Norman Tebbit urges death penalty for police killers debate

 
Lord Tebbit Lord Tebbit said arguments against capital punishment for murder "have always been thin"

Related Stories

Bringing back the death penalty for those who kill police officers should be considered, Conservative peer Lord Tebbit has said.

He said he was reluctant to see the routine arming of police officers, but the "deterrent effect of the shadow of the gallows" should be reconsidered.

It follows the fatal shooting of two police officers in Greater Manchester.

Lord Tebbit has long supported a return of the death penalty in certain circumstances.

As an MP he voted a number of times to bring back capital punishment for murderers, including those who kill police officers.

'Violent criminals'

Writing on The Daily Telegraph website, he said: "The murder of two unarmed women police officers is bound to reignite the debate over whether our police officers should be armed as a matter of routine and whether there should be a return to capital punishment for limited categories of murder, such as that of a police officer, or more generally."

Yvette Cooper: "I think it would be a really sad day if we lost that tradition of unarmed British policing'

The former chairman of the Conservative Party rejected calls for the arming of police because it would "widen the gap which has grown between the police and the public in recent years".

But, he said, there had been "far too many killings" recently where it was impossible not to wonder if the threat of an "early dawn walk to the gallows" would have changed the actions of the perpetrator.

"The hard fact is, as violent criminals know perfectly well, a credible threat that a man will lose his life unless he complies with a demand usually results in obedience."

Lord Tebbit said concerns that such a penalty would lead to miscarriages of justice - with the innocent executed - would be mitigated by the care juries would take deliberating when they knew a person's life was at stake.

He said: "I have kept track year by year since the death penalty was suspended, then abolished, of the number of people who have been killed by persons previously convicted of homicide.

"It has averaged three people a year. About 150 people killed because their killers have been freed to kill again.

"Would our courts have sentenced to death three innocent people a year, year in year out? I doubt it.

"I think it is time we thought again about the deterrent effect of the shadow of the gallows."

 

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +6

    Comment number 684.

    No! Heinous criminal acts should be severely punished but the death penalty is an archaic and unfathomably uncivilised punishment. Some might also call it the easy way out.

    Knee jerk reactions to anything aren't properly thought out by definition and we all need to take a step back and think why the death penalty was removed in the first place.

  • rate this
    +6

    Comment number 653.

    Alot of anger on the forums today, rightly so.

    However I feel alot of 'Hang em High' posters are blogging more out of the frustration they know our prison system is Butlins for bad guys, and know the punishment, even if he is given life really does not suit the crime.

    While I support rehabilitation of offenders, some really do deserve dark damp cells to rot in. Perhaps thats the real debate...

  • rate this
    +10

    Comment number 618.

    I can't see how capital punishment will prevent people committing acts of murder.
    Before capital punishment was abolished the threat of the gallows didn't stop murder. Why should it be any different now?
    Capital punishment, in the past, has served no other purpose than to seek revenge and satisfy a base human desire for coarse retribution.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 604.

    Yes we need the death penalty - if not as a deterrent for the primary crime but to prevent any chance for that offender to reoffend. And not just for a police killer but for serial killers, child killers, and multiple killers. The death sentence provides relief to society, to relatives and also to prison budgets. Rehabilitation, mercy or humanity are liberal luxuries in such a case.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 598.

    As a society we seem to be seeing more murders and a total lack of respect for human life. We live in an anything goes society, where a liberal/ tolerant attitude works in favour of the murderer: Killers are given lenient sentences, which are nothing more than an insult to their victims/victim's families. Death penalty........yes, let's have the debate it's long overdue!

 

Comments 5 of 16

 

More Politics stories

RSS

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.