Axel Rudakubana: 'Evil' Southport killer jailed for minimum 52 years
Axel Rudakubana: 'Evil' Southport killer jailed for minimum 52 years
Axel Rudakubana is handed a life sentence for killing three girls and attacking 10 other people.
You're viewing a single thread.
Do you guys on here think this is an acceptable sentence, or do you think Britain should have the death penalty for cases like this?
I think it's acceptable. I'm actually surprised it's this long to be honest. Personally I'm absolutely against the death penalty, I'm glad we don't have it here.
I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted for your question...
I guess I'm being downvoted due to just mentioning the death penalty. The only reason I asked is because callers on LBC (radio) were mentioning the death penalty so I wondered what people on Lemmy would think.
Dude's 18 now so this means he'll be in prison until he's 70. At least.
And no, absolutely no death penalty until the justice system can be proven to be completely flawless and incapable of convicting an innocent. And even then I'd say no.
absolutely no death penalty until the justice system can be proven to be completely flawless and incapable of convicting an innocent.
yeah but you'll never need to look past this statement, because it will never be so.
they day somebody produces a 'perfect' judicial system is the day justice actually dies. Only place that has ever been 'achieved' is places like north korea.
No. The death penalty is no deterrent and we've seen on numerous occasions how flawed the justice system is, so we can rarely be 100% sure we have the right person (unlike in this case which is unequivocal). I also hope that they can undergo some kind of rehabilitation, perhaps not to the point that they realise the horrific nature of their crimes and have to spend their years with that knowledge eating away at them.
It's acceptable. There are too many problems with the death penalty to ever justify it. I'm expecting this person to have a tough time in prison due to what they did, so in some ways this could be worse for them, if retribution rather than rehabilitation is your preference. So long as they are away from society it is a good result.
I'd just like to add an argument against the death penalty. The common argument is that we sometimes get it wrong so we can't have it because you can't reverse the sentence, and that is a strong enough argument. However, if one day we have a justice system that can be 100.000% certain of guilt (or society at large is persuaded of this, even if it isn't true...) then I still don't believe we should have the death penalty, because it's not possible to be 100% certain that there is no chance of rehabilitation. I'm someone who has had a family member horrifically and senselessly murdered, and I still believe revenge achieves exactly nothing. It just adds bodies to the pile and increases suffering. It won't bring back your loved ones, or, crucially, reduce your suffering one iota to see the guilty suffer or die.
The question really is: why the hell would any civilised society, whose citizens believe themselves to have mastered their animalistic nature, want the death penalty?I want to add my tuppence worth as well. Even if one day we have a justice system that can be 100.000% certain of guilt AND 100% certain that there is no chance of rehabilitation, I think we should still not have the death penalty, because I don't think spending the energy and time killing individuals in cold blood is a healthy way for a society to behave. This Rudakubana guy may be some kind of monster, but that doesn't mean that acting monstrously towards him is somehow acceptable.
You are absolutely right
No death penalty
If you support the re-introducing the death penalty, then you must accept that at some point in the future, somebody will be executed for a crime that they are innocent of.
It is inevitable and rules it out for me.
Yeah that makes sense. But on the other hand, jailing people for life costs money and there's the slim chance they can escape. But I suppose if you have good security then a full life sentence would be an effective deterrent, so maybe you wouldn't have to pay for very many people to have such long sentences, so it might not cost so much.
You may be surprised just how much death row costs. Part of being 'absolutely sure' is not executing until all possibilities of appeal and such are exhausted, and well, if your scheduled to be killed most people will do whatever they can to delay it for as long as possible, or even better get it overturned. Some end up on death row for decades.
Some data here: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/costs/summary-of-states-death-penalty
Good points to be honest.
Flaying, perhaps. Or drawn and quartered. Maybe scaphism.