Capital punishment e-petition

[evilsoup]

E-petitions urge MPs debate return of death penalty

House of Commons Petitions with more than 100,000 supporters could be debated by MPs
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

MPs to debate public's petitions
Online petition plan to go ahead
Petitions 'could help form laws'

The first "e-petitions" - which allow the public to prompt parliamentary debates if they get enough support - have been published by the government.

The return of the death penalty heads the list of demands, with dozens of campaigners calling for it.

Other suggestions include leaving the EU, anonymity for rape defendants and limiting jail food to bread and water.

Petitions gaining more than 100,000 signatures could lead to a full debate in the House of Commons.

The government has warned MPs not to "ignore" the public's suggestions.

Forty of the first 169 petitions published call for the return of capital punishment and several say the UK should leave the European Union or withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights.

However, seven call for the death penalty not to be reinstated.

One petition recommends the televising of court proceedings and another that the price of alcohol be increased.

One demands that prisoners' diets be restricted to bread and water, as in the "good old days", another that bodybuilding should be encouraged to improve the nation's health.
'Strong opinions'

Among the list of 154 rejected petitions, most relate to sport on TV, the majority calling for Formula One to be kept on free-to-air terrestrial stations.

But several such demands are included among those published for the public to sign up to.

Any petition signed by more than 100,000 UK citizens goes to the cross-party Commons Backbench Business Committee, which will decide whether it is worthy of debate.

This does not mean any parliamentary bills will be tabled as a result, simply that the matter will be discussed.

BBC political correspondent Ross Hawkins said only six days were potentially available between now and next April for MPs to debate the public's suggestions.

Within minutes of launching, the e-petitions site experienced problems, as some users were told: "We are very sorry, but we were unable to complete your last action. We have been notified about the problem and will resolve it as quickly as possible."

Any petition deemed to be libellous, offensive, duplicates of existing open petitions or not related to government will be rejected.

Moderators will also block any that concern honours and appointments.

But Labour have said the petitions could lead to debates on "crazy ideas".

The system replaces the previous e-petitions pages on the Downing Street website, set up when Tony Blair was PM.

The most popular of these, with more than 1.8 million people in support, opposed road pricing.

More than 70,000 backed the one-word suggestion that Gordon Brown should "resign".

And almost 50,000 signed up to the idea that TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson should become prime minister.

So they've finally brought in the e-petition idea. Forty of the petitions are focussed around bringing back hanging, but I think it's be hilarious if the anti-death penalty one got more signatures. All UK members, please 'sign'.

[Iroscato]

Never mind about hanging, suddenly, the terrifying idea of Jeremy Clarkson having power of some kind just stepped slightly closer. Hawking help us all...

[HMS Sophia]

Apparently the people want the new aircraft carriers to be nuclear powered

ETA: I can read it now... and...
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/399

[Bluewolf]

I have to admit, while (I hope at least) I doubt many of these petitions will go anywhere. The idea of this sort of populism actually having any sort of grip is terrifying to me. Too many people want the UK to regress spurred by shock and sob stories spat out by the tabloids.

[Simon_Jester]

Apparently the people want the new aircraft carriers to be nuclear powered

There are a lot of arguments for doing so- the US tested this fairly extensively back in the '60s when we had plenty of both nuclear and oil-fired carriers. Frankly, the current decision not to have them nuclear powered may be a case of "penny wise, pound foolish."

[Darth Tanner]

Some of the funniest ones...

It should be illegal to park outside somone elses house between the hours of 7pm and 7 am
Scrap the tv licence... because everything’s gone digital
Put a 20mph zone in Soho
Empower FA refs to make the correct decision
Knight David Beckham

I’m amazed at how many idiots have mindlessly posted about F1 going off the BBC, there’s just hundreds of them!

Frankly, the current decision not to have them nuclear powered may be a case of "penny wise, pound foolish."

It’s a bit late in the process to be changing such a fundamental design element though isn’t it?

[ChaserGrey]

Apparently the people want the new aircraft carriers to be nuclear powered

ETA: I can read it now... and...
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/399

Yep, the same Junior Planespotters apparently also want the carriers equipped with naval versions of Eurofighter and Apache helicopters.

Presumably demands for a hot tub, a railgun array and a planet-killing superlaser were tabled.

And Simon, I happen to agree with you- nuclear propulsion makes a lot more sense if you're going to use the carrier for any significant period of time, given that a) carriers are really, really big and b) the need for wind over the deck during flight operations means they spend a disproportionate amount of their time at maximum speed, not most economical speed. Regardless, with the first of class already laid down it's a tad late to be making those kinds of changes on the QE class.

Besides, given that they plan to put the second ship in ordinary as soon as she's complete, maybe nuclear wouldn't have been a good choice after all.

[HMS Sophia]

What chasergrey said. I wouldn't mind the carriers being nuclear powered. That'd be great. But the first one is under construction as we speak so... a bit late?

[Simon_Jester]

Yep.

Still, I fault people less for having a good idea and not thinking it through than I do for having a bad idea.

[HMS Sophia]

Still, I fault people less for having a good idea and not thinking it through than I do for having a bad idea.

True... But it's the "It should have nuclear power! and heavy weaponry! and 50 planes!...
I dunno. It's just ridiculous.

On topic, the pro-death petition isn't gonna get anywhere. There are already more people for anti-pro-death... or whatever you call it.
Also, this could be terrible if less popular political parties realise they could use this to get their views discussed...

[Minischoles]

A few do have some merit, like rape defendents being anonymous, the nation's health, price of alcohol increase.
Not really surprised the EU and jail conditions got up there, both are things the tabloid rags have been screeching about for years.

[Zaune]

Thanks for posting this, evilsoup, I was starting to have doubts about leaving the country. This has cleared them up wonderfully.

Yep, the same Junior Planespotters apparently also want the carriers equipped with naval versions of Eurofighter and Apache helicopters.

Presumably demands for a hot tub, a railgun array and a planet-killing superlaser were tabled.

I can see some advantages to a common design for carrier- and land-based fighter aircraft, and the F-35 his behind schedule, over budget and no longer going to be delivered in the spec we intended to buy when we signed up for the program. Probably too late to pull out now, of course.

And they've actually got their wish with the Apache, up to a point; the British version is modified for carrier operations, and would normally operate off the amphibious assault ship HMS Ocean.

[ChaserGrey]

Yep, the same Junior Planespotters apparently also want the carriers equipped with naval versions of Eurofighter and Apache helicopters.

Presumably demands for a hot tub, a railgun array and a planet-killing superlaser were tabled.

I can see some advantages to a common design for carrier- and land-based fighter aircraft, and the F-35 his behind schedule, over budget and no longer going to be delivered in the spec we intended to buy when we signed up for the program. Probably too late to pull out now, of course.

Of course, that's part of what got us into the JSF mess in the first place. More seriously, Naval Typhoon was looked at when JSF first started running into problems. It's theoretically possible, but it would be a major redesign as Typhoon isn't built for catapult launches and arrested landings. You'd also lose a lot of strike capability, assuming JSF delivers in that regard.

And they've actually got their wish with the Apache, up to a point; the British version is modified for carrier operations, and would normally operate off the amphibious assault ship HMS Ocean.

Huh. Well, you learn something new every day, thanks. Still not something I'd base on your big-deck carrier, though, as I would *not* want to take those ships within an Apache flight radius of the shore. Sunburns hurt.

[TC27]

Any further monies spent on the CVF need to go on fitting cat and traps to both hulls and ideally placing a Aster 15 capability on the ship itself epsecially if Type 45s are going to be restricted to six.


Regarding the DP - its a dog whistle to some people but there's absolutely no chance of it being re-instated certainly whilst we remain within the EU.

[evilsoup]

Mwahaha, signatures for the death penalty: 2,851; signature against: 5,788

[ChaserGrey]

Any further monies spent on the CVF need to go on fitting cat and traps to both hulls and ideally placing a Aster 15 capability on the ship itself epsecially if Type 45s are going to be restricted to six.

They're already being fitted with cats and traps, and the UK order for the JSF is being changed to the C model. Methinks they're hedging against the B model being cancelled, which is looking more and more likely.

As for air defense, meh. Six destroyers is plenty to cover one carrier.

[TimothyC]

As for air defense, meh. Six destroyers is plenty to cover one carrier.

Six destroyers does not mean six per carrier - it means more like 2.

With six ships you get one in deep refit, two in refit/working up/training, two with the active carrier, and one showing the flag someplace.

[Teebs]

Amusingly enough I actually know the guy who started the 'retain the ban' petition.

I find it interesting that the whole death penalty thing has been started by an ostensibly libertarian/small-government blogger. One would have thought that for those that don't trust the government to do things efficiently and properly, expanding its power to include the right to put people to death would not be part of their beliefs. Yay hypocrisy.

[ChaserGrey]

Well, yes. I suppose my point is that if ASTER works even closed to what it says on the tin, two Type 45s should be able to protect a carrier group against anything short of a multi-regiment Backfire strike. You don't see too many of those these days.

[Lord Zentei]

Amusingly enough I actually know the guy who started the 'retain the ban' petition.

I find it interesting that the whole death penalty thing has been started by an ostensibly libertarian/small-government blogger. One would have thought that for those that don't trust the government to do things efficiently and properly, expanding its power to include the right to put people to death would not be part of their beliefs. Yay hypocrisy.

It's not part of their beliefs, as a rule.

[Teebs]

It's not part of their beliefs, as a rule.

Sorry if I was insufficiently clear, I was directing my comment at Paul Staines/Guido Fawkes' behaviour, not that of libertarians in general.

[ComradeClaus]

Why doesn't UK buy Rafale? It's already carrier capable & the Europeans are all lovey-dovey w/ buying each others stuff. They only advantage of the EF over the F-35 is a spare engine. Which is insurance I prefer. No need to mock Naval Apache, there was as program in the 80's to develop one.

Personnaly, I like the death penalty. A dead criminal is cheaper than a live criminal & a far lesser threat to peace. But I prefer something spectacular, like a coliseum. (Look up "pummelonia Superjail" to see how fun it could be) Of course I was raised on a very simple understanding of Justice. Bad things must be punished, pay evil unto evil. Plus all the John wayne & clint eastwood flicks where all the baddies are smitten righteously. Or the scene in Conan where Arnie beheads Thulsa Doom, gruesomely violent execution of an unarmed criminal, but cathartic. Of course the death penalty is so rare, it isn't a viable deterrent. A criminal is far more liable to die at the hands of his fellow inmates, or recieve attention from the "Health Inspector", then take a trip to "Ye Olde Sparkie"

[Zaune]

Why doesn't UK buy Rafale? It's already carrier capable & the Europeans are all lovey-dovey w/ buying each others stuff. They only advantage of the EF over the F-35 is a spare engine. Which is insurance I prefer.

Apart from the fact that we've already sunk rather a lot of tax revenue into developing the Eurofighter and our domestic aviation industry needs all the help it can get right now, we have some history with the French that would tend to make buying military equipment off them... unpopular, shall we say.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

Personnaly, I like the death penalty. A dead criminal is cheaper than a live criminal

This is a common misconception, but its wrong. Life without parole is actually cheaper than execution. That pesky constitution gets in the way of cheap, quick executions.

Even if the death penalty was cheaper than life without parole, there is still a problem with it. What if you execute the wrong guy? If you put a man in prison for murder, and then ten years down the line new evidence exonerates him, he can be released, compensated for his lost time in some way. But if you execute a man for murder, and ten years later new evidence exonerates him, all you can do is say "Oops, my bad." See the problem there?

[Hamstray]

Or the scene in Conan where Arnie beheads Thulsa Doom, gruesomely violent execution of an unarmed criminal, but cathartic.

Isn't Conan the lawless criminal? Thulsa Doom acts well within the legal boundaries of his own society.