I have written previously about the moral case for the reinstatement of capital punishment in Britain - that was in the harrowing case of Lucy Letby. While it was certainly questionable whether the evidence against Letby met the stringent threshold required for such a judgement, Axel Rudakubana obviates the needs for such doubts by A)
Well said Frank. I agree with your analysis of why the death penalty should be reinstated for heinous crimes, particularly indiscriminate terrorism or relating to children. Southport and Sarah Khan would pass my criteria. For reasons I’ve never understood sane advocates become insane anti capital punishment when they become MPs. Maybe they realise how useless politicians are at government?
It would be foolish to put bets on how long Rudakubana will survive in prison.
The rough justice meted out by other inmates, who always revile child killers, will win out and the state won't have to soil its hands with his death.
The death sentence is merited in Rudakubana's case, but the Letby case is as full of holes as Swiss cheese; I'm surprised that you cited it, as enquiries are still ongoing.
Mental illness is probably part of it, but there was too much planning in the Southport murders to make that the story.
I wonder why there is so much visible effort being put into denying it was terrorism. And yet Labout won't engage with the British Council of Muslims but gives money for mosques. Total disconnect. Are Labour in favour of Muslims or not? Baffling.
The commandment ‘thou shalt not kill’ has nothing to do with capital punishment. It simply states that murder is wrong, something which even an atheist would agree with. Capital punishment has always been an accepted punishment by the Catholic Church and has for centuries been enshrined in Canon Law. Unfortunately Frankie Bergoglio has, in his usual annoying way, muddied the waters by saying that the death penalty has no place in modern society. I believe he has removed it from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, something which he has no right to do, even though he is the Pope. (As an aside, most of us traditionalist Catholics wish he would sod off and stop persecuting us). The do-gooders of all denominations are simply allowing themselves to be led by the modern world of woke ideology, rather than looking for true justice. “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord”, something which I agree with entirely. The Letby case is a minefield, but Rudakubana is not. It’s so bleeding obvious to most right minded people that the only solution is the rope. As a Catholic would I open the trapdoor? Too damn right I would!!
I’m afraid, as an atheist, the religious argument cuts little ice with me.
I too am an atheist as you know Frank but I have to take slight issue:
The actual commandment states: 'Thou shalt do no murder'
'Judicial killing is not murder'
I also have no problem with at least 6 of the 10 commandments which anyone with any sense could follow. Even the ones that are practically impossible such as 'Thou shalt not commit adultery' ;o)
I agree that the death penalty would be appropriate for someone who admits willingly to murder. Why should the state keep a murderer alive for decades, feeding, housing and clothing him when, as you say, he has deprived others of life?
However, it requires the murderer to willingly and freely admit to their crimes because it would be a slippery slope down to "well, he seems to be guilty doesn't he?"
Interestingly, I was watching The Guardians of the Galaxy film the other day and the heroes get sent to a prison where the guards are only there to stop the prisoners escaping. They don't care what the prisoners do inside the prison, who gets hurt, who gets killed or what happens. So maybe that would also be an option - prisons that run themselves. Although they'd need to be sorted into different categories - put all the murderers together, all the drug lords together, all the rapists together. Then ensure they have no contact with the outside world - no phones, no visits, no letters, no computers or TVs, no calendars, no books or films.
Well said Frank. I agree with your analysis of why the death penalty should be reinstated for heinous crimes, particularly indiscriminate terrorism or relating to children. Southport and Sarah Khan would pass my criteria. For reasons I’ve never understood sane advocates become insane anti capital punishment when they become MPs. Maybe they realise how useless politicians are at government?
It would be foolish to put bets on how long Rudakubana will survive in prison.
The rough justice meted out by other inmates, who always revile child killers, will win out and the state won't have to soil its hands with his death.
The death sentence is merited in Rudakubana's case, but the Letby case is as full of holes as Swiss cheese; I'm surprised that you cited it, as enquiries are still ongoing.
I hope he serves a very short sentence and his every waking moment is spent in abject terror that retribution is only a shank away.
Mental illness is probably part of it, but there was too much planning in the Southport murders to make that the story.
I wonder why there is so much visible effort being put into denying it was terrorism. And yet Labout won't engage with the British Council of Muslims but gives money for mosques. Total disconnect. Are Labour in favour of Muslims or not? Baffling.
The commandment ‘thou shalt not kill’ has nothing to do with capital punishment. It simply states that murder is wrong, something which even an atheist would agree with. Capital punishment has always been an accepted punishment by the Catholic Church and has for centuries been enshrined in Canon Law. Unfortunately Frankie Bergoglio has, in his usual annoying way, muddied the waters by saying that the death penalty has no place in modern society. I believe he has removed it from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, something which he has no right to do, even though he is the Pope. (As an aside, most of us traditionalist Catholics wish he would sod off and stop persecuting us). The do-gooders of all denominations are simply allowing themselves to be led by the modern world of woke ideology, rather than looking for true justice. “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord”, something which I agree with entirely. The Letby case is a minefield, but Rudakubana is not. It’s so bleeding obvious to most right minded people that the only solution is the rope. As a Catholic would I open the trapdoor? Too damn right I would!!
Ditto. I'd trip the drop for free and wouldn't lose a second of sleep about offing the murdering little bastard.
Spot on Frank, as ever, you speak for millions.
Thou shalt not kill
I’m afraid, as an atheist, the religious argument cuts little ice with me.
I too am an atheist as you know Frank but I have to take slight issue:
The actual commandment states: 'Thou shalt do no murder'
'Judicial killing is not murder'
I also have no problem with at least 6 of the 10 commandments which anyone with any sense could follow. Even the ones that are practically impossible such as 'Thou shalt not commit adultery' ;o)
I agree that the death penalty would be appropriate for someone who admits willingly to murder. Why should the state keep a murderer alive for decades, feeding, housing and clothing him when, as you say, he has deprived others of life?
However, it requires the murderer to willingly and freely admit to their crimes because it would be a slippery slope down to "well, he seems to be guilty doesn't he?"
Interestingly, I was watching The Guardians of the Galaxy film the other day and the heroes get sent to a prison where the guards are only there to stop the prisoners escaping. They don't care what the prisoners do inside the prison, who gets hurt, who gets killed or what happens. So maybe that would also be an option - prisons that run themselves. Although they'd need to be sorted into different categories - put all the murderers together, all the drug lords together, all the rapists together. Then ensure they have no contact with the outside world - no phones, no visits, no letters, no computers or TVs, no calendars, no books or films.