By Max Musson:
As paedophile Mark Bridger goes to prison to serve a life sentence for the murder of five year old April Jones, the question we should now be asking ourselves, is how many more deaths will Mark Bridger’s imprisonment cause before his life comes to an end?
Bridger was sentenced to a ‘whole life’ prison term and while opponents of capital punishment may feel that this is a just and fitting end to this affair, proponents of capital punishment point to the costs that will be incurred needlessly keeping Bridger alive in prison.
The prison service costs the British taxpayer a total of £3,580,000,000 per annum, with a current prisoner population of 84,431, and this means that on average, it costs £42,401 per annum to keep an offender in prison. Presumably, potentially violent maximum security prisoners will cost rather more, and non-violent offenders held in open prisons will cost less.
Mark Bridger is forty-seven years old and if he lives another forty years, this means that he will cost the taxpayer £1,696,040 over that period.
When one considers the current climate of financial shortages and government cut-backs to vital services, it seems ludicrous that so much money will be wasted keeping alive someone who will always be a danger to those around him and who will never make a positive contribution to the life of our people.
When one considers that heart disease is a major killer in this country and that a life saving heart valve replacement operation costs the NHS just £10,000, our action in keeping Mark Bridger alive means that during the remainder of his lifetime, the public purse will be denied the funding necessary for the NHS to potentially carry out 169 life saving heart valve replacement operations.
In other words in the ‘zero sum game’ of life, our misplaced humanitarianism, causing us to spare Mark Bridger’s life, means that his life will be paid for through the unnecessary deaths of a further 169 innocent people over the next forty years.
While there may be a case for with-holding the death penalty in murder cases where the evidence is less clear and where there is potentially the possibility that a convicted murderer may later be found innocent, in a case such a this, in which the killer is a known paedophile; in which he was witnessed abducting April Jones; in which he has confessed to killing April Jones; and in which traces of her blood and a fragment of her charred skull have been found in his house, there can be no justification at all for keeping him alive.
The majority of the British people have many times stated their support for the death penalty in cases such as this. It is high time government agreed to implement the democratic wishes of our people.
By Max Musson © 2013
# # # #
Steve
- Edit
I’d be quite happy for this man to be fed to rabid dogs & when the death penalty was abolished it was supposed to have been replaced with life in prison.
But I have heard of quite nasty murders being punished with only a few years in prison, look at the Jamie Bulger killers for example.
I think making equivalents like this “Will 169 More People Die?” is rather misleading & pointless as you can do this all day long with lots of things.
Simply because you can’t prove one leads to the other.
The cost of mass immigration however you could tie to needless deaths such as if we hadn’t let so & so into the country, this other person wouldn’t be dead in this way or those girls wouldn’t be sex slaves.
Maybe NHS being an International Health Service is costing us dear & draining resources away from those more deserving of them.
Steve
- Edit
I think you might be referring to pilpulism (Pepper)?
A Jewish trait where they argue one way on one occasion then the other way another time to win arguments or to tie contradictions together to suit themselves.
Also regarded as hypocrisy or bare faced cheek.
frederickdixon
- Edit
There is only one good moral argument against the death penalty and that is the possibility of wrongful convictions, which we know have happened. I discount the arguments of professional handwringers such as bishops and left- liberal politicians. Unfortunately the arguments of such people do have widespread influence, and I fear that that would result in today’s atmosphere in perverse acquittals, in difficulty in finding prosecuting counsel willing to act, in finding judges willing to sit in capital cases.
All in all, although in my heart I agree with Max, my head tells me that we should have “life means life” and leave it at that.
Steve
- Edit
Ok lets face it, even in a white paradise we will have such people & we will have to deal with them.
The worst of them should face the death penalty, you could have degrees of death penalty, like shooting or hanging for the worst & maybe hypoxia as a softer option?
But our present situation of importing “people most likely to” must stop.
Our enemies tell us it’s enrichment but we say it’s a deliberate destruction of our culture & race replacement.
Steve
- Edit
I think Pierrepoint prided himself in executing a man in about 30 seconds flat.
His fastest was about 7 seconds from cell to dropped.