Paedophile to be beheaded and crucifiedFollow

Paedophile to be beheaded and crucified in Saudi Arabia for string of sex attacks where he left toddler to die in desert
Last updated at 8:54 AM on 04th November 2009



Article

Wish they would do that to some of the street scum here.

Apart from giving them the opportunity to re-enact a famous scene from Life of Brian, what difference would it make?

Yeah, because they would be dead. Death is pretty good at stopping recidivism in its tracks. Of course, by our justice system, the death penalty is more expensive than life in prison so that kind of nullifies that point. Also, the death penalty as a deterrent isn't really working out so hot here, unless you're referring to deterring the criminal from committing future crimes.

The problem is not really that Americans are not clever enough to make a legal system work. It's that for the death penalty to be fair, all legal avenues must be exhausted. This is long and expensive. Legally executing someone is more expensive than keeping them in prison for life. Which, by the way, also prevents recidivism. And every study shows that the deterrent thing clearly doesn't work.

The only benefit of the death penalty is that satisfies the baying mob's desire for BLOOD. Otherwise it's more expensive, less safe, and more prone to error.

But yeah, I can see the BLOOD bit being attractive.

To be fair, chavs are pretty annoying.

Not that I encounter them often, working in Westminster and living in West Kensignton, but you know, from what I see on the news.

On average, though, it is more expensive. Are you advocating some kind of hybrid system, where only those who plead guilty are executed? That makes (most) people less inclined to plead guilty, does it not? Generally, the court tries to entice people to plead guilty with the promise of a softer punishment, to save money.



If I leave my door open, I'm actually fairly unlikely to be burgled. Anecdotes aren't very persuasive.



And life in prison doesn't remove people from society? Huh.

Edited, Nov 4th 2009 12:31pm by Kavekk

As a deterrent, the death penalty is really useless in its current state. What needs to be done is live broadcasts of the events, preferably during a halftime event during large sporting events. Okay, it probably wouldn't deter anyone that way either, but damn, would it make sports much more interesting.

It'd really be better if he was imprisoned for life. But, **** it. The people who want beheadings will always call for beheadings.

No, it isn't. Once again you're talking about a system, not the punishment. If you have a system that makes people languish on Death Row for years and is bogged down with bureaucracy that is just a bad system. It's not a reflection on a particular punishment.



I'm not talking about systems at all. If you cold bloodedly murder someone in a room full of eye-witnesses and have no excuse as to why you did it other than he looked at you funny, it's a pretty clear cut case.

You and that other guy seemed obsessed with a crappy system that might possibly execute undeserving people for whom there could be doubt as to their guilt. But no one is talking about that.

There is no reason not to execute those who are deserving and whose guilt has been established just because a crappy system in another country might occasionally execute people in error.

There are plenty of convicted people in the world facing all sorts of punishments who have been caught red handed and who can't deny what they did. If one of those commits a crime so bad it's deserving of a death sentence then do it.

If someone is facing a death sentence but there is doubt over whether he committed his crime then you need a system that can deal with that and how you do that is not what we're talking about here.

If you want to start a thread debating the relative merits of the world's various penal systems that is up to you. I'm just pointing out that the world is full of criminals for whom there is no doubt as to their crimes and if one of those is worthy of the death sentence then I have no problem with it.



That's an ignorant thing to say. The anecdotes of people who live in a place and have done so for years tell you what it's like to live there. That's how people know what it's like to live in a certain place. And when thousands or millions of people tell you exactly the same thing that's how you learn for sure what a particular place is like.

If for some reason you don't believe all those people, you are welcome to get on a plane and see for yourself with your own eyes. I personally have visited many such places in the world and can testify as to what it's like first hand.

Sadly, most of the places where you can leave your wallet unguarded or walk home late at night free from muggers or rapists have the downside of being run by dictatorial or oppressive governments. So they might make an interesting place to go on holiday but you wouldn't want to live there.



Not if they're let out no. And if they're not (rare, because 'life' rarely means life) then they rack up huge costs at the taxpayer's expense.

Ok, I'm TOTALLY against the death penalty, but after hearing about the long time it takes to set up and go through an enlectric chair or lethal injection execution, and how often they are stuffed up, IF you are going to have a death penalty at all, I'm much in favour of a very very sharp sword/axe/guillotine.

I'd prefer Battle Royale. I bet Phillip Morris & Lockheed Martin would sponsor it. Hell, it would be bigger than (American) Football!

Winner gets to sit on death row until there are enough contestants for Battle Royale All Stars.

To be fair, I think the level of UK based poster was not representative of the UK as a whole. We needed someone to lower the balance a bit.

As horrible as I think the death penalty, I'm probably f*cked up enough to watch this.

I mean the RL equivalent. I've seen Battle Royale and Battle Royale II.

Edited, Nov 4th 2009 8:52am by LockeColeMA