do you think ireland should have a death penalty?

lightspeed

hi after reading the papers and listening to the news over the past few years it seems to me that the only solution to deter serious acts of evil is by executing the offenders. i read yesterday in the evening herald about a twice convicted rapist lured a young girl by pretended to be a young man on facebook, he then pretended to be the father of the young man he was pretending to be and after luring her into his car he raped and murdered her. Then today i read in the irish sun about a separate incident in which a serial rapist raped and tied up a woman in her home . He then got a butchers knife and started slashing her legs and telling her he was going to drown her baby and cut it into pieces. the judge in this case sentenced him to 12 years in prison but the judge wanted to give him a life sentence . The judge said that the life sentence would not make it through the appeal process as his previous rapes were a double rape and not 2 separate incidents. i have no idea why this scumbag is shown such leniency because he raped 2 woman at the same time and not at separate occasions? can anybody explain why that is justified?
so in 12 years time or most likely less with good behavior this man could be living next door to you or you daughter or sister or family. It just a raffle as to where these people will be placed . apparently from what i read in singapore where they have the death penalty with the oppurtunity for only 1 appeal they have much less serious crime such as this. DNA is also a lot more sophisticated at least in the states so the chances of someone being wrongfully convicted are pretty slim. So whats your opinions on the matter?

Caoimhín

Think?

genericguy

i know a lot of people are going to moan that we've become too civilised to use the death penalty, but at the end of the day for some of the crimes (particularly those of a sexual nature) that have been in the papers lately i think it is a greater sin to let the raping bastards live.

dvpower

Yes. For spelling mistakes.

Hellrazer

Yep public hangings in the Park.Charge €20 a go entrance fee and we`ll be out of this recession in no time.

Minstrel27

A lifetime of hard labour is what they should be dishing out.

super_furry

If England had the death penalty, the Birmingham Six would have been executed. If there's even a chance that one innocent person would be put to death, you can't have it.

stovelid

Only for the first poster to say something smart about paragraphs.

WIZE

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=64108996

fontanalis

lightspeed wrote: »

hi after reading the papers and listening to the news over the past few years it seems to me that the only solution to deter serious acts of evil is by executing the offenders. i read yesterday in the evening herald about a twice convicted rapist lured a young girl by pretended to be a young man on facebook, he then pretended to be the father of the young man he was pretending to be and after luring her into his car he raped and murdered her. Then today i read in the irish sun about a separate incident in which a serial rapist raped and tied up a woman in her home . He then got a butchers knife and started slashing her legs and telling her he was going to drown her baby and cut it into pieces. the judge in this case sentenced him to 12 years in prison but the judge wanted to give him a life sentence . The judge said that the life sentence would not make it through the appeal process as his previous rapes were a double rape and not 2 separate incidents. i have no idea why this scumbag is shown such leniency because he raped 2 woman at the same time and not at separate occasions? can anybody explain why that is justified?
so in 12 years time or most likely less with good behavior this man could be living next door to you or you daughter or sister or family. It just a raffle as to where these people will be placed . apparently from what i read in singapore where they have the death penalty with the oppurtunity for only 1 appeal they have much less serious crime such as this. DNA is also a lot more sophisticated at least in the states so the chances of someone being wrongfully convicted are pretty slim. So whats your opinions on the matter?

Here's an interesting development from texas.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/03/texas_judge_weve_executed_inno.php

DNA isn't osme silver bullet that will solve every crime, it's another tool in crime solving and can be powerful but it's not infalllible (DNA can end up at crime scenes indirectly).
My opinion on the death penalty is that killing should either be wrong or not so I'm against it but people like the cases you mentioned should never see daylight again.

GrizzlyMan

Yeah I agree with it, in certain cases! but it will never happen.

Prof.Badass

Rather than killing them, I think being forced to work as sex slaves for pensioners is what the scum* deserve.

*to qualify as scum all you have to do is be working class and either do drugs, claim the dole or wear a tracksuit (middle class people can do these things without being scum) :rolleyes:.

Mark200

I never understand when people try to justify a call for the death penalty by pointing at serious criminals who were released from prison. You don't need to kill them to stop them from being released... just change the courts system.

And the thing about serial murderers and rapists is that they don't expect to be caught, so the death penalty won't work. I don't buy for a second that there are people out there who might think a crime is worth committing because the punishment is life in prison, but then all of a sudden the crime is not worth committing because the risk is death.

who the fug

If you kill an officer of the state then yes.

knird evol

super_furry wrote: »

If England had the death penalty, the Birmingham Six would have been executed. If there's even a chance that one innocent person would be put to death, you can't have it.

You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs

NothingMan

who the fug wrote: »

If you kill an officer of the state then yes.

I'd like to think my life is worth as much as an "officer of the state". In certain circumstances yes I think the death penalty is justified.

Dudess

lightspeed wrote: »

hi after reading the papers and listening to the news over the past few years it seems to me that the only solution to deter serious acts of evil is by executing the offenders.

Even though it's not a deterrant in the United States?

who the fug

NothingMan wrote: »

I'd like to think my life is worth as much as an "officer of the state". In certain circumstances yes I think the death penalty is justified.

Yes but you are not paid to walk up and down the street, protecting the population

If you pull a gun on the state then I think it you should know before hand where the consequences of you action will end up

lightspeed

the birmingham six were only convicted to begin with because of corrupt police who switched dna samples and altered evidence. Thia can hapen in any case but how often does it?
If 2 gardai know me and have a quarrel against me what if they pulled me over and planted cocaine in my car?
as far as i know if you are found with drugs you eventually get convicted for possesion. So how would it be any different if drugs were planted by corrupt police and you were innocent and did 10 years or more?
Yes you will still be alive after your sentence but the point im making is that if its possible for the gardai to be as corrupt at the moment but yet it currently is not an issue then why would it be if we had a death penalty? Why would we suddenly have corrupt gardai trying to have innocent people executed for crimes like rape and murder? Also Dna evidence is a lot more advanced now then at the time that the birmingham six were wrongfully convicted. But given the number of re offending drug lords having innocent people murdered and rapists re offending and murdering innocent people i think its a fair argument to execute them upon 1st conviction for these crimes weighed against the lives lost by wrongfully convicted getting executed i think it would save more innocent lives. to prove this theory why not consider if you were to compare (a)the number of those wrongfully convicted and (b) the number of those that reoffended and murdered and raped more people and see which is higher? My guess is b

super_furry

lightspeed wrote: »

the birmingham six were only convicted to begin with because of corrupt police who switched dna samples and altered evidence. Thia can hapen in any case but how often does it?

Aside from there being no DNA evidence at all, the bolded part makes my point for me.

lightspeed

Dudess wrote: »

Even though it's not a deterrant in the United States?

Yes but the united states has legalised the ownership of guns which do dramatically increase the mumber of murders.Also only a few states carry out executions and have you actually looked at any statistics proving that it has not deterred murders in these states? if so please let me know where you found this information? In singapore guns are not legal . check out this link showing the statistics for homicides worldwide
http://chartsbin.com/view/ueh

check out ireland then scroll all the way down to the very bottom you will find singapore?
i dont think think that its a coincidence that singapore have outlawed the ownership of guns and enforce the death penalty do you?

Mark200

lightspeed wrote: »

Yes but the united states has legalised the ownership of guns which do dramatically increase the mumber of murders.Also only a few states carry out executions and have you actually looked at any statistics proving that it has not deterred murders in these states? if so please let me know where you found this information? In singapore guns are not legal . check out this link showing the statistics for homicides worldwide
http://chartsbin.com/view/ueh

check out ireland then scroll all the way down to the very bottom you will find singapore?
i dont think think that its a coincidence that singapore have outlawed the ownership of guns and enforce the death penalty do you?

According to that list, Luxembourg has almost identical murder rates - yet they don't have the death penalty. Hmm.

hooradiation

Tell you what, we can reintroduce the death penalty when we have a totally infallible justice system that will never wrongfully convict a person.

Until then, no.

Sigi

Abolishment of the death penalty is required for EU membership,so it's not gonna happen.

who the fug

Sigi wrote: »

Abolishment of the death penalty is required for EU membership,so it's not gonna happen.

Nothing to stop us leaving the EU, that is why we is independent

Le King

who the fug wrote: »

If you kill an officer of the state then yes.

Why? Just an officer...?

lightspeed

Mark200 wrote: »

According to that list, Luxembourg has almost identical murder rates - yet they don't have the death penalty. Hmm.

probably because the data is given as per 100,000 people and luxembourg has under 490,000 people and singapore has a population of approximately 4.9 million people. its easier to control and police a smaller population than a much larger population. That seems pretty logical to me.

who the fug

Osu wrote: »

Why? Just an officer...?

Officer

as an in

Garda
Tax Man
Soldier
Bailiff

etc

hooradiation

lightspeed wrote: »

probably because the data is given as per 100,000 people and luxembourg has under 490,000 people and singapore has a population of approximately 4.9 million people. its easier to control and police a smaller population than a much larger population. That seems pretty logical to me.

That's not how statistics work.

Mark200

lightspeed wrote: »

probably because the data is given as per 100,000 people and luxembourg has under 490,000 people and singapore has a population of approximately 4.9 million people. its easier to control and police a smaller population than a much larger population. That seems pretty logical to me.

Well if you want to bring logic into it, then it seems pretty obvious from looking at the list that as a general rule it's the wealthiest countries, and the countries with the best quality of life, that have the lowest murder rates (shocking). Among the bottom ones that are well known for being wealthy and having a high quality of life are:

Singapore
Luxembourg
Japan
Denmark
Hong Kong
Norway
Austria

The ones in bold do not use the death penalty.

Also, not to mention that you're completely ignoring all the countries that do use the death penalty that have far higher murder rates than Ireland.

DrumSteve

who the fug wrote: »

Officer

as an in

Garda
Tax Man
Soldier
Bailiff

etc

aw.:(

orourkeda

No.It's never worked

kowloon

lightspeed wrote: »

hi after reading the papers and listening to the news over the past few years it seems to me that the only solution to deter serious acts of evil is by executing the offenders. i read yesterday in the evening herald about a twice convicted rapist lured a young girl by pretended to be a young man on facebook, he then pretended to be the father of the young man he was pretending to be and after luring her into his car he raped and murdered her. Then today i read in the irish sun about a separate incident in which a serial rapist raped and tied up a woman in her home . He then got a butchers knife and started slashing her legs and telling her he was going to drown her baby and cut it into pieces. the judge in this case sentenced him to 12 years in prison but the judge wanted to give him a life sentence . The judge said that the life sentence would not make it through the appeal process as his previous rapes were a double rape and not 2 separate incidents. i have no idea why this scumbag is shown such leniency because he raped 2 woman at the same time and not at separate occasions? can anybody explain why that is justified?
so in 12 years time or most likely less with good behavior this man could be living next door to you or you daughter or sister or family. It just a raffle as to where these people will be placed . apparently from what i read in singapore where they have the death penalty with the oppurtunity for only 1 appeal they have much less serious crime such as this. DNA is also a lot more sophisticated at least in the states so the chances of someone being wrongfully convicted are pretty slim. So whats your opinions on the matter?

lightspeed

Sigi wrote: »

Abolishment of the death penalty is required for EU membership,so it's not gonna happen.

why would be alone in wishing that teh the death penalty be reinstated?
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepgee/news/justice/article841077.ece

http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/thoughts.html

its seems more people in britain are for the death penalty than those opposed to it.
From what i read in singapore 95% of the people said they are happy to have the death penalty enforced
if we did a survey and more people supported it than opposed it how would it be democratic for us to ignore the voice of the majority of the people?
What if we did a european survey and most of europe wanted the death penalty introduced at each countrys own discreation? would it be democratic to ignore the results? i dont think it would be. And how much money does it cost to take care of serial rapist and murderers it would save the government millions of euro that we could use in schools or sick childen or whatever. id rather we we just have a big bonfire and burn the money saved than spend it on keeping a serial murdering rapist alive and making sure his stay is comfortable. Abortion is considered murder by many people and yet we had a referandum on that and its illegal here and yet legal in uk and both countries are in the EU ?
id still like those opposed to answer the question which you would prefer , when the government conducts its rapist and murder lottery and if they move a serial rapist or convicted murderer next door to your family or daughter etc. if that your daughter was a victim of one of these rapists would you prefer to have seen him exterminated or just imprisoned to be released back into the population?
If your answer is (a) Yes id rather he had been executed than he had had been given chance to rape and murder my daughter then its fair to say your opinion is completely bias. whereas mine is not.
My opinion however is not bias as i want these animals exterminated whether they live near me or not . Thankfully I know of no friends or family that have ever being murdered or raped nor do i know of any living nearby however i still rather they be executed .if such awful acts where to occur to a loved one my opinion would not be strengthen or weakened it would just be the same. so it comes dow to the question of the location lottery and living next door to a rapist or state/viglante execution.there are no there options as i cant see how we could economically sustain lifetime sentences for all rapists and murderers.

Biggins

The emotional side of me says "yes" when I hear of some absolute dispicable crimes but the (hopefully) wiser side of me says "No" in the cold light of day and opts for locking them up for life.

Life meaning life - not a 30 years stay.

anti-venom

lightspeed wrote: »

hi after reading the papers and listening to the news over the past few years it seems to me that the only solution to deter serious acts of evil is by executing the offenders. i read yesterday in the evening herald about a twice convicted rapist lured a young girl by pretended to be a young man on facebook, he then pretended to be the father of the young man he was pretending to be and after luring her into his car he raped and murdered her. Then today i read in the irish sun about a separate incident in which a serial rapist raped and tied up a woman in her home . He then got a butchers knife and started slashing her legs and telling her he was going to drown her baby and cut it into pieces. the judge in this case sentenced him to 12 years in prison but the judge wanted to give him a life sentence . The judge said that the life sentence would not make it through the appeal process as his previous rapes were a double rape and not 2 separate incidents. i have no idea why this scumbag is shown such leniency because he raped 2 woman at the same time and not at separate occasions? can anybody explain why that is justified?
so in 12 years time or most likely less with good behavior this man could be living next door to you or you daughter or sister or family. It just a raffle as to where these people will be placed . apparently from what i read in singapore where they have the death penalty with the oppurtunity for only 1 appeal they have much less serious crime such as this. DNA is also a lot more sophisticated at least in the states so the chances of someone being wrongfully convicted are pretty slim. So whats your opinions on the matter?

A rational and clear thinking person would see a death penalty as a deterrent to commiting murder. If you believe the death penalty is a deterrent, then you must be assuming that that everybody else, including murderers and potential murderers, would also think likewise. You can't assume that everyone has the same ability to think rationally and weigh up the potential consequences of their actions to the same degree.

Would the death penalty deter a drunk from beating to someone to death in a street brawl? Hardly likely, is it?

Would a child rapist be in any way influenced to change his actions at the thought of being arrested, tried and executed? Their sick urges have to be satisfied at whatever cost. Someone who is capable of such a deparved crime surely wouldn't be deterred by fear of capture . If they did then they would probably never offend. If the thought of spending the rest of your life in prison and being universally despised is not enough to deter you from raping kids, then it's hardly likely that a death penalty would be any more effective a deterrent.

I'd be more inclined to keep these vile scumbags in prison for the rest of their natural lives. At lesat if they're alive, and in the off chance that they prove they were wrongfully convicted, then their convictions can be overturned and some degree of reparation can be made. Killing one wrongly convicted person would be one too many.

lightspeed

Mark200 wrote: »

Well if you want to bring logic into it, then it seems pretty obvious from looking at the list that as a general rule it's the wealthiest countries, and the countries with the best quality of life, that have the lowest murder rates (shocking). Among the bottom ones that are well known for being wealthy and having a high quality of life are:

Singapore
Luxembourg
Japan
Denmark
Hong Kong
Norway
Austria

The ones in bold do not use the death penalty.

Also, not to mention that you're completely ignoring all the countries that do use the death penalty that have far higher murder rates than Ireland.

what exactly is your point? obviously the poorer a country the less crime and murders but we dont have the wealth or abilty to control murderers and serial rapists and if we are so flushed with cah then why cant we give lfe permanent sentences to murders and drug lords and rapists?
im for the death penalty because i see no other way. in the example i mention that serial rapist after raping three women and and will be out in a maximum of 12 years. So without execution what is your solution ?
should we just give him a box of roses aswell as police protection and a state funded accomadation and just ask him would he mind not trying to rape and murder a 4th victim? Without execution or life sentence what is the alternative? please give me your solution ?

ScumLord

I would say no only for the most extreme cases, where someone repeatedly offended, shown no remorse at all and is likely to continue to offend and re-offend.
If there's absolutely no hope of rehabilitation I don't think we should be wasting money on housing them for the rest of their natural lives.

I know people will argue that they need to be punished but what's the point really? Kill them and be done with it or send them for testing to prevent other children from growing into that type of person.

It should only be for the most extreme cases of inhumanity.

changes

I'd like to see 30 or 40 yr sentences handed out to our worst offenders instead of the ridiculous 10 or 12 yrs they normally get.

And yeah i support the death penalty.

lightspeed

anti-venom wrote: »

A rational and clear thinking person would see a death penalty as a deterrent to commiting murder. If you believe the death penalty is a deterrent, then you must be assuming that that everybody else, including murderers and potential murderers, would also think likewise. You can't assume that everyone has the same ability to think rationally and weigh up the potential consequences of their actions to the same degree.

Would the death penalty deter a drunk from beating to someone to death in a street brawl? Hardly likely, is it?

Would a child rapist be in any way influenced to change his actions at the thought of being arrested, tried and executed? Their sick urges have to be satisfied at whatever cost. Someone who is capable of such a deparved crime surely wouldn't be deterred by fear of capture . If they did then they would probably never offend. If the thought of spending the rest of your life in prison and being universally despised is not enough to deter you from raping kids, then it's hardly likely that a death penalty would be any more effective a deterrent.

I'd be more inclined to keep these vile scumbags in prison for the rest of their natural lives. At lesat if they're alive, and in the off chance that they prove they were wrongfully convicted, then their convictions can be overturned and some degree of reparation can be made. Killing one wrongly convicted person would be one too many.

Yes but that costs hundreds of thousands of euro to give these people life sentences. they get police protection in prison and make friends with other rapists, play pool and still get to live their life but what about those that they murdered? They dont and there family wont ever be the same again so i fail to see it as justice and where is that kind of money going to come from?
Should we take it from healthcare or your childrens education? increase taxes further?
Its just wishfull thinking to believe otherwise and it would deter those from reoffending if they were executed as they wont be alive to commit further offenses.

hooradiation

lightspeed wrote: »

Yes but that costs hundreds of thousand to give these people life sentences. they get police protection in prison and make friends with other rapists, play pool and still get to live their life but what about those that they murdered? They dont and there family wont ever be the same again so i fail to see it as justice.
Its just wishfull thinking to believe otherwise and it would deter those from reoffending if they were executed as they wont be alive to commit further offenses.

Like many people you are confusing the words justice and revenge.
They mean different things.

Now, let me make sure i've got this right

The justice system is flawed and has and will continue to make mistakes. Therefore the way to fix this is to give them the power to sentence people to death and the previous problem of the system being prone to mistakes will....vanish? rectify itself by magic? Not matter?


Until the advocates of the death penalty can come up with a way to ensure that people are not incorrectly killed by the state, the ban on the death penalty will and should remain in force.

thetonynator

I would not support the death penalty for two reasons, the first is simple enough- the appeals process is so long that most just die in prison before being executed.

The other reason is a proper one:

If it is not right for you to kill someone, how the hell is it right for the criminal justice system to kill you???

ChocolateSauce

That is not a power any government should have, ever.

Cheap Thrills!

The emotional side of me would love to see it for those that attack/abuse/murder/maim others, especially the elderly and children.

But I don't think its a deterrant. And although it solves the problem of taking these people out of the population, the same thing can be achieved by imprisoning them for life. Thats life meaning life.

Yes, its expensive but death row is also extremely expensive.

A lot of people argue that the death penalty is just revenge. I don't have a problem with that part of it. I think society needs to exact revenge on remorseless psychopaths.

But I think keeping them alive in total solitary confinement (4 blank walls) with no books/interaction/tv/computers is a better revenge than giving them the noteriety and drama of the death penalty. Some of them, unbelievable as it is revel in the attention of that.

Sentances are too short and light. Rehabilitation is a privelege that the criminal must EARN not be handed. So many times cynical criminals take advantage of well meaning attempts to rehabilitate them. Manipulating the system which seems to be built on handing priveleges to the offender instead of them earning it.

Punishment is jsut that. Punishment. When a criminal decide to torture and rob an old person and leave them to an agonising lonely death, when they decide to sexually abuse/rape a child, when they break into someones house and maim them and terrorise their family they LOSE their human rights. That kind of thing should mean prison with no books/tv/computer/human company .....just a bed, toilet, basic medical, 4 blank walls. Thats it.

We would see far less casual crime if prisons were run like this.

Mark200

lightspeed wrote: »

what exactly is your point? obviously the poorer a country the less crime and murders but we dont have the wealth or abilty to control murderers and serial rapists and if we are so flushed with cah then why cant we give lfe permanent sentences to murders and drug lords and rapists?
im for the death penalty because i see no other way. in the example i mention that serial rapist after raping three women and and will be out in a maximum of 12 years. So without execution what is your solution ?
should we just give him a box of roses aswell as police protection and a state funded accomadation and just ask him would he mind not trying to rape and murder a 4th victim? Without execution or life sentence what is the alternative? please give me your solution ?

My point is that you've clearly failed to show that the death penalty acts as a deterrent.

"Without execution or life sentence what is the alternative? please give me your solution ?"

I already gave my solution to the scenario you described: change the courts system. It's pretty deluded if you think the only way to stop someone from being released in 12 years is by killing them. I don't see why you excluded life sentence as a possibilty.

Also, since you're going on about cost so much (even though I don't think cost should play a factor in deciding whether or not to kill someone), putting a prisoner to death in America costs far more than keeping him locked up for the rest of his life.

anti-venom

lightspeed wrote: »

Yes but that costs hundreds of thousand to give these people life sentences. they get police protection in prison and make friends with other rapists, play pool and still get to live their life but what about those that they murdered? They dont and there family wont ever be the same again so i fail to see it as justice.
Its just wishfull thinking to believe otherwise and it would deter those from reoffending if they were executed as they wont be alive to commit further offenses.

You seem to be convinced that it would act as a deterrent. The evidence available form countries where the corporeal punishment is used suggests the contrary; that there is no decrease in murder levels, and an increase in murder levels, if anything, in some places. This suggests that we are not dealing with people (killers, rapists) who are thinking clearly about their actions and are not worried about the consequences.

I don't believe that the cost of maintaining prisoners should be a factor either. Custodial sentences are over used. Too many people in prison for petty crimes where more fitting punishments should be handed down. For instance why jail a fraudster, who is not a particular physical danger to anyone? A more fitting punishment could be sought which would free up a jail cell, reduce prison costs, and make cells available for those scum who really should be occupying them for life.

hooradiation

Cheap Thrills! wrote: »

A lot of people argue that the death penalty is just revenge. I don't have a problem with that part of it. I think society needs to exact revenge on remorseless psychopaths.

I do.
Mainly because revenge is
A] never proportional
B] never satisfied.
C] never rational.

Then we end up right back where we started as we have a case that provokes peoples sense of revenge to the point where nothing but the death penalty will do.

Cheap Thrills! wrote: »

Punishment is jsut that. Punishment. When a criminal decide to torture and rob an old person and leave them to an agonising lonely death, when they decide to sexually abuse/rape a child, when they break into someones house and maim them and terrorise their family they LOSE their human rights.

Also i love how people who consider themselves to be the upstanding, law abiding, decent members of society have no problem with banding around the phase "lose their human rights".

Either they are every bit as cruel as the monsters they vilify but are too afraid to act on those impulses or they just don't know what they are talking about.

I hope the latter but on occasion i suspect the former.

lightspeed

thetonynator wrote: »

I would not support the death penalty for two reasons, the first is simple enough- the appeals process is so long that most just die in prison before being executed.

The other reason is a proper one:

If it is not right for you to kill someone, how the hell is it right for the criminal justice system to kill you???

1) Because you werre ware of the consequences when commiting the act.
You had a choice that was very simple, Either dont rape or murder or do and get executed therefore you started the ball rolling. Is it really a challenge not to murder or rape someone?
2)It will cost the state hundereds of thousands of euro to house,protect and feed you during prision and then after.
3) theres a possibilty of you reoffending and therefore you are a threat to the tax paying public that funded your sentence and possibly state defense if you could not afford a solicitor during the trial and would therefore act as a detterent to those curious of commiting such crimes.
4) with the large amount of money saved from state executions we could create more jobs and surely speed up appeals while still being able to give a fair trial and take enough time to evaluate the evidence.
5)The person who you murdered is no longer alive and yet you get to enjoy your life as best you can in prision making friends with other rapists drug lord scum and murderers and a lot of hardworking tax payers think that this is a tad bit unfair.

Again given the state of our economy we cant aford to give lifetime sentenes so other then executions whats the solution?
For those opposed to state execution can you please outline your solutions?

Mark200

lightspeed wrote: »

1) Because you werre ware of the consequences when commiting the act.
You had a choice that was very simple, Either dont rape or murder or do and get executed therefore you started the ball rolling. Is it really a challenge not to murder or rape someone?

You could use that logic for any crime - such as robbery. Would you support the death penalty for robbery?

lightspeed wrote: »

2)It will cost the state hundereds of thousands of euro to house,protect and feed you during prision and then after.
3) theres a possibilty of you reoffending and therefore you are a threat to the tax paying public that funded your sentence and possibly state defense if you could not afford a solicitor during the trial and would therefore act as a detterent to those curious of commiting such crimes.
4) with the large amount of money saved from state executions we could create more jobs and surely speed up appeals while still being able to give a fair trial and take enough time to evaluate the evidence.
5)The person who you murdered is no longer alive and yet you get to enjoy your life as best you can in prision making friends with other rapists drug lord scum and murderers and a lot of hardworking tax payers think that this is a tad bit unfair.

I've already informed you that the death penalty is far more costly than life in prison.

the bolt

changes wrote: »

I'd like to see 30 or 40 yr sentences handed out to our worst offenders instead of the ridiculous 10 or 12 yrs they normally get.

And yeah i support the death penalty.

how may i ask do you control a wing full of people doing 30 or 40 year jail terms.death penalty does not deter people imo as if the thought they were going to get caught they would not do the crime in the first place.

lightspeed

Lets be honest robbery is not as evil an act as raping and murdering someone and thats wht they are currently sentenced differently.
In answer to the question put to me though if i had spent the last 10 or twenty years robbing people and going in and out prison more times than the prison staff then why should they not execute me?
im costing them a fortune? children and the elderly are sick in hospitals without proper equipment and yet im entitled to numerous social benifits . have reoffended countless times when i could have made an effort to reform and educate myself and get a job but i chose to continue robbing people over a large period of years knowing i could get the death penalty
all at the cost of the state. Seems to me that i made my decison by my own free will. And the only reason it cost so much is because of the larger number of appeals for death sentences. The sentence dhould not dictate the trial thats what they have evidence. In singapore they evalute the evidence and have a trial and 1 appeal and it is cost effective which is the opposite of in the united states where they have 4 or 5 appeals costing the state large amounts of money in legal costs. Unless theres is no no evidence to present the there does not need to be more than one appeal