E-petitions

[DimPrawn]

Taken to it's logical conclusion we would find ourself in a country where (Sir) Jeremy Clarkson is Prime Minister, heroin is compulsory, the death penalty is restored and applied in public to anyone claiming benefits for more than 12 months, Strictly Come Dancing is on for 4 hours every night and Members of parliament are elected by 'I'm a celebrity - get me out of here....' voting.

I'd vote for that.

 

[Spacecadet]

Taken to it's logical conclusion we would find ourself in a country where (Sir) Jeremy Clarkson is Prime Minister, heroin is compulsory, the death penalty is restored and applied in public to anyone claiming benefits for more than 12 months, Strictly Come Dancing is on for 4 hours every night and Members of parliament are elected by 'I'm a celebrity - get me out of here....' voting.

No green taxes

 

[hyperD]

Taken to it's logical conclusion we would find ourself in a country where (Sir) Jeremy Clarkson is Prime Minister, heroin is compulsory, the death penalty is restored and applied in public to anyone claiming benefits for more than 12 months, Strictly Come Dancing is on for 4 hours every night and Members of parliament are elected by 'I'm a celebrity - get me out of here....' voting.

I'll second that. Just to see the Righteous plummet to more miserable depths of wretchedness.

 

[Old Greg]

Stupid site is 'busy' and won't let me add any new petitions.

 

[Paddy]

Apart from the death penalty will not be brought back, (The USA is the only Western Country left using it) There are far too many innocent people who’s convictions have been overturned at a late stage, some after execution. Those people in favour usually say that it’s OK to execute a few innocent people because overall it’s better to have capital punishment however, their argument breaks down when you ask them are they willing to sacrifice their own son or daughter it they are wrongly convicted.

 

[vetran]

Its a good idea its what I wanted from the original site.

Pity really they missed the opportunity to add the choice when signing to be for or against. That would halve the petitions and give a clear indication of interest without forcing people to raise a rival petition and diluting the voting.

 

[Arturo Bassick]

Its a good idea its what I wanted from the original site.

Pity really they missed the opportunity to add the choice when signing to be for or against. That would halve the petitions and give a clear indication of interest without forcing people to raise a rival petition and diluting the voting.

It is stupid. The petitions are to trigger debate. If you are happy with the status quo then why do something to trigger the debate.

It is a PETITION site, not a referendum, those may come later.

 

[vetran]

The thing about a petition is that it was invented before new technology made multiple choices easy.

If you are asked to physically sign a petition the sponsor will likely be in favour of the proposed change therefore its only likely to consist of positive adherents.

As the petition site is impartial then positive & negative views are possible. As the gauge for interest and therefore consideration for debate is a fixed number it makes sense to measure for & against votes.

For example if someone petitions for shorter prison sentences but there are overwhelming objections to such a move that suggests prison sentences should be reviewed but may need to be increased rather than decreased. But there is a strong feeling amongst the electorate and therefore they need consideration.

Possibly it would become a non binding referendum but it makes sense to expand it in my opinion.

Referendums the questions are normally decided by the government petitions are raised by the electorate.

 

[Paddy]

This could happen to anyone:

CORSICANA, Texas -- Strapped to a gurney in Texas' death chamber earlier this year, just moments from his execution for setting a fire that killed his three daughters, Cameron Todd Willingham declared his innocence one last time.

"I am an innocent man, convicted of a crime I did not commit," Willingham said angrily. "I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do."

While Texas authorities dismissed his protests, a Tribune investigation of his case shows that Willingham was prosecuted and convicted based primarily on arson theories that have since been repudiated by scientific advances. According to four fire experts consulted by the Tribune, the original investigation was flawed and it is even possible the fire was accidental.

Before Willingham died by lethal injection on Feb. 17, Texas judges and Gov. Rick Perry turned aside a report from a prominent fire scientist questioning the conviction.

The author of the report, Gerald Hurst, reviewed additional documents, trial testimony and an hourlong videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene at the Tribune's request last month. Three other fire investigators--private consultants John Lentini and John DeHaan and Louisiana fire chief Kendall Ryland--also examined the materials for the newspaper.

"There's nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire," said Hurst, a Cambridge University-educated chemist who has investigated scores of fires in his career. "It was just a fire."

Ryland, chief of the Effie Fire Department and a former fire instructor at Louisiana State University, said that, in his workshop, he tried to re-create the conditions the original fire investigators described.

When he could not, he said, it "made me sick to think this guy was executed based on this investigation. ... They executed this guy and they've just got no idea--at least not scientifically--if he set the fire, or if the fire was even intentionally set."

Texas Man Executed on Disproved Forensics | Death Penalty Information Center

 

[SueEllen]

This could happen to anyone:

Agreed - Google Sally Clark and see how easy it is for an "expert" in the UK to get someone convicted of murder.