Far-right member motions death penalty

No body has the right to snatch the life of anyone. So its quite rational to give death penalty to such criminals. Infact the punishment should be of the same kind as the crime observed. This is the only possible way to discourage the crimes in the society to let it run peacefully. If I come to know that I will get free myself after some years while having all facilities in the bars, why I will not go to do murder or any other serious crime if I'm too stupid,------

Learn to live by helping others to live their lives full.

Get a rope!

How very suprising(!) When is death sentence appropirate, then? How about starting all the right wing extremists, huh? Bah, if they want this penalty how about starting with the nazis that killed Björn Söderberg, as a start, or would they try not to convict other nazis.

Sd is filled to the brink with law voilators without respect for the law they claim to follow. When a political party makes difference between people based on sexual preference, skin color and origins this are starting to be pretty much like the 18th century....

Sweden will continue to sentence murderers 10 years and use the death sentence for tax evaders ha ha ha

I am positive to death penalties in cases where it is 100% prooved that a person really killed somebody and that this was not like a traffic accident, not a mentally ill person, not in self defence but a pre planned murder done on purpose or in conjunction with robbing a business or a private home and then killing someone. Why let these people spend a number of years in excellent standard prison on tax payers cost, why to feel pitty on them if they killed on purpose? Maybe if penalties are tougher, more people would think twice before commiting a crime. There is also need for more both civil dressed and uniformed police moving around in the community on 24 hrs basis.

Nobody deserves the death panelty , The Problem is that Swedens dimocrats want to take sweden to the old days, maybe to the 18th century. This people are just playing rasistic and crazy !

Ayesha07, where are you from?

@Jack; Nobody deserves the death penalty. How about Hitler and Osama bin laden??

I'd rather go with the law of Quran '

"Believers [always bear in mind the true spirit of faithfulness with God, in adhering to His laws. Remember that to preserve the sanctity of life] Qisaas is prescribed upon you for victims of murder. If the murderer is a free man, then the same free man [should be punished], if he is a slave then the same slave and if the murderer is a woman, then the same woman [should be punished]. [This should be your Law,] but whoever is granted some forgiveness by his brother, then it is incumbent upon him to follow the customary [Diyah] and to gracefully remit to him the due.

This is an allowance from your Lord and His mercy [upon you. You must not take undue advantage from it. Remember that] whoever transgresses [in the implementation of this law] even after this [allowance], he shall then face an extremely painful punishment. And [the law of] Qisas is source of life for you, O people bestowed with understanding, so that you live your lives within the prescribed limits."

Now follows the muslim haters with their messages. Please feel free. You are most welcome to waste your time....

Am I positive to death penalty?

A person that has taken a life of another has simply consumed his/her own right to live. A killer, mentally ill or not, (although I'm really confused about if there are any healthy minds out there who kills for the "fun" of it) is never going to feel regret, sympathy or compassion for another human being no matter how many hours of rehab spent and wasted on the scum bag. Just cut the crap of locking them up in mental facilities and try to "fix" them. He/she will kill you, the "fixer" as soon as opportunity arise without a second thought. I am not talking about accidental deaths, but you also have to be able to proof it isn't accidental or self defense. So yes, I am positive to death penalty.

staffan,does it matter where he's from I'm from northern europe and I agree with 100% of what ayesha07 says.

....everyone does know it cost MORE to kill someone than to keep them in jail for life. You make be reading this and think NO WAY! But look it up for yourself. The cost and time it takes to kill is much higher than dumping them in a hole for life. Plus, if 30 years later, DNA finds they did not do it, you can let them go. Kinda hard when they are dead!

The problem with the deathpenalty is that it is too easy a way our for those who deserve it, and irreversable for those who don't:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/09/will_texas_soon_say_it_execute.html

Oh, and Pengy: why only right wing extermists? Left wing extremist usually do a lot more damage to society. And religious extremist are possibly even worse. How about just 'extremists' then?

The death penalty does not prevent crime and has no place in today's Europe.

Leave the capital punishment to the capitalists which calculate human lives in dollars where they got the say, to the bible and thora thumping followers of the abrahamitic cults in countries where church and state are not separated and eye-for-an-eye is still prescribed as the "law" by them, and to the followers of the muslim cult which will vegetate in mental darkness forever in their dreadful and miserable countries.

@martell; The death penalty does not prevent crime and has no place in today's Europe??

Statistically and scientifically speaking that is a lie!!

@sherkovic, clarify your sources, please!... because, as far as I know, death penalty is pretty irrelevant in terms of crime deterrent. As obvious example, we may mention the USA that remains the only western country that applies death penalty and very murder rate is much higher that in any other western Europe country. Scientifically speaking is a non sense... cost a lot more than life sentences, is morally regrettable and, all in all, does just contribute to increase the level of violence accepted in a society (because if you think that in certain situations killing is right, then why the State only should have this right?)

Sweden Democrats are a bunch of ignorant nazis and this matter just confirms it.

The death penalty is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. And on top of that, scientific research on the matter shows that the death penalty does not deter people from committing crimes. Jurisdictions with the death penalty often have higher murder rates than jurisdictions without, and Canada's murder rate dropped after they abolished the death penalty.

Plus, I don't want the money I pay in taxes used to kill. That makes me, and all tax payers murderers. (Funny thought: would all tax-payers then have to be sentenced to the death penalty?)

Besides, the death penalty seems like the easy way out for the murderer. They won't have to think about what they did and they won't have to live with the fact that they have no freedom (no matter what amenities the prison has, knowing that you're not free and being contained is always very damaging to the human spirit). It's really a "get out of jail free" card for the murderers and a horrible, disgusting state-sanctioned murder for those who are actually innocent but convicted anyway.

You can't have a real sentence to death, without having also a first degree self defence for all citizens back into society.

Aaahhh..my favourite topic! Unless the death penalty is carried out within 5 yrs or less it serves no purpose.

I have this from the 'horses' mouth' so to speak because I have corresponded with death row prisoners in the usa since 1995.

The one penpal who suffers most is the one who has 'life without possibility of parole'

He's dead tired of isolation but is terrified of being put out into general population because there he will always have to watch his back.

We have corresponded for the past 10+ yrs via snail mail and I know he has positively changed his attitude to life in this time.

The death penalty if carried out, as I have said, within 5 yrs or less would be good for child molesters and murderers.

Child molestation is an incurable disease and needs to be stamped out!

Otherwise LWOP is the best because the perp has a looong time to reflect and change.

TV and radio and the odd phone call may be allowed but nothing else!

Death penalty or a heavy fine.. hey remember this is Sweden ;)

It does eliminate repeat crimes.

Vladd777 is right, though. It must be done in a timely manner. As I recall in Great Britain in the 1800's a fellow stepped up in a crowd, levelled a gun at another fellow and blew his head off. Seven days or so later after a trial where the massive number of witnesses who saw everything were called, he was hung. He didn't do it again.

I am a firm believer that there must be two witnesses for a death penalty. It is too easy to fix DNA evidence, etc. and frame someone circumstantially.

The death penalty means there are situations in which killing another human being outside of self-defense is acceptable. It's not. It's barbaric and solves nothing. And frankly, if something is embraced by redneck America and radical Islam at the same time, that's a clear red flag for everyone else to not do it.

Sherkovic. The Quran is not eligible to dictate law, morality or ethics. You have to be really stupid to think that quoting the Quran means anything to any reasonable person who realizes that it's a 1400 year old religious text. Reason and logic dictate law, and both has shown that the state murdering people is not only ethically wrong, but also solves nothing except for making a few deranged people happy because someone was murdered.

Everyone hates child rapists and violent murderers, and we'd all honestly feel a degree of satisfaction from seeing them executed for their crimes.

That doesn't mean it's right, and it doesn't mean we should do it.

@nevon.... you wrote " You have to be really stupid to think that quoting the Quran means anything to any reasonable person who realizes that it's a 1400 year old religious text"

Well reasons and logic is not bound to TIME factor. Aristotle teachings can not simply be igonored on the basis of being old....... if there is hate for Quran, you must not forget that there are more than 1.5 billion, who derives reasons and logic from the same book... and your words can simply lead hate comments later on... and then you will think yourself a wise man at the end of the day... Please educate your self and think you write..

Pointing out the obvious fact that a 1400 year old religious text is unsuitable for law and ethics in the 21st century is not the same thing as hating it. It's a simple fact. The justice prescribed by the Quran involves violence, inhumanity and lots of horrible things. That's fine, most of the world was horrible 1400 years ago, and most of the literature from that time reflects this. However, when you try to push the Quran as a valid source of law and morality in 2009, you shouldn't be upset that people find that outrageous and ridicule you.

There's a rather obvious difference between rednecks on these forums who hate Muslims because they're brown and hate the Quran because the brown people read it, and people who can rationally criticize blind faith in any religious text and it's horrible consequences without foaming at the mouth and wildly suggesting that all Muslims are terrorists.

Also, it's a gross oversimplification to say that 1.5 billion people derive their reason and logic from the Quran when Muslims are so heterogeneous. There are vast sums of Muslims who are non-practicing or moderate or largely secular who, given the choice, would definitely not stone people to death for adultery because the Quran says so. And apart from all this, the number of people who believe in a thing isn't what makes it right or wrong.

There should be a mandatory 'death sentence' for the murder of a policeman.

.period.

"Revenge in the heart of every woman and man

One judge can't kill him but another one can

Lethal injection or electric chair

Have you got the right man? Does anybody care?"

-wilsondub

@ nevon... what I want to say is humans irrespective of their race, color and religion, are sensitive to their possessions which do include their faiths as well. So if you start confiscating or rediculing their possessions, infact you are inviting troubles within the soceity.... as far as 'death to stone' punishment is concerned, it was in all abrahmic religion(Judaism,christianty) but in Quran you wont find the punishment 'stone to death' for adultary though it is practiced in Islamic countries... it is something different . So generalize your statements of disliking rather than targeting a specific one. We as generation need to unify the things or before it is too late and coming generations would just say that 21th century was worse than 6th century...

The comment of Sherkovic at 12:46 Oct 17 is an example of the employment of taqiyya and kitman: the portion Sherkovic quotes from Islamic law is not concerned with mercy or compassion but with the issue of the payment of "blood money" ('diyah') from the perpetrator of a crime (murder) to the family of the victim. There are specific amounts prescribed for this in Islam and it is also the case that this payment of "blood money", as a form of 'compensation' for the crime, underlines the basic inequality in Islam between Moslem and non-Moslem, male and female, and a free person and a slave: the life of a Moslem male is worth more than that of a female Moslem, that of a Moslem male/female is worth more than that of a non-Moslem male/female and the free person more than that of the slave and payments made to the victim's family are on this basis. This is also the foundation under the laws of Dhimmitude whereby non-Moslems live in a persecuted status of considerably reduced legal rights under Islamic domination. Sharia Law is predicated upon this basic inequality and inhumanity which is antithetical to our Western Law, beliefs, values, institutions and governance.

i dont see how an execution can be so expensive. I can knock up a set of gallows that will last 100 years for less than 15,000skr. I will throw in the rope for free,and i will pull the lever too,and in the case of child killers/sexual predators,i will do it for free. If you have ever witnessed a public execution,you will realise the profound effect it has on the people watching,a lethal injection administered in an enclosed room with a few witnesses is not the same thing at all. Personally i would wish everyone respected everyone elses right to life....but some just dont!

Sorry Hejhej, I'm not going to censor myself. All ideas and beliefs are open to criticism and ridicule, including religion. What causes problems in society is not people talking but rather people shutting up even though they think something is wrong, because they're afraid or because it might upset someone.

And welcome Nutcracker. Your archaic knowledge of 15th century Sharia Law is as pointless as always. It's like someone quoting the Old Testament and saying Christianity/Judaism is incompatible with our Western law. There are Muslim countries who either have totally secular laws or are in the process of phasing in secular laws, which proves that Islam is not incompatible with modernity as long as it has a healthy dose of secularism just like Christianity and Judaism, which are both otherwise horrible barbaric ideologies.

@ Nutcracker.. I personally think that there is need of flexibility as far as the decisions of the life of humans are concerned. If someone has been found quilty of murder, so the law of the state may dictate to hang him or put him for certain period of confinement or fine him heavily.......... Decisions must be judicious and based on rationale, so what I think is that the family of the victim may be consulted for the decision making, and if the family members with the mutual consent of justice bodies have some aggrement which can avert another death ,so it can be debated.

If every murderer was executed, eventually there would only be one murderer.

nevon: You are ignorant of the present day: 57 Moslem nations are signatories to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (1990) which directly contradicts the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This article has the texts of both and explains the essential differences: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/Ohmyrus30816.htm Articles 19d, 24 & 25 of CDHRI specifically state that "all rights & freedoms" and "all crime or punishment" "are determined by the Shariah"; all Moslem nations practise Sharia in part or extensively, including stoning, death for apostates, etc. Hej: taqiyya & kitman, too from you: the Mandate of Stoning (Ar-Rajm) is in the aHadith of Bukhari & Muslim which, with the Koran and Sira, are Islam's 'holy' texts & in all of them it is Muhamed who personally gives the order for stoning. Stoning is still the punishment for adultery and often for rape victims (because they have had 'sex outside marriage' as rape victims unless they can provide 4 male witnesses!). There is NO mandate to stone an adulterer in the New Testament: Jesus Christ, in probably the most famous passage of the NT, says "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her" (the adulteress) & when, in shame, the Jews depart, Jesus asks the woman where are her condemners and she answers: "No man, Lord" and Jesus says, "Neither do I condemn thee: go thy way; from henceforth, sin no more." (John 8: 1-11)

Oh yeah, how about Turkey? Vast majority Muslim, yet not a trace of Sharia to be found, largely secular. Pakistan? Fighting radical Islamists as we speak, and has a legislation that has largely phased out religious law. India? World's largest democracy. Indonesia? Working hard to put a leash on all those conservative clerics, and has legislation which is not remotely as you describe.

Your boring walls of text about 7th century Sharia don't apply anymore, because the biggest Muslim countries in the world either have completely secular law (such as Turkey), or largely secular law and a vendetta against Sharia (Pakistan for example). Just because you read a book about Wahhabi's doesn't mean all Muslims are like that.

And all good and nice about the New Testament (which also contains plenty of stupid verses condoning violence/genocide), but then where did the Spanish Inquisition come from? How come the Catholic Church killed and tortured so many in the middle ages? Obviously "some" people thought the Old Testament was just as valid, even though you might want a nice little line between it and the New. It's irrelevant though; comparing religions and trying to figure out which one is less barbaric is pointless. The driving force behind human rights and civil liberties is secularism, not religion.

And if you'd take a breath from reciting the entire 8th century Islamic judicial literature, maybe you would realize that Muslim countries have become and are in the process of becoming secular as well.

Being so militantly antagonistic towards Islam and trying to put all Muslims in the same basket as radicals is stupid and destructive.

@Nutcracker... Historians had been subjected to certain influences and which makes the history quiet doubtful.. (www.faithfreedom.org) is controverial website so making all its references doubtful or influenced for certain other reasons as it was the case with historians with old time....... your comments about death sentence may be more meaninful rather than hate speech again faiths .. I wish we can be part of solution rather than problems.

To you who questioned from where I am (Staffans question)

I am swedish, however spent many years living outside Sweden, different countries and cultures.

Rgds,

Ayesha

It is the good and solid values imparted by Jesus/ Eisa (RA) himself that leads us to condemn capital punishment. It is the benighted and the scarred of the world who go for flogging, stoning, amputating, crucifying people (or even gasing, injecting and hanging / decapitating). I hope all countries move away from capital punishment. May they remain innocent and may those who say they believe in Eisa learn what he said. There is nothing in the new testament about genocide or violence - of course those who have not read it are not making statements they are merely asking questions ... awaiting for some enlightenment :)

Didn't jesus say that a person who "offends" a child deserves a millstone around their neck and to be thrown int the sea?

Look, we entrust the military and the police the right to protect society by killing. So yes, Swedish society has an implied death penalty -- the penalty for sending in armed troops into Sweden is to be shot or bombed to death. So why not have the death penalty for people who are far more eveil than some hypothetical soldier who has been ordered to attack Sweden? I person who murders someone in cold blood deserves to be executed. Neither the state or the actual executioner is commiting murder either.

Because Rebel, in the case of invasion you are killing in self defense. In the case of capital punishment you are killing as retribution or in order to make an example. Killing in self-defense is justified, killing a person who no longer poses a threat because you have him shackled up in a dark hole somewhere is not.

Shiraz, my apologies, there is no genocide in the New Testament, just the Old Testament. However, by Nutcracker's logic, that would mean the Jews and probably most Christianity as well (since the Old Testament is part of the Christian Biblical canon right?) would be just as bad as radical Islamists. They're not, so obviously something changed. The enlightenment maybe? Oh, and I think the people who formulated modern legal ethics and secular, reason-based morality are due more credit for the abolition of capital punishment than Jesus. You know. Just because.

nevon: Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia: these are all permitting more Sharia into their legal systems; Turkey is listed as one of the worst human rights offenders among nations & most of the rest are Islamic; India faces enormous pressure (esp in its North-West) from Moslem factions demanding Sharia where they predominate. My knowledge of foundational Islamic texts, modern-day political conditions & the Cairo Declaration is supported by the OIC voting bloc in the UN's Human Rights Council which effectively prevents any discussion or censuring of Islamic Sharia as it impacts, unjustly and inhumanely, on Moslems AND non-Moslems who are killed, threatened, persecuted & deprived of what we Westerners regard as basic human rights. You need to read some sites besides The Local to realise the extent of the threat: wherever Moslems predominate, they begin to demand Sharia law for themselves and then, eventually, for all peoples. In Britain Moslems on Oct 31 will march in London demanding Sharia law be instated to replace English law (there are already 85 Sharia courts in England; done without any recourse to public opinion (or knowledge). YOU may dismiss the Koran, aHadith, Sira, the Cairo Declaration, the OIC, but Islam's past & present could well be Sweden's (and the West's) future if people fail to educate themselves or discuss the issue calmly and with knowledge. Hej: faithfreedom.org is an excellent, authoritative & well-researched site which is why Moslems & their apologists loathe it. This Sept & Oct there have been movements, world-wide, by apostates from Islam appealing to Western govts & organisations for protection from Islam's death for apostates mandate. Islam and its Sharia will never "be part of the solution."

None of this makes your insufferable text diarrhea any more relevant. You're making it look like all Muslims everywhere abide by the most primitive and barbaric interpretation of their religion. This is simply not true; Turkey (no Islamic law at all, human rights abuses are largely connected to nationalism rather than religion), Indonesia (largely secular judiciary/administration, except for that ridiculous little region), Pakistan (fighting the Taliban) and India (fighting their own breed of homegrown Islamic radicals) are all very good examples of countries which have either completely shed radical Islam or are trying to do so, and these countries contain, by far, the most Muslims in the world. They are also democracies, with open, internationally monitored elections.

The simple fact that none of these countries are ruled with Islamic law, that there is no state-sanctioned discrimination in most of them, and the fact none of them have insane aggressive religious governments (quite the contrary in fact) shows that the people there are not as radical as you paint them to be with your 7th century knowledge of Islamic law. After all, they vote for their governments, and if they were as you say, the Taliban would be ruling everywhere. These countries are moderate, their institutions are either secular or being secularized and so are their societies, through education and economic relations with the rest of the world (their economies are huge, and they're connected to the world).

You're being simple. In your world, Islam is what is written in the Quran, and the most horrible bits of it in particular. All Muslims beat their wives and stone people to death, because that's what it says in the Quran, and Muslims obey the Quran, right? This is a huge oversimplification. Jews don't kill people for working on the Sabbath, and the majority of Muslims don't stone people to death for adultery, EVEN THOUGH both of their religious doctrines command them to do so. Think about that.

nevon: you're an apologist for Islam and your feeble attempt at moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam proves that you will not defend Western values which are rooted in Judaeo-Christian principles (including the enlightenment and that secularism you almost regard as a religion in itself and which actually comes from Christ's admonition to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is His"). Islam, on the other hand (neither ideologically nor in practice) permits any distinction between belief and government as events such as the following are proving with increasing regularity throughout Moslem countries:

October 12, 2009: Agence-France Presse

New law mandating death by stoning for adulterers in Indonesia's Aceh province, Human Rights Watch reports:

400 lashes for child rape

100 lashes for homosexual acts

60 lashes for gambling

Death penalty for married adulterers

100 lashes for unmarried adulterers

Passed unanimously September 2009 by lawmakers in Aceh province. "Aceh had previously adopted a milder form of Sharia Law in 2001 as part of an autonomy package from the central government aimed at quelling separtist sentiment." Moslems are never satisfied with 'a little' or 'milder' forms of Sharia. Indonesia is 90% Moslem. The fact is, 'nevon', that if you are banking on 'moderate' Moslems to withstand Sharia, you are deluding yourself.

Aceh has 3.9 million people out of 229 million people in Indonesia. That's 1.7 percent of the population. You're making a logical leap from 1.7 percent of the population of Indonesia to all of the Muslims in the world. That is invalid. What about all the other examples of democratic, non-radical Muslim countries I've cited? The rest of Indonesia? Pakistan'? India? Turkey? All you can muster is some enclave of radical Islamists on the tip of Indonesia? And you expect people to assume they represent all Muslims?

And please don't try to hijack the enlightenment by pointing out that Jesus made a vague quote that sounds remotely secular if you look at it long enough. Most of the pioneers of the enlightenment were either outright atheists, agnostics or deists, as can be seen from their works and ideas.

I support death penalty for serious criminal!!!

We are always confused with our laws.... in the USA every State has their own law, in Europe we can not make up our mind on the many certain cases.

Does Islamic law keep changing like us? or is it clear cut? like

Death penalty to the rapist and chop of the hand of robbers who steal some else food and money, I truly love Islamic law that is why the crime rates specially for rape is very very little compared to European and USA or I maybe I should not compare it?

We should have a law like Islam we do not need to change it every month... that law would work until we are all life :)

I have to agree with nutcracker who did some good research, the muslim moral system is and will stay incompatible to the Western world because of the unequality. The main core of Western societies is equality which means the same rights and no extra rights for anyone and which stands diametrally against Western values. Also eye-for-an-eye societies like the religiously confused american majority will not get a foothold for their moral system in Europe.

Just accept it, you guests and immigrants, and live by these rules or don't be in Sweden, as Sweden has its own culture, laws and morals which are deeply rooted in Western civilization and will not be sacrificed to somebody else's will.

It is a much worse punishment to be locked in a cell for the rest of your life than to be humanely euthanized. Humanely euthanizing someone is somewhat akin to opening the gates of the prison and setting someone free. If you want to punish someone it has to be done here in this life because justice, retribution, and vengeance is a "here" thing, and not a "there" thing. People who have near death experiences routinely say that they left their bodies and felt an overwhelming sense of love, peace, and forgiveness. It seems that everyone becomes enlightened when they enter that light regardless of who they were, or where they lived, or what they believed.

Religious fanatics along with other murder machines should ALL be executed. But since when is this discussion board about religion???

In Australia it costs over A$75000.00 a year per oxygen thieving scumbag to keep them behind bars, the cost of extinguishing that misery out all our lives would amount to no more than a few hundred dollars per oxygen thieving scumbag including disposal of the body.

Now when you have recidivist pedophiles and psychopathic murderers with no hope of redemption, who treat the jail system as a holiday resort, why should we prolong the misery of their victims?

Justice is a double edge sword which has long been blunted by leftwing socialists pandering to the immorality of their dogma.

Capital punishment should always be the last resort once the crime has been proven without doubt. There are many cut and dried cases that could be dealt with in this way.

While capital punishment definitely does have a place in a civilized society, it is an irrelevant discussion, since it would be meted out only in extremely rare cases. In the U.S. today, population 300MM, on average one person per year is actually executed. Instead the discussion ought to focus on real, meaninhgful, jail time for serious offenses. The way it is in Sweden today, jailtime is nothing more than a brief respit from your daily chores, a vacation, even for crimes as serious as assult, rape and murder.

The reason why most countries have abolished the death penalty, is the the chance that the wrong guy may be executed. If I look at the number of people, in my life time(64 years) that have been executed and later found to be innocent after advances in technology - DNA etc. or just plain Police incompitence. Then my vote still goes for the abolition of capital punishment. Saying sorry to dead man or his family will not bring him back

The deal penalty works great! Look no further than Singapore!

The problem in america is, they wait way too long to zap them. Often 10, 20 years after the costly and asinine appeals process. By then, the punishment for the undesired behavior is has lost it's message.

Take a look at this! Last meal requests involve a lot of T-bone steaks, pecan pies and fried chicken! And, if you read thier last statements, most understand the punishment they have been issued.

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm

". If I look at the number of people, in my life time(64 years) that have been executed and later found to be innocent after advances in technology - DNA etc."

Please list the cases found in the USA. Just a few -- please?

"...While capital punishment definitely does have a place in a civilized society, ..."

@beynch, THIS is why most Europeans think that the U.S. is not a part of the civilized nations LOL common knowledge in Europe, and the "legal system" in that country across the Atlantic is not taken serious for many reasons in the Old World.

No, there still is NO PLACE for capital punishment in Europe and will not be anymore. Europe has learnt enough from tyranny and wars between 1914 and 1945 on its soil.

No doubt that Sweden has to change something very soon about the verdicts for serious crimes which in many cases are ridiculously low and leave the victim helpless but the attacker publicly triumphant.

For monsters, one and only one punishment : Hard labour for life.

My only problem with the death penalty is that innocent people have been executed and there is no way to amends once someone has been executed. That said, Sweden is way too lax on crime. People who commit serous crimes need to spend the rest of their lives in prison. How can Sweden release cold blooded murderers in good conscience? Ten year in prison is not a high enough prce for taking someone's life.

Hey guys,

I have a simple question. I believe that if you answer it truthfully then you get your answer to death penalty.

Let's suppose that some crazy guy rapes your daughter or kills your father or takes away the life of someone very close toyou, and then he is caught. Would you like him to be set free after 10 yrs of jail or would you want him dead? To tell you the truth, I would want him dead. Even thoug I will never get my loved one back, I will atleast have some satisfaction. Do I sound crazy? Well, I believe all humans tend to get a bit crazy when they are emotional.

For those of you, usually irreversibly indoctrinated, infantile, liberals, who think that `the wrong person was executed`, in the interest of balance, do you, as a comparison, have any statistics on how many people were murdered as a direct result of the wrong person being let out?

Beynch, your constant way of calling people who oppose the death penalty liberal and leftist is ridiculous... This issue is split in your black and white political spectrum.

Beynch's question concerns how many criminals re-offend after release from prison. According to UK Ministry of Justice report (2008), a staggeringly high proportion do: in UK, 50% of criminals after serving full sentences re-offend within one year (2008 figs); more than 30% re-offend within 6 months of ending their prison sentences; criminals on probation (as opposed to those who have served their full prison sentences) committed 120 murders while on probation in 2008, 44 manslaughters, 103 rapes, 80 kidnappings. We don't live in a perfect world, no one would care to be wrongly executed (not "murdered" as liberals say) but against that has to be balanced the incredible inhumanity of so many innocent people dying or being raped, abused, their lives ruined or obliterated. The reason the Left doesn't punish criminals with suitable prison sentences and turns them loose again on the public is it wants to destroy the moral foundation of society in order to impose its own rules. Execution of murderers isn't done for 'vengeance' but, among other reasons, to prevent the murderer from re-murdering. The govt's first duty is to protect the innocent, law-abiding citizens.

@Nutcracker: Thank you.

@Gwrhyr: Where did you learn your manners? At SSU? You criticize ideas, not people! But perhaps you were out sick that day?

@Nevon - Good to see grammar, lucid thought and moderation on these pages. Lost, sorely missed qualities.

If some sub-human rapes and kills my children I have every right to deal out the most painful punishment possiable to the perp. There is no police force or law that can stop me.

martell "Leave the capital punishment to the capitalists which calculate human lives in dollars"

I am assuming you are talking about the US. Since there are two mandatory appeals and countless years in prison the death penalty is actually far more costly than life in prison. Please do your research before you profess to be an expert on the subject.

nevon, It is not only embraced by redneck America, and radical (you meant all) Islam. Northern states carry out the death penalty too. It is only for the most serious cases. For example if someone rapes and murders multiple women, and DNA evidence proves it was them they will probably be considered for the death penalty. Statistically there are hardly any people put to death in the US. I know it contradicts the Swedish model of letting the rapist/murderer back out into society after 5 years in jail but "when in Rome".

Nutcracker, if as you just said, "execution of murderers isn't done for 'vengeance' but, among other reasons, to prevent the murderer from re-murdering", then wouldn't the same end be achieved by simply putting them in a maximum security prison for life?

Or do you think the death penalty deters people from committing horrible crimes? Here's something to think about; people who commit crimes which are so horribly violent and deranged enough to warrant the death penalty either;

a) seriously don't think that they're going to get caught (organized crime/gangs, premeditated crimes).

b) would prefer not to get caught but can't really care if they're put on death row (compulsive sex offenders, serial killers, psychopaths) or;

c) are violent/aggressive/dumb and commit heinous crimes in heat of passion without paying attention to consequences (murderous spouses with histories of domestic violence, bar fights).

I mean seriously, do you think there is one criminal out there who decided to kill/rape a person because he weighed life in prison against the death penalty and wasn't deterred enough by the prospect of spending the rest of his life in a dark hole with 1 hour of sunlight a day, but would have been deterred by execution instead? Or a casual child-molester who thought that going to prison and getting married to a big dumb biker called Buba (and his gang) for the rest of his life was somehow an acceptable risk, but lethal injection wasn't?

Your limp logic would only work if the state executed people for running red lights or for vandalism, or for lesser crimes, in which case you can be damn sure no one in their right mind is going to run a red light or spray paint graffiti on walls. In that case your argument would fail because crime and punishment has to be proportional.

wow at least their not making them dig their own graves

Beynch, why are you insulting me personally then? Why do you keep talking about the SSU? Why do you infer my other political beliefs based on this issue? And why do you think this is a left/right issue? This isn't anything like that.

Nevon

Thank you. A very well put set of points that sums it up perfectly

@Nutcracker - After the typical, obfuscating behaviour of an uncertain person who hides behind reams of statistics to make up for a lack of clear understanding, you degenerated into a typical conspiracy theory about the Left encouraging mayhem to reintroduce it's own immoral society. Spare us this crap. Oooh...and the UK Ministry of Justice report for 2008? I decided to have a look for myself! (Most people wouldn't, would they? Bet that's what you normally count on.) Delivery of milestones in the national and regional reducing re-offending delivery plans 5.22 The latest published results for 2005 show that we have reduced adult re-offending by 7.4 per cent compared with 2000 on the predicted rate. This means that we are on track to hit the target set in the 2002 Spending Review. So they haven't published the figures you're stating... the report can be got from: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/annual-report-2008.htm under National Offender Management Service. @ beynch - Talk about indoctrinated. So you say it's worth killing a few innocents to save the rest of the innocents? Infantile - for encouraging discussion and not going down the road of "you took mine, so I'm going to take yours"? My personal feelings on the death penalty aside (agree for heinous crimes including murder and genocide), it's unfortunately been proven to be a fairly useless tool for preventing the original ill. America has less crime because it has the death penalty? Please.

@Serendipitiz: '...worth killing a few innocents to save the rest of the innocents...`. Your derivation skills are flawed. I don't think that's what I said. But in any case you've given us somthing to think about. What you seem to leave out is society's need for revenge, a valid concept in this discussion if we are to proceed leaving in a reasonably civilized society. Nutcracker's blurb is good and on target. Read it again and think as you read.

The cases should be evaluated on an individual basis. The sentence should be decided by a jury (randomly-selected, ordinary, reasonable people from the community in which the crime took place). The jury should decide the sentence after an exhaustive fact-finding process faciliated by the parties interests and balanced by the judge.

However, I don't think the state or the judge should have the right to influence or limit the jury's decision. Thus, anything goes.