In addition to what WoF and BM have stated previously:

1) Studies in the USA have shown that the death penalty is not regarded as a deterrent to criminals.
2) Every single death penalty case in the US has been appealed over and over again. There was one particular case where the guy pleaded guilty and couldn't be bothered fighting a case that he knew he'd lose. Amnesty appealed on his behalf, against his will. As BM said, the costs involved are absurd.

Later research in the USA has shown that up to 5-10% of cases where a person has been executed, they've later been found innocent due to more evidence or better technology. In most cases, the convicted person was black.

An interesting fact: if a kid in the bad parts of Miami shoots someone and is sent to Death Row, it will actually increase his life expectancy compared to staying home.

The only way capital punishment works, if, you don't kill the person because of punishment, but you kill them because of the enormous risk of keeping them alive.
Now, I still disagree with this, but in the case of a terrorist ring leader like Osama Bin Laden (who was captured by the brittish, and held untill the Americans could rescue him, of course he escaped), or something like 3:10 to Yuma (as in the movie that recently came out), where someone of extreme risk is captured, and you're in enemy territory, or very close to it, then maybe, under those extreme circumstances, killing your victim is the only choice, if of course, he/ she poses a great threat alive and free.
But this wouldn't even be put under trail, it would more be a military execution, so even that doesn't realy count as captial punishment.

Over here in England, we have a prison overcrowding problem. Therefore, prisoners are being released early and continuing with their shenanigans. That's why I would prefer more executions.

And just how many crimes would you make capital offences in order to make any difference at all to overcrowding?

I'm not sure, but I sure as hell know that I'm moving to another country when I have the money. Possibly America. I know the crime rates won't be any better, but at least I'll be in a place where I've always wanted to stay.

But, I know I'm going off topic, so i'll choose to end this post now.

Wait, you want to live in America?

Your logic has major flaws. As BM implied, would you execute people for smaller crimes even if they didn't kill or hurt anyone?

And you want to move from the UK into America? Good luck filling in all the immigration and security papers (Yes, you'll be forced too even if you're British). And I hope you'll have a lot of money - The NHS may suck but at least they won't leave you dying on the street when you've been injured because you can't afford to pay for your healthcare.

Did I ever say i thought that moving to America would be easy? No. I know my logic has major flaws, but in my eyes, people committing any crime are a waste of time and money and must be dispatched as quickly as possible.

And Used - yes, I do. I want to move to the state I lived in for about a year when I was a very young child. It was a farm area.

If you'll read the topic and especially what Bullet Magnet said, dispatching them takes a lot more time and money than locking them up. This makes your logic even more flawed. :P

But about the USA thing. It's your choice in the end where you want to live, but remember this: Things you saw through the eyes of a child look very, VERY much different through the eyes of an adult. This includes places and areas. And trust me on this 'cause I've had to deal with it very often throughout my life.

That's one of the things about childhood. You don't know very much. :P And I miss my childhood ignorance a hell of a lot sometimes. :( But now we're straying off-topic.

Also note that most people in jail over here in England are because they aren't paying tax rather than those who murder. Monetary crimes are alot more serious here than anything involving injuring or killing people. I'm not even bloody joking, it's a joke over here.

Life sentences would seem a greater punishment (provided they're not kept in too much class, which seems to be the case. Homeless people deliberately get thrown in jail because it's better than being on the street...wtf) than death penalty, however, after a while a prisoner could easily become used to it and not give a s*it, the places are fairly lax anyway (there was news about prisoners getting hold of drugs in there...yeah...), and the fact that life sentences never are these days. I've heard of people having a life sentence for about 5 years, then getting out. Point being?

I don't think there really is a right solution to this...too many scumbags as it is, jails full, planet overpopulation, life sentences not working, but is death easy way out blah blah blah...
Neither option seems viable these days. We need holy judgment or something, I swear. Hopefully, if our technology gets good enough, we can read peoples minds with them, to prove innocence or guilt. Rather than a freakin' court. Wonder how long it'll take for that though.

Recording their brainwaves isn't the issue, interpreting them is, which is pretty damn impossible. The mind is not a book that might be read with the proper equipment, most of our thoughts do not even occur descriptively (your mind's voice), rather conceptually, which can neither be represented in any other form without the thinker translating for us. You'd need a willing participant to interpret your readings, essentially telling you what he is thinking in the usual way. [/offtopic]

WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS CUT OUT EITHER THEIR INNER EAR ON ONE SIDE AND/OR EYE ON THE OTHER SIDE

Yep, English prisons are the shit. And in this case I don't mean "the shit" as in awesome, I mean the shit as in....well, shit. I don't think I could mention shit any more in 1 post without getting onto a discussion on laxatives, but that pretty much is still accurate on the standards of the British justice system.


And truth is, the appallingly good prison standards, combined with the soft sentences, is another reason for me being in favour of capital punishment.

And I still maintain that the method of with a single bullet would be cheaper, quicker and ore economic. And it can't be murder when the guy getting killed is a murderer. As far as I'm concerned, once you commit that kind of crime and violate someone else's human rights to such an extent, you no longer deserve human rights yourself, and hence quick n' easy executions are not murder.

Having said that, I believe Peter Martin was 100% in the right when he killed a burglar and wounded another when they broke into his house, and that he shoudn't have gone to jail, but that's a different kettle of fish. Martin killed a guy who'd broken into his house, could be armed, no knowing what he'd do, so I say that's not murder, but is instead self defence against unknown dangers from criminals who've broken into your house at night and for all he knew at the time may have been armed. To me that isn't murder, not at all.

I'm actually thinking Zerox's suggestion of divine judgment may be the only thing that'd 100% truly work, assuming it was the real God speaking first hand.

Another problem I have with capital punishment is the fact that the judicial system is basically hiring a government sanctioned murderer.

What happens if he begins to enjoy his work? What separates him from them, apart from the wishy washy idea of 'Serving Justice'?

Yeah, that is a good point. If they start to enjoy the killing......I have no real answer to that. But other than that I still think there's nothing wrong with it, as like I said, killing a killer =/= murder. If enjoyment starts to set in though, then that is worrying.

You know what? You win. You've proved my logic wrong (along with a few others). Congratulations.

And i have considered how I saw things as a child - now it would be nice to see them how they really are.

Just keep in mind all of the luxuries America has to offer: no free healthcare, corrupt politics, an impending national debt, and growing prices for pretty much everything due to America's dependency on oil.

From Iraq.

The only good thing about America is your right to protect your land (That Peter Martin guy would most likely be a free man if that had happened in the USA).