The death penalty or capital punishment is the punishment by death for a crime. Currently 58 countries worldwide allow the death penalty (including the U.S.) while 97 countries have outlawed it. The Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It abolished the death penalty for murder in Great Britain (the death penalty for murder survived in Northern Ireland until 1973). The act replaced the penalty of death with a mandatory sentence of imprisonment for life.
@9868V6M1yr1Y
Yes, but for child sex offences and animal abuse and cruelty and sex offences against animals.
@9HY5DZX4mos4MO
So your basically saying if someone commits a sex offence to an adult such as rape, they shouldn't get the death penalty but to hit an animal they should, are you sane in the head. Please don't run to be an MP
@99QPPQB1yr1Y
murderers and pedophiles should get it
@96HZKQ22yrs2Y
Yes, but only for mass-murderers, war criminals and terrorists
@9L757Y51mo1MO
No, I feel that inflicting death on any human is hypocritical as a punishment, saying that nobody can kill as it is a cardinal sin, but then going and killing the person who killed. In my eyes that would mean anybody involved in the decision of the death sentence would also then be described as murderers.
@8Q46C3HConservative3yrs3Y
Depends on what they have done
@99N2LVV1yr1Y
No but, the families should also be punished as well to serve as a deterant and Torture should also be mandated in cases of pedophillia
@98HMWP41yr1Y
spending life in prison is a harsher sentence but we need it available for Extreme crimes against the country,
@98CY2DQConservative1yr1Y
Spend their entire life in prison
@9J4VGZK4mos4MO
There should be hard labour, work camps prisons not prisons where you watch tv and read books all day.
@9J3L3H2Conservative 4mos4MO
While there is always going to be punishment involved with prison and legal offences, as should be the case, that comes in the form of not being allowed out, seeing your family for a short amount of time, struggling to find employment after release and being told what to do in cramped, uncomfortable conditions. Being in prison under the conditions at the moment is tough, and there should be a greater understanding of this. However, prison should also be about helping the prisoners become better people. While there are some that would have known what they were doing, and will not regret what… Read more
@9M6T4GR3 days3D
Yes but only for pedophiles, child murders and rapists, and the victims family should decide the means of death.
@9M6LGNS3 days3D
Yes, but only for the most heinous of crimes and repeat offenders. Money saved should go to the victims' families and to community support projects.
@9M65LBK4 days4D
Yes, but only for the worst and repeat offenders. It is wrong that taxpayers' money is used to keep evil people alive when the money could be spent on the deserving.
@9M4KN5R 6 days6D
There has to be undeniable proof, too many mistakes have happened previously. Either that or prisons need sorting as not enough space for criminals as is.
@9M478MW6 days6D
No government or police authority should not have the power to do this, they are already too corrupt to trust
@9M3N8B86 days6D
Yes but the standard would be so high I would only have executed people like Ian Brady and Harold Shipman.
@9M2XYGR7 days7D
Harsher punishment and stricter prisons. They should be punished for their actions. Not escape with death or lenient prisons….
if you murder then you should receive the death penalty to receive a punishment that relates to the crime
@9M24XHF1wk1W
No but laws should be stricter and horrific crimes with undeniable evidence criminals should not be given options of parole, reduced sentences or good behavior benefits
@9LZV7LC1wk1W
Holding people for the death penalty is very expensive. However, when a crime especially to a child is so horrific the person who did the crime will now be a in a tax free room with 3 meals a day which is better living circumstances than innocent people.
@9LZBQMQ1wk1W
Convicts with a life sentence should serve five years before termination, and if they are found to have been wrongly convicted then the prosecution that resulted in the death would suffer the same punishment.
@9LZ8LLN1wk1W
yes and no. if the crime is sick and seriously evil then i believe they should suffer in prison and then have the death penalty after about twenty years. if it is less severe but still death penalty worthy, then i believe life in prison is the right punishment.
@9LYKWNR1wk1W
I support it in principle, but I’m against the death penalty in practice due to religious conviction
@9LXK8SH1wk1W
well, i believe that some people do deserve to have a death penalty but it does depend on how bad the crime they have committed is, saying they have killed multiple people they should have the death penalty but if they killed one person they should spend 10-15 years in prison.
@9LS7NHN2wks2W
Death penalty with crime involving a direct victim makes it harder for them to come forward so it would do more harm then good
@9LQKWWG2wks2W
Yes, if the evidence is undeniable and the individual 'doesn't care' about being in prison - prison should be more of a punishment than death - if the death penalty is passed, the money allocated to the prisoners receiving the death penalty should go elsewhere eg. education/NHS
@9BLKYZ71yr1Y
Only For Convicted Murders
@9BKZ2PR1yr1Y
yea, but only for crimes such as: rape, sexual assault /harassment, child molestation etc.
@9BK6FLT1yr1Y
serious crimes and where the murderer shows so sign of remorse and will highly likely never change
@9BK4Y7M1yr1Y
No, spending life in prison with no parole is harsher
@9BK3TJD1yr1Y
i believe instead of the death penalties, we should be testing on them, instead of on animal. For example rapists, murders, should be tested on, so animals are no longer tested. No more animal testing do it on those who have committed awful crimes.
@9BJNJBC1yr1Y
There should be national referendum to decide
all criminals should provide social work for free within continuous vigilance and within restricted areas to avoid damages to third parties.
@9BH4J4V1yr1Y
I have mixed feelings and have no definite answer
@9BGN2SF1yr1Y
Yes, but only as punishment for holders of the following positions (past and present):
1. Cabinet ministers, MPs, Lords, and monarchs.
2. Central bankers, as well as executives in the private financial industry, and other corporate executives.
3. Anybody within the country's top 10% income bracket.
@9BGBG621yr1Y
They should spend life imprisoned with no appeal or parole.
@9BF9HCP1yr1Y
Only for pedos. And I mean actual ones like Jimmy Saville, not the ones who the right try to push as pedos
@9BDNCMS1yr1Y
It’s difficult as sometimes this can be over used in the states
@9BCRHBY1yr1Y
Yes but only for severe high risk people and cases e.g. terrorist
@9BBMSPT1yr1Y
Yes, but only for convicted paedophiles
They should receive life in prison and be forced to pay a large sum of money to the victim's family. if this is not possible, his parents should pay for the sins of their child.
@9B6TYL81yr1Y
They should have a long life suffering behind bars, they shouldn’t just die
@9B68Z5S1yr1Y
Yes, but only for horrific crimes with undeniable evidence. If someone is told they are going to prison for life and will never be eligible for release, they should also be given the choice of the death penalty. Life is prison is near enough torture, regardless of what they've done, the system should be better than they were when the committed the crime and offer a quick way out as opposed to life behind bars, which is a life torture sentence to be honest.
@9B65QYG1yr1Y
Yes, for severe crimes or repeat offenders
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
