egafd.com

I'm still unsure of who you're talking about. Are you asking me what I prefer would have happened to the Jew/Slav prisoners or the people within the 3rd Reich responsible for the atrocities?

My answer, though, is the same: sky.

Can you explain what you'd get out of Ian Huntley (or any other killer) being executed by the state?

Fuck me Sam I would get nothing except revenge...you think people responsible for Belsen should be allowed to watch Sky in a cell...? fuck off!!

Well, killing is exactly the option the 3rd Reich would take. I choose to distance myself from that mentality. If you'd prefer a world where animals are killed by animals for acting like animals then that's fair enough but that's a whole lot of beastly acts going on.

Again, I think it more civilised not to kill people for killing people. And, again, it's analogous to those daft Muslim placards: "Islam is peace - behead those who insult Islam!" You want a system that warns, "Killing is evil - kill and we'll kill you!" Silly when you think about it.

I'll ask you the same question I asked pornhistorian: what do you get out of it?

Ah yes, true justice.

What about the miscarriages of justice that frequently have occurred?
People who have been fitted up or wrongly convicted because of dodgy forensics etc etc. There have been many such miscarriages through the years for offences that decades ago would have resulted in the death penalty.

At least with life sentences, the wrongly convicted have the potential for a second chance.

D

Quite true, just saw, "In The Name of the Father" again the other night and it brought back memories of the 1970's. I remember how the police were able to fit anyone up they liked from the local village idiot to a bunch of Irish people. Juries always believed the police.

I remember at the time thinking that the arrests for the bombings were all bollocks. Terrorists don't "Hang around" waiting to be arrested. I expect the "Hang 'em" brigade wouldn't have apologised, for the miscarriages of justice, if those poor sods had been hamnged, they would have simply repeated the mantra, "There's no smoke without fire, they MUST have been up to something!"

I can't answer for anybody else but I would get satisfaction that justice has been done. I would also take satisfaction that he could not commit the crime again, which has happened so many times when murderers have been released.
I eat meat so I know an animal must be killed but I take no satisfaction in knowing the animal has died. I don't think I could kill a dumb animal unless to put an end to it's suffering. I believe Huntley is suffering and I would have no qualms about giving him the means to kill himself and I'm sure there would be no shortage of volunteers to do the job for him.
No I will not be turning vegetarian/vegan.

Porn Historian,

"Maybe in the past.But thanks to DNA testing this virtually impossible."

Your confidence in modern science is disconcerting. It is not a cure-all.

And in the absence of DNA evidence which is not available in a number of cases?

Given that the majority of murders are committed by people who know the dead person, in many cases close family, unless a murder weapon is found it can be difficult to find incontrovertible DNA evidence pointing at the murder.

Or in the case where DNA evidence has been tampered with? (see comment on police stichup earlier).

Or in the case where the relevant laboratory makes an error? Are scientists totally infallible?

D