I know that in the US, there have been many times where cops gun down some bystander or someone who wasn't armed, etc., so the death penalty in the US doesn't even play a role in that regard as these are people getting killed even before they get a trial

Don't know whether that happens in the UK or not, since I don't follow british news

i am not going to comment on a case that i have only a wikipedia article and links to newspaper articles as sources. because, unless i have personally spoken to people from all sides involved i can not claim to have a fair opinion.

but i can tell you i am all for keeping dangerous individuals out of society.

i can also understand that you are upset about that they are freed and protected. and i am not saying it is right that they are, but neither do i think it is right to rile up other people to kill them.

No it doesn't. i think there was a pre-referendum survey done to guage people's feelings towards it a few years ago, most people don't want it reinstated, and in my opinion a lot of the people who DO want it back, are the sort of people who read The Sun.

My post was like 50% a joke.

I'm for the death penalty. I'm against torturing of any kind. I'm also against revenge. Death takes care of the problem. Turturing and revenge serves no point and it doesn't undo what was done.

Death would prevent them from ever doing it again. Keeping them locked up would be a waste of money.

An even more scary thought is what they would probably do to those poor children.

I guess "justice" would be recieving a proper punishment for doing something wrong. THey only spent 8 years, and in a juvenile institution, not a jail. They had better conditions in there, than they had at home (and from my undertsanding they had abusive families, so leaving them at home would've probably been a better option to punish them). It's really not such a terrible place to be in. They even had access to education, and after they were out they had the opportunity to start their lives over.

In my opinion, considering what they've (gory details and all), the only "just" punishment would be for them to loose their lives. This doesn't mean that they should be killed, but they should be robbed of the oppotunity to have a life (in other words they should spend life in solitary confinement: no TV, no exercise, no one to talk to, nothing to read, just themselves and their thoughts for the rest of their existence). I think that would bring peace maybe to the victim's families, but it would definately bring peace to the general population (including me ), because you'd know that you can't go around doing something like this without suffering true consiquences.

There's no heaven or hell, so if you want people to be good you have to create a hell on earth, to make regular society seem like heaven.

Well, he may enjoy killing people, but he is effective, no? As long as he doesn't kill any innocents he's useful.

As for any "psychological problems" they may have had, they had none. Had they had any psychological problems it's obvious that it wouldn't have been their fault, as they wouldn't have been in sound mind. The solution to that would've been to throw them in an insane asylum. However they were of very sound mind when they did what they did. They even tried to kidnapp kids before, so it was all premeditated. They were very aware of what they were doing, and they did it all in cold blood. If these doesn't have "life in prison" written all over it, then I don't know what has.They didn't even show any sign of remorse for what they did.

The reason why I think they should be killed at this point is that they played the system, played all the idiot judges and psychologists who like pointing fingers at society, the family, movies, video games etc., but never at the bastards who commit the act.These individuals are pure evil, and one way or anither need to be eliminated from society.

Society is turning more and more like a place where bullies are made out to be the victims, and the real victims become punching bags. No amout of abuse they may have suffered at home justifies what they did. No movies they may have seen excuse their behavior. They did it because they wanted to do it, and they should be punished accordingly. You say they're kids, but only the most monstrous adult killers commit such acts.  Taking their lives (not necessarily by killing them, but giving them a lifetime of solitary confidement would be perfect) is the right thing to do, it's something most people would agree to,  and the way the authorities and the courts handled this does nothing more than shake people's trust in the legal system, which should stand for justice, above all else.

Yeah, I might have gotten a wee bit carried away with that one. I've always hated when I see injustices take place, and it bugs me that people commit atrocities and get off easy (if they get any sort of punishment at all), while others have their lives ruined over small mistakes, or even when they do nothing wrong at all.

Also I would be fine with imprisonment and rehabilitation.  But solitary confinment has been proven to be counterproductive and make people more likely to commit violent acts of impulse.  It makes people more paranoid and less trusting of others.

@Armad:

They had largely undeveloped minds and their ability to rationally think about the consequences of their actions was not yet developed. 

Yawn... Nonsense.

Kids who commit crimes should be tried as juveniles

No. They should be tried as adults. Juvenile crimes is a joke.

People who grow up in middle-class communities surrounded by suburbs with plenty of jobs and opportunities don't don't commit crimes unless they're genetically predisposed to attack other individuals.

Genetically predesposed? Just another theory that's yet to be proven.And if it's true, than rehabilitation is pointless.

Yeah the system failed this one time, but that doesn't mean we need to go out and kill them ourselves, we fix any loopholes and don't let the mistake happen again.  We don't go out and commit vindictive acts of vengence because that's just as bad for society as this murder.

Fixing the "loopholes" would imply getting rid of the juvenile crime system, which really is a loophole that shouldn't exist, but I doubt you agree with it. And they should still be punished for what they've done, not get away with it. Saying that vidinctive acts acts are just as bad for society as this murder is like saying that attacking a foreign country that attacks you is bad.

Also I would be fine with imprisonment and rehabilitation.  But solitary confinment has been proven to be counterproductive and make people more likely to commit violent acts of impulse.  It makes people more paranoid and less trusting of others.

Rehabilitation should be used in some cases where there's still hope, and where the criminal deservse a second chance (like forexample some poor fellow who resorts to stealing). In this case they shouldn't recieve any rehabilitation. They don't deserve it, and it would be pointless anyway. I'm sayin that they should recieve solitary confinement for life, so that fact that it will make them paranoid and less trusting of others is pointless, as they'll never get a chance to talk to others angain (in my proposed punishment).

If we give up on the idea of rehabilitation, our entire concept of justice and imprisonment may as well be thrown out the window.

What those kids did to that toddler was terrible but it must be kept in mind that they were children themselves. Advocating the murder of children in response to their misguided thought processes is just as repulsive as the atrocities they committed.