do you think that murderers should be sent to jail?

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:03pm #1

solice · 12-09-2003 2:04pm

bring back the death penalty

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:07pm

They should be given training like sniffer dogs get, and trained to attack skangers.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:07pm

you're a sniffer dog

solice · 12-09-2003 2:08pm

you want to teach a murderer to attack other people. ok, doubts over your sanity

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:10pm

I don't think the death penalty should be brought back. Murder doesn't give the state justification to commit murder. Besides what if a mistake was made, or martial law came in, and people got executed for less serious offences.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:11pm

i think you should be brought back

solice · 12-09-2003 2:11pm

we are talking about murder not anything else, and if someone takes a life in all seriousness why should their life not be taken from them

Wook · 12-09-2003 2:11pm

murderers should be placed on a 'battle royal' kinda island and screened for reality TV, so they provide us with many pleasant cozy evenings.

Sposs · 12-09-2003 2:13pm

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:14pm

good one sposs.

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:15pm

I don't agree with the "eye for an eye" approach. Solice, you're a catholic, haven't you ever heard of granting mercy. Fair enough, they should be locked away for public safety, but death penalty is too extreme.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:17pm

Originally posted by Sposs

right back atcha

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:18pm

well duhhh, but what's that got to do with the thread?

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:20pm

whats anything got to do with the thread?
its a bull**** thread.

solice · 12-09-2003 2:20pm

its a preventitive method. "eye for an eve" it could be construed as. but as far as i am concerned, someone who takes a life is not worthy of living. that person hsa committed a most awful crime (not the worst, there are alot worse crimes that can be committed)

but we will draw a par. is someone who committed one murder less guilty than someone who committed multiple murders. no.

jack the ripper deserved to die. washington rifle dudes deserve to die. timothy mcveigh deserved to die. carla faye tucker deserved to die. osma bin laden deserves to die.

when you take a life you take a life. to hell with them

solice · 12-09-2003 2:23pm

Originally posted by partyboy
whats anything got to do with the thread?
its a bull**** thread.

seriously partyboy, i know you are trolling but if you are going to start a thread at least have the fcuking intellect and brain power to go through with it.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:27pm

well done chief, real boring.

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:28pm

It's not always about "what someone deserves" but what is in the best interest of society. Fair enough jack the ripper "deserved to die", but if you follow your argument then what happens when the victim themselves "deserved to die". What if someone was to do away with jack the ripper the way they did away with the general etc. What if someone decides to commit a lynching. Could the argument that the victim deserved it be used in their defence? Because that's the defence you're using for the state.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:29pm

i totally disagree

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:31pm

by the way partyboy, you're a dickhead. If the thread is too boring for you, **** off. If you're going to start a thread, like solice said don't start saying "oh I've changed my mind, don't want to talk about anymore". Just don't talk about it any more. Go elsewhere. Start a "fun" thread if that's what you want.

solice · 12-09-2003 2:31pm

so in the interest of society, its fair to put a known killer back on the streets after serving a sentence (which in ireland is only between 5 to 10 years, and a parole board announced that all murderes should spend no less than 12 years in prision)

is it in the interest of society to leave murderes back on the streets after 12 years, i think not

could this please be moved to politics board.

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:34pm

That's a different issue though. I agree that's it not right to have a "life sentence" of only 12 years, but that's seperate to the issue of the death penalty.

solice · 12-09-2003 2:35pm

and so is "mob rule" and "lynching"

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:38pm

Lynching is the act of killing a criminal because it's believed to be "in the best interests". You're stating that the state should get involved in a "legitimate" form of this. Just because the victim deserves to be killed doesn't mean they should be killed. I know lots of people who deserve to be killed for whatever reasons, but I don't go out and do it, and neither should the state (although I'd like to see them arrested, damn gardai).

Stark · 12-09-2003 2:40pm

http://users.rcn.com/mwood/deathpen.html

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:41pm

saps

HJ Simpson · 12-09-2003 2:41pm

I find it hard to agree or disagree.
Part of me says yep an eye for an eye.
However if we look at the Birmingham Six, Guildford 4 in England they would surely have been put to death. Later however the police were found to be to lazy to actually gather proper evidence.
The gardai have also been found to make up evidence "Donegal" for example.

HJS

solice · 12-09-2003 2:44pm

this is not a debate on gardai, its on pathetic judiciary system that we have.

lynching is carried out by a person or group of people. the last lynching i heard of was by jack ruby when he kille lee harvey oswald. lee harvey oswald deserved to die. he was going to be executed either way. jack ruby was executed for his murder.

state sanctioned executions, death penalty is a means to deal with people who have no respect for life. sure checks and balances will have to be put in to make sure there is no in justice carried out. but when you have a murderer, who has committed an act so grossly against society, someone who shows no remorse for what that person did. then why should we waste hundreds of thousands each year on keeping him locked up and then release him after 12. its bloody disgraceful

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:51pm

ruby went to jail

partyboy · 12-09-2003 2:53pm

solice · 12-09-2003 2:54pm

if thats the case, i stand corrected. but he commited murder, in front of the world, on camera. he did not show remorse for it. and american taxpayers paid for his incarcariation, paid to feed him, clothe him, wash him. thats sick

oh and partyboy, welcome to the conversation. see its not that hard

Beëlzebooze · 12-09-2003 2:59pm

Interesting thread for AH, too bad that pee-brain partyboy might get it locked.

Beëlzebooze · 12-09-2003 3:01pm

In general I don't agree with state sancioned murder , which the death penalty is. But on the other hand, some people just do not deserve to die, or realy are beyond the law.

partyboy · 12-09-2003 3:03pm

give murderers drugs

money

and access to children

Victor · 12-09-2003 3:09pm

Originally posted by solice
but as far as i am concerned, someone who takes a life is not worthy of living.

So do we then execute the executioner.

Sposs · 12-09-2003 3:19pm

Littletinyman · 12-09-2003 3:29pm

LOLOLOL

Victor · 12-09-2003 3:39pm

Originally posted by solice
then why should we waste hundreds of thousands each year on keeping him locked up and then release him after 12.

€331,000,000 a year to keep an average of 3,200 prisoners = €103,000 per prisoner per year. Not "hundreds of thousands". And think of the millions that it would cost to have all those appeals.

Beëlzebooze · 12-09-2003 3:52pm

300 million to keep three and a half thousand peeps under lock and key?

300 MILLION?

just imagine what else could be done with that kind of money. the mind boggles.

where did you get this info from?

Victor · 12-09-2003 4:17pm

Originally posted by Beëlzebooze
300 million to keep three and a half thousand peeps under lock and key? 300 MILLION?

http://www.irishprisons.ie/statistics.asp

http://www.finance.gov.ie/publications/otherpubs/rev2003c.pdf Vote - 21, it actaully includes the Probation Service so it's actually less than €100,000 per prisoner. Most of the money actually goes on salaries.

Mercury_Tilt · 12-09-2003 4:34pm

This post has been deleted.

Mossy Monk · 12-09-2003 4:43pm

hard labour for all murderers. the death penalty would be too easy on them

simu · 12-09-2003 4:54pm

Yes, they should be jailed and for a *long* time. 12 yrs is not enough, good behaviour or no good behaviour. You kill someone as a teenager, you're out again when you're in your 30's.

I'm against the death penalty - firstly, in case new evidence comes to light and secondly because spending decades in a prison cell is tougher punishment than non-existence.

LoneGunM@n · 12-09-2003 7:19pm

Deep down I'd like to see all murderers burn in hell!!

But we live in a "civilised society", so that'd be wrong. So they should be made to serve @ least LIFE.

In the absence of the death penalty, they should be chucked in solitary confinement and fed bread & water for LIFE

Littletinyman · 12-09-2003 10:27pm

I'd like to see you burn in hell

LegacyUser · 12-09-2003 10:49pm

if there's ever a referendum on introducing the death penalty
there should be a clause

if you vote yes you will be the first miscarriage of justice

wonder would it pass

solice · 15-09-2003 1:25pm

when we had the three in a row referendum not so long ago we voted to remove the penalty as a means of punishment from the constituition.

i was too young to vote at the time but i was pushing to keep it in

Beëlzebooze · 15-09-2003 1:43pm

the penal system is about rehabilitation/reform, not about revenge. If convicted criminals are put to death, there is no rehabilitation, only revenge.

for those of you who are for the death penalty to be reintroduced, what did you have in mind?

the method used as a deterrent: electric chair, gas or hanging? or the more 'humane' method; Lethal injection?

what would the age cutoff point be? what about mentaly handicapped people? would they also be executed on your behest, like in the US?

solice · 15-09-2003 1:47pm

any person of sound mind (not legally insane) that shows no remorse for a murder committed by them should be executed.

i would think lethal injection would do fine

Havelock · 15-09-2003 1:54pm

[The following content should not be seen as all my own views but as a provokation for conversation]

Yes, the death penality should be brought back into effect.

Their should be no age restriction.

Their is no such thing as a miscarrage of justice.

It should not be restricted to murderers alone, rapests and drug dealers (of hard drugs) should suffer it to.

A bullet applied to the base of the skull will suffice, fired by state employed exicutioner. Full clip will be loaded to make sure.

Yes the severaly handicapped (those who cannot produce anything for the benifit of socity) should be sterilised and killed.

What is wrong with gasing? It would be a cheap and effective way of carring out the above.

All of socities dregs should be "cleanised" to make a more productive socity, with out burdens we would better prosper.

do you think that murderers should be sent to jail?

Comments