web analytics


By David Vance On August 4th, 2011

noose and Sir George Young

The problem about a representative democracy is that those in power tend not to want to represent the popular will. When I brought this point up the other day on the BBC, it was ignored. But I am afraid the BBC will not be able to ignore this so easily;

“Capital punishment is expected to be the first subject debated by Parliament under an e-petitions scheme. The initiative allows the public to help set the government agenda and means anyone can set up an internet petition on any subject. If it attracts more than 100,000 signatures, MPs must consider debating it in the Commons.

The scheme is officially launched today, but it has already backfired on the Coalition because Right-wing internet bloggers (Oh no, not THEM!)  have been collecting signatures for the last few days. The restoration of hanging for the murderers of children and policemen is by far the most popular serious issue. Commons leader Sir George Young – writing in today’s Daily Mail – says Westminster cannot ignore this popular groundswell. The intervention of Sir George, who is overseeing the e-petition scheme, paves the way for the first Commons vote on capital punishment since 1998. The last hangings in Britain were in 1964.

Now, when this IS debated, the politicians will vote against the restoration of capital punishment. Sir George is wrong. Westminster will ignore it. EVERY single poll of the British people saince 1965 have shown that the majority of people want to see it restored. That’s the disconnect. The EU has outlawed it, preferring instead soft justice.

Terrorists, child-killers, mass murderers — I say let them swing. But gosh, isn’t that just so harsh. I mean, it’s not as if someone died, is it? Hang on….


24 Responses to “LET ‘EM DANGLE…”

  1. Not going to happen. It’s only the people who want this not our politicians /political/Guardianista classes.
    Ditto with the EU. Otherwise if we had any democracy left in this country, we’d have had referenda on this kind of issue some time ago.

  2. Quite interesting this. Radio 5Live are discussing it right now.
    Of course it won’t be restored, but it could be used as part of an overall campaign to show the level of disconnect between government and electorate.
    I wonder if it was this issue that originally encouraged politicians to start ignoring the will of the people, and has led to wilful deceit and obfuscation by them in pursuing their own agendas?
    The deceit in taking us to war in Iraq, the death of Dr. David Kelly and of course politicians’ abuse of the expenses system, to name but a few.
    Bloody politicians!

  3. Of course politicians should listen to people’s concerns about justice and they have a duty to protect the safety of the populace, but regardless of opinions on the death penalty, governments should not always automatically do whatever the majority of the population want. The people can be wrong, and in the case of wanting the authorities to have the power to kill as a judicial penalty, they are.

  4. Colm
    governments should not always automatically do whatever the majority of the population want.

    I disagree. Democracy is exactly that. Paternalistic dictatorship is your ‘the state knows best’ approach.

  5. I disagree. Democracy is exactly that.

    An absolute democracy is, but no western state is an absolute democracy. MPs are not, nor have they ever been, mandated. They should take great regard for the will of the people, but they are, and always have been, free to vote however they like.

    Absolute democracies are simply the rule of the majority with no protection for minority groups. That is why modern states are all liberal democracies.

  6. A corrupt police, an out of touch and elitist judicial system and unrepresentative polls….

  7. Even in the very unlikely event that the death penalty is restored they will make it that it doesn’t apply in Northern Ireland anyway.

  8. Geoff – I’m sure your right but you raised an ugly ugly word…liberal.
    The cause of many problems. I’d prefer a bit more of the US approach. We vote for Police chiefs we vote for Judges, dog catchers etc.
    Rather than the UK approach…an unaccountable, unelected, unmovable, unfireable political elite composed of Guardianista nanny statists.
    We have the tyranny of the over represented minority interest groupings at the vast expense of us majority types.


  9. could a right-winger explain why they are against sharia law?
    I mean you get all the grisly punishments like hanging, floggings etc
    Is it cos they’re Muslims?
    don’t you have a sneaky regard for their laws?
    Be honest !

  10. Colm,
    I know you feel very strongly on this, which is fine because at the end of the day we are talking about people’s lives, and no one wants to see an innocent die.
    And that’s where the rub is. In actual current practice what we have IS innocent lives being snuffed out, and IF the murderer is caught there is a strong possibility they will only serve part of a “life sentence”.
    So our representatives are saying in essence, that it is better that an innocent be murdered than a guilty person – murderer – forfeit their own life.
    Now, if you think that is an acceptable state of affairs, you are not the man I take you to be.
    And don’t forget, you are also okay that our political masters will continue to refuse any change in the situation….

  11. Agit8ed

    I don’t think you have read or understood my comments on this. I want life sentecnes for murder to be life in all cases. If you are convicted of murder, then you are jailed until you die. I don’t want murderers ever to be freed and risk killing again. I don;t wnat them to be freed even if there is no chance of them killing again. This is not about protecting the ‘rights’ of the murderer – I wouldn’t weep if a murderer was killed in jail by another inmate for example, I just think that the state and the lawful authorities should not carry out killings themsleves as a punishment for the crime of killing.

  12. Murders of children, only?

    Heck, In Ireland I’d bring it right down to illegal parkers and drunken yobs.

    That’d decimate the population alright.

  13. Tom I’ll have a quick stab at this.

    Good thing – Sharia has some harsh punishment for criminals.
    Bad thing – how it defines criminality.

    Eg such criminal acts as…popping into the local for a pint. Putting a quid on a nag at the bookies. Seeing a buxom young wench in less then the full metal burkha. Seeing a risque movie. See Tom even you would be a criminal mastermind under sharia.

    Couple that with criminalising same sex relationships and you can see that Sharia Islamic values are utterly incompatible with Western values.

    Sharia as practiced in Iran allows the payment by criminals of blood money to escape punishment. Probation is easy…just memorise and parrot the Quoran. See it’s just not our kind of thing.

  14. Dog,
    sure I see
    but as we’re on hanging, specifically
    if you can’t get it via Westminster,
    sharia plus let’s say might be the way to go, as a pick and mix
    keep the hanging, don’t touch the other stuff with a barge-pole.

    p.s wow a new pic of a noose, ATW is updating ..

    psst sometimes I think DV has 5 pix
    noose, mushroom cloud, eurabia, butcher boy MMG, pis in trough
    and simply pulls the pic out to fit the story .. he’s a funny guy
    that’s why I like coming here 🙂

  15. This is fluff, just window dressing to keep the masses under the delusion that politicians represent them. The idea that any significant law – say on capital punishment or our subjection to foreign rule – might be changed because of petitions is ludicrous.

    Come on, wake up. Leave that “this is a democracy” crap in school. Politicians represent the corporates and unions which stuff their pockets full of cash. Everyone else is insignificant.

  16. Tom – your cherry picking from Sharia. I’m afraid sharia works in the same way that Islam works. No grey areas. Either your a believer and submit (which is what the word Islam actually means) or you don’t, then your merely a Kuffar. The term ‘moderate muslim’ is an invention of the liberal (spit) left, it has no meaning in Islam.
    It’s simply to lull us kuffars into thinking that all Muslims are fluffy and nice and that the ones that want to kill us are an aberration. They simply are nothing of the sort. The Hadith’s require Muslims to kill the Kuffar…full stop. No grey area. Now some choose to ignore the old testament style ‘smiting’ and a jolly good thing to. But they in fact in the eyes of the ‘true believer’ are thus Kuffars. Nice circle of logic isn’t it. Islam as a entity has yet to undergo ‘the reformation’ that Christianity did centuries before.

    Presently one cannot be a ‘moderate muslim’ no more than you can be 37.45% Pregnant.
    Want to google Taquiyah? or ‘Thou shalt bear false witness’….

    You must understand the issues properly in order to recognise the problem.

  17. Dog
    what percentage of Muslims do you think subscribe to the killing of non-muslims?
    there’s quite a number of liberal ( kiss ) muslims who are dedicated to the sort of reformation you point to, but you don’t get to hear about them , not here anyway. alot are women working in politics, some are ordinary joe’s like this guy:
    do you see the reality, or just read the hye and fear-mongering?

  18. “Even in the very unlikely event that the death penalty is restored they will make it that it doesn’t apply in Northern Ireland anyway.”

    I thought they never abolished it in NI for pesky civil rights lawyers…

  19. Tom – you haven’t followed the circle of logic have you. Go read up about the Hadiths. I suggest that your not very well informed about Islam.

  20. Maybe Tom is a Mullah?

  21. David, your first observation that we are supposed to be part of a representative democracy but that those in power tend not want to represent our will says it all. However, the way things are going suggests that those in power may not be in power very long. If Europe and the Eurozone collapse, and that day is looking ever closer, who then do you think will be our government? Personally I do not think it will be Cameron, he U turns too much and certainly does not listen to the people, nor do I think it will be Ed Miliband, he has no stature and the thought of Clegg brings tears to my eyes.

  22. As you pointed out David the United Kingdom is (or should be) a representative democracy. And was it not Edmund Burke who stated that “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion”.

    Politicians go where the votes go. If that many people felt really strongly about this issue at least one of the major parties would have backed it.

  23. Colm,
    “I wouldn’t weep if a murderer was killed in jail by another inmate for example, I just think that the state and the lawful authorities should not carry out killings themsleves as a punishment for the crime of killing.”

    Right, I do understand your position, and it is “the next best thing” if we can’t have capital punishment returned. However, I seem to remember that when hanging was abolished the government said that “life would mean life” (in prison), but look where we have arrived at? There are more excuses and “get-out” clauses for murderers than there ever was.
    One case that sticks in my mind is the murder of Headmaster Philip Lawrence by Learco Chindamo in 1995. Look at how that case destroyed that family and took away a warm hearted dedicated teacher. Learco is alive and free,and just been nicked for committing a violent mugging…

    So please explain to me (again sorry!)why you don’t think the state and the lawful authorities shouldn’t represent the will of the people and institute capital punishement?

  24. “I wouldn’t weep if a murderer was killed in jail by another inmate for example, I just think that the state and the lawful authorities should not carry out killings themsleves as a punishment for the crime of killing.”

    Pardon me for seeing that paragraph as being as fine a piece of hypocrisy as one could wish to find.

    An attitude of ‘Do it, but I don’t want to know about it!’ sort of thing. It would be totally immoral and cowardly if the State knowingly adopted that as an option, – it would be just an extension of the use of homosexual rape as a form of punishment, and that one seems to have gained some acceptance in the prison system

    I think the basic problem is that very few of us actually have enough trust or faith in the system to be sure that when a death sentence was passed, that it was correct and irrefutably justified.

    I was always suprised that there were people who were prepared to perform the act of excution, if there was ever a definitive definition of ‘killing in cold blood’, the hangman’s job was it!.