|
|
Post by clarity on Jul 16, 2017 3:32:11 GMT
When did the UK abolish capital punishment? 1998, The last executions in the United Kingdom were by hanging, and took place in 1964, prior to capital punishment being abolished for murder (in 1965 in Great Britain and in 1973 in Northern Ireland). Although unused, the death penalty remained a legally defined punishment for certain offences such as treason until it was completely abolished in 1998. In 2004 the 13th Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights became binding on the United Kingdom, prohibiting the restoration of the death penalty for as long as the UK is a party to the Convention. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 5:42:51 GMT
This is like the other side of the argument that the only reason we have employment protections is due to the EU.
You'd think we were essentially Texas until the EU said we couldn't kill people anymore. I know polls show most people think the state should have the right to kill its citizens but not sure politicians are chomping at the bit to reintroduce the death penalty.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 16, 2017 7:37:50 GMT
This is like the other side of the argument that the only reason we have employment protections is due to the EU. You'd think we were essentially Texas until the EU said we couldn't kill people anymore. I know polls show most people think the state should have the right to kill its citizens but not sure politicians are chomping at the bit to reintroduce the death penalty. This is largely true except that the UK finally gave up the option of capital punishment specifically to comply with an EU policy. Furthermore, to answer an earlier point, the UK retained CP for crimes which did not involve homicide. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 8:14:05 GMT
The excerpt Clarity suggests it had more to do with the UK (willingly) signing up to the European Convention on Human Rights than the EU.
But most importantly the UK's stance on the death penalty appears to have evolved independently of the EU.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 16, 2017 9:20:15 GMT
That can't be wholly true though, can it? UK expressly retained CP for certain crimes and only gave those up when obliged to by the EU. There's nothing to suggest that the UK, having decided to retain CP for very specific, non-homicide crimes, would have given it up had it not been for the EU.
|
|
Muz
New Member
Posts: 12,255
|
Post by Muz on Jul 16, 2017 9:57:25 GMT
This is like the other side of the argument that the only reason we have employment protections is due to the EU. You'd think we were essentially Texas until the EU said we couldn't kill people anymore. I know polls show most people think the state should have the right to kill its citizens but not sure politicians are chomping at the bit to reintroduce the death penalty. Champing. |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 11:16:46 GMT
That can't be wholly true though, can it? UK expressly retained CP for certain crimes and only gave those up when obliged to by the EU. There's nothing to suggest that the UK, having decided to retain CP for very specific, non-homicide crimes, would have given it up had it not been for the EU. Was it obliged to by the EU? And is it likely it would abolish it for murder, but decide to class acid attacks in the same manner as treason and keep the death penalty for those forms of crime? |
|
nobody
New Member
Posts: 8,733 
|
Post by nobody on Jul 16, 2017 11:51:49 GMT
Up until 1998 you could be hung for treason, it's no wonder then, that some MP's welcomed its abolition
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 11:54:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 11:56:01 GMT
I think it suits some people to blame the EU for us not having the death penalty.
Once we leave and we see no MPs chomping at the bit to reintroduce it, then what will it be blamed on?
|
|
|
|
Post by hammerhead on Jul 16, 2017 12:21:27 GMT
Bit of a red herring this, isn't it?
The UK hasn't executed people sice the 1960's. So what if abolition of the death penalty for treason, piracy and whatever was at the insistance of the EU, it wasn't enforced anyway.
|
|
mids
New Member
Posts: 63,916
|
Post by mids on Jul 16, 2017 14:33:15 GMT
Weirdly we still had to make decisions on the death penalty in Jamaica where the Privy Council is or was the last court of appeal until recently. It might even still be. It's a mental idea that a union of states has that much power to make decisions over what another nation state does within its borders. Utterly wrong in my opinion although some here no doubt think that the concept is "utterly brilliant".
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 16, 2017 14:40:27 GMT
That can't be wholly true though, can it? UK expressly retained CP for certain crimes and only gave those up when obliged to by the EU. There's nothing to suggest that the UK, having decided to retain CP for very specific, non-homicide crimes, would have given it up had it not been for the EU. Was it obliged to by the EU? And is it likely it would abolish it for murder, but decide to class acid attacks in the same manner as treason and keep the death penalty for those forms of crime? Why not? There's no logic in keeping CP for homicide only as a) it won't bring the victim back and b) there are non-homicidal acts which are arguably far more wicked. |
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Jul 16, 2017 21:47:40 GMT
It's a very weird one, isn't it? Every public wants (when polled straight, without being asked in detail) capital punishment. When the polling asks a bunch of questions that get in to the details of capital punishment, the support looks very weak. Indeed, in the US, almost nobody is allowed on a jury in a capital case who disapproves of the death penalty, yet fewer and fewer juries are allowing the death penalty.
Meanwhile, in Europe, there are quite a lot of countries not in the EU, yet one - literally, just one - country (Belarus) retains the death penalty.
There is no desire among almost any politicians to have a death penalty. It's "popular" on a very shallow level, but deeply unpopular as soon as it's tested. It's nothing to do with the EU. It's just such a ludicrously silly thing that as soon as anyone (who's not a demented vengeful idiot) thinks about it, they decide that it's a very, very bad idea. It's not coming back.
|
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 16, 2017 21:58:59 GMT
No. It's not coming back and I don't support it. I am, however, deeply ambiguous about practical, summary executions in the field/kickings to death in police cells.
|
|
|
|
Post by flatandy on Jul 16, 2017 22:00:38 GMT
I am thoroughly against them. But in certain specific circumstances it can be hard to be *too* upset.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 22:03:50 GMT
Was it obliged to by the EU? And is it likely it would abolish it for murder, but decide to class acid attacks in the same manner as treason and keep the death penalty for those forms of crime? Why not? There's no logic in keeping CP for homicide only as a) it won't bring the victim back and b) there are non-homicidal acts which are arguably far more wicked. The question is, is it likely? Not, "what will be possible". |
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 22:05:33 GMT
I am thoroughly against them. But in certain specific circumstances it can be hard to be *too* upset. I think it's a barbaric form of justice supported by backwards people. But generally I can't raise the effort to go and protest against it given the crimes it is generally used against (in the West.) |
|
|
|
Post by perrykneeham on Jul 16, 2017 22:07:36 GMT
Well, in the basis that they retained it specifically for non-homicide crimes then, yes, it is more likely than introducing CP for murder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Repat Van on Jul 16, 2017 22:13:01 GMT
Well, in the basis that they retained it specifically for non-homicide crimes then, yes, it is more likely than introducing CP for murder. The question was not "is it more likely than introducing CP for murder". The question was is it likely that they would introduce the death penalty for acid attacks [with only EU membership stopping us]. |
|
