Murder latest
In yesterday's Sun, despite having the same MoD/Buckingham Palace/Whitehall propaganda as all the other newspapers, they managed to find their own spin on Prince Harry's adventure in Afghanistan, with the coverline: "Prince Harry Kills 30 Taliban." Well done, Prince Harry. (If you read more closely you'll find that had a hand in ordering three air strikes in Helmond Province which are thought to have killed "up to 30" Taliban. But this is a small quibble.)
Five days earlier, in the same newspaper, a poll found that "almost 100,000" Sun readers had called for the return of the death penalty, in light of the conviction, in short order of Mark Dixie, Steve Wright (ha ha, not that one), the teenage killers of "hero dad" Garry Newlove and Levi Bellfield. A "staggering" 99% of readers who responded to the paper's You The Jury poll said the Government should reintroduce it. The views of the bring-back-hanging mob are, according to the Sun, "backed by many of the families whose lives have been cruelly torn apart by killers now serving time behind bars." Well of course they are. It's not really fair to ask victims' families - they're in no fit state to comment. The Sun also crowed that Shadow Home Secretary David Davis "and some religious leaders" had joined in. Widow Helen Newlove, said: "For many, the death penalty is murder by another name - a chilling relic from an uncivilised past. Yes, the thought of bringing it back may be unpalatable. But the horrifying events of the past week have strengthened my conviction that the hangman is the answer."
What the fuck is going on? Former Home Office Minister Anne Widdecombe wants capital punishment brought back "as a deterrent." That's all very nice in principle, but it still means that murder would be sanctioned by the state, as it is in some parts of America, another apparently civilised country that wishes to spread its special brand of democracy around the world with a big stick. Presumably, jolly TV presenter Widdecombe is one of those who'd happily step forward to pull the switch. (I actually doubt that any of them actually would, when it came down to it.) Why do these people take what seems like such pornographic pleasure in images of "the hangman" and "the gallows" and "pulling switches"? How are we to take the moral high ground against anyone who kills if we are prepared to kill ourselves? Are Sun readers "and some religious leaders" really intellectually ready to draw up a list of "good" killers (Prince Harry, the hangman) and "bad" killers, and stand by it?
I personally admire Sara Payne, mother of murdered Sarah, who put the issue into some much-needed human perspective, saying: "I don't think anyone should be able to take another's life. It's one of our core values as human beings living in a civilised country that you do not kill."
What's that smell? I think it may be flaming torches. Or some Taliban on fire. Can't tell.
posted by Andrew Collins @ 11:10 AM
4 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
4 Comments:
A bonanza week for the fundamentally unpleasant Miss Widdecombe and her ilk. And once again The Sun presents one of its 'staggering' pieces of research - with exclusively self-selecting respondents - as being in some way meaningful. Gah.
"But the horrifying events of the past week have strengthened my conviction that the hangman is the answer."
The answer to what? How do we stop such people killing again? Have we really not put that argument to bed yet?
The cases of Wright, Dixie and Bellfield concern men with deep psychological problems that drove them to kill. For the death penalty to work as a deterrent you have to assume rationality on the part of the person thinking of killing - 'if I do this then there's a chance I will be killed myself and I'm not prepared to take the risk'
But these aren't rational men. They are killing due to some terrible compulsion; I'm not sure the potential consequences get much of a look in.
And the Garry Newlove case involved under 18s did it not? Are we executing children now?
So if it's not a deterrent then it's about revenge - and you have already addressed what this means to a civilized society.
The hanging debate remains the best advocate for representative democracy. Leaving The Sun aside I think most polls still indicate that a referendum would see the hanging lobby win. Our MPs may have a lot to answer for but at least they've kept this lynch-mob mentality at bay.
Roy Jenkins - the greatest Home Secretary of the last century who presided over the abolition of capital punishment in the UK - had the board listing forthcoming executions removed from next to his desk when he assumed office and replaced it with a large fridge to hold his wine.
Now that's the mark of a civilized society.
As far as I know, and I've read a lot of papers on this, there hasn't been one single academic paper that's demonstrated any deterrence effect of the death penalty. This is excluding those subsequently trashed for their dishonest or incompetent (or both) use of statistics or those where the data had been simply made up (seriously).
I think I actually have more respect for the the likes of Jon Gaunt who openly admit it's about revenge than those who seek to hide it with claims of its deterrence.
"What's going on?" you ask. I suspect it's the same as has always gone on. I think opinion polls have consistently returned the disappointing news that the majority of the UK public would vote in favour of killing certain criminals if they had the opportunity.
In the meantime, at the prison a mile down the road from me, 4 prisoners killed themselves by hanging in the 3 months around New Year. I wish I had something hopeful or constructive to add to this, but all I can say is that it is desperately obvious that vulnerable prisoners are being failed.
Post a Comment
<< Home