Death penalty is unlikely to return

MY thanks to Peter Wadsley for his thought-provoking letter on why the death penalty should not be reintroduced and it is hard to make a case against his argument. However, I do wonder if the statement about the death penalty not being a deterrent is altogether correct.

I realise that it is easy to look back at previous years through ‘rosetinted glasses’, but it seems to me that even before it was abolished the crime rate where knives and guns were used in fatal attacks was considerably less than they are today, and it appears that to some carrying a knife is apparently a normal thing to do, which does make me wonder if they would continue to do so if they knew they would face the ‘ultimate penalty’ should they use it.

Peter is absolutely correct when he says that the death penalty is retribution, but to be honest, if it was reintroduced for terrorism, which is basically a crime against the State, it would probably find more support from the people in this country, many of whom may feel that just locking up someone for a life term – at our expense – who has committed such a terrible crime of murdering dozens of innocent people with a bomb (even if they actually serve that time which is rare) is insufficient and proper retribution for their act is required.

I suppose in reality this debate is a bit pointless, as it would not deter a committed terrorist, but may do so for those who think that violence is OK to inflict on others.

However, I cannot see the death penalty being reintroduced under any circumstances.

Paul Mercer

Tavistock