nothing compaired to life or execution. If you are ready to kill you are ready to kill no matter what. But it's mostly about the deterrence effect, that's for sure. I like the "correctional facility" term as it describes what the prisons should do. I don't kill people since I go to prison for it, I don't kill since it's a dick thing to do. That's why prisons are, to make people remember that it's a dick thing what they did. And spend a while at it too. And also, people

[QUOTE=BaconDioxide;18029356]If you really really want to go there, then statistically, it's not completely impossible. But that's not my point. If you only ever executed criminals in cases in which there was "no doubt", you wouldn't be executing as many as you do execute per year. From [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution[/url] "At least 39 executions are claimed to have been carried out in the U.S. in the face of evidence of innocence or serious doubt about guilt."[/QUOTE] 39 executions over the course of what, 150 years?