Death Penalty in Ireland 2011?

deepsouthtalla

Hey lad's

Just wondering if Ireland was to reintroduce the Death Penalty in 2011, What would have to happen???

deepsouthtalla

*Bump*

Anybody???

Alan_P

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

*Bump*

Anybody???

Well first there'd have to be a referendum to reverse the constitutional amendment that banned it completely.

Since opinion polls consistently show that 60-70% of the Irish electorate oppose the death penalty and support the constitutional ban on it, the whole death penalty restoration project pretty much grinds to a halt right there.

Zubeneschamali

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

Just wondering if Ireland was to reintroduce the Death Penalty in 2011, What would have to happen???

A big bonanza for lawyers.

seamus

We'd also have to withdraw from the European Union.

Bottle_of_Smoke

The rent a mob crowd at every protest falling under the "f*ck the man" umbrella would get bigger.

deepsouthtalla

seamus wrote: »

We'd also have to withdraw from the European Union.

Maybe that would be a good thing!

I support the Death Penalty, in cases of 1st degree murder, child abuse and treason (inc economic)

the murder rate in Ireland is rising and 7 years is not enough!

seamus

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

I support the Death Penalty, in cases of 1st degree murder, child abuse and treason (inc economic)

What will you do when people are proven innocent after we've killed them? Send a ham to their widow?

deepsouthtalla

seamus wrote: »

What will you do when people are proven innocent after we've killed them? Send a ham to their widow?

If we have a proper 3 stage appeal system set up, to confirm that person is guilty and in done in say 80 day's it would make sure that the person/s is guilty

Here is a good link on Death penalty as a deterrent:
http://off2dr.com/modules/cjaycontent/index.php?id=24

seamus

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

If we have a proper 3 stage appeal system set up, to confirm that person is guilty and in done in say 80 day's it would make sure that the person/s is guilty

Still can't be guaranteed. Innocent people will still be put to death.

I'm also not going to read a report from a pro-death penalty website. You'll find equally convincing studies on anti-death penalty websites "proving" that the death penalty is not a deterrent.

usernamegoes

seamus wrote: »

We'd also have to withdraw from the European Union.

Why would we need to withdraw?

deepsouthtalla

have a look around that site, with the Irish liberal/pc media all we here in Ireland is about the "poor" Death Row inmate, what about the victims family?? like the film "Dead Man Walking" u never heard about the Victims family in the book or the film all u heard was the inmate "poor Me" story

beeftotheheels

usernamegoes wrote: »

Why would we need to withdraw?

Because you cannot have the death penalty while being an EU Member State. This is why all the potential applicant countries have to abolish it before we let them join.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides

Article 2
Right to life
1. Everyone has the right to life.
2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

seamus

usernamegoes wrote: »

Why would we need to withdraw?

The Lisbon treaty legally binds us to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which includes an article prohibiting the enactment of the death penalty.

Zubeneschamali

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

have a look around that site

Eehhh, no.

This is an old issue, now settled.

Denerick

I don't believe these polls that show 60-70% against. If there were a referendum tomorrow an overwhelming majority of Irish people would back it. We are, at heart, unthinking trogolydtes intent only on vengence.

seamus

Denerick wrote: »

If there were a referendum tomorrow

That's precisely why you don't announce and hold referendums in a 24-hour period

Most people will support it in blind rage, but upon examining the proposal will think more rationally about its widspread use as a specific method of punishment, rather than as a way of dealing with the latest "Evildoer of the week" as sponsored by The Sun.

deepsouthtalla

Denerick wrote: »

I don't believe these polls that show 60-70% against. If there were a referendum tomorrow an overwhelming majority of Irish people would back it. We are, at heart, unthinking trogolydtes intent only on vengence.

I agree the Irish people would be overwhelmingly in favor of the DP, but i disagree is vengeance is about closer for the victims family,

Denerick

seamus wrote: »

That's precisely why you don't announce and hold referendums in a 24-hour period

Most people will support it in blind rage, but upon examining the proposal will think more rationally about its widspread use as a specific method of punishment, rather than as a way of dealing with the latest "Evildoer of the week" as sponsored by The Sun.

I think you have a much greater opinion of the average prole than I do. Just remember the power of the tabloids over the unthinking mind slaves that they influence. These people, the first to believe the propaganda (1.12 per hour minimum wage if we accept Lisbon! etc. etc.) are also the most unlikely to vote. But we can never grow too complacent, these people might decide one day to turn off the Home and Away and Neighbours re-runs and slowly make their way to the polling booth's. We must all be prepared for such an eventually and the potentially disastrous impact they could have on our body politic.

Denerick

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

I agree the Irish people would be overwhelmingly in favor of the DP, but i disagree is vengeance is about closer for the victims family,

'Closure'? Don't make me laugh. Its utterly and totally about vengence.

deepsouthtalla

Denerick wrote: »

'Closure'? Don't make me laugh. Its utterly and totally about vengence.

How is it about vengeance?????

If a dog attacks a child we put it down, if a child gets murdered we lock him up for years and send him on his way spending thousands of euro's on him when on average the drugs to kill some cost's just $60

Alan_P

Denerick wrote: »

I don't believe these polls that show 60-70% against. If there were a referendum tomorrow an overwhelming majority of Irish people would back it. We are, at heart, unthinking trogolydtes intent only on vengence.

You don't have to believe opinion polls:- we had an actual referendum on the issue. We voted 62-37 to impose a complete Constitutional ban on capital punishment, in all cases, for all time, even to the extent of taking away the power of the Oireachtas to re-instate it.

Opinion polls since have shown that the Irish opposition to the death penalty has, if anything, become stronger, and there's zero evidence that a referendum to reinstate it would pass.

usernamegoes

beeftotheheels wrote: »

Because you cannot have the death penalty while being an EU Member State. This is why all the potential applicant countries have to abolish it before we let them join.

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides

Article 2
Right to life
1. Everyone has the right to life.
2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

I thought that the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law only applied to laws that were enacted within the competencies of the EU. general penal laws are not part of the EU's competency.

We are a member of the Council of Europe which is nothing to do with the EU and we have incorporated the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Irish law but that could be removed by ordinary legislation.

old hippy

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

How is it about vengeance?????

If a dog attacks a child we put it down, if a child gets murdered we lock him up for years and send him on his way spending thousands of euro's on him when on average the drugs to kill some cost's just $60

People aren't dogs, though.

Murder is murder, whether committed by an individual or the state.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Is locking someone away in a dangerous and stessful environment for life with no access to the opposite sex actually any more humane than a bullet to the head?

Definite case to be made for cruel and unusual punishment if you ask me.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Denerick wrote: »

'Closure'? Don't make me laugh. Its utterly and totally about vengence.

Generally yes but I think for some crimes the motivation is genuinely about closure. Anecdote alert but once knew a person who had been raped and told me that when the rapist killed himself she didn't fear leaving the house anymore and found it far easier to get on with her life.

Also in the case of murder I could imagine a victim's family really being sickened that the murderer can continue living their life whilst their son/daughter is in the ground. I don't think you could conclusively say their wish for capital punishment is neccesarily a vengence

beeftotheheels

usernamegoes wrote: »

I thought that the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law only applied to laws that were enacted within the competencies of the EU. general penal laws are not part of the EU's competency.

Have you studied the development of human rights law within the context of the European experiment? The Court, which was the initial driver, drew from the "shared constitutional traditions and international obligations" of the Member States as noted in the charter below.

This Charter reaffirms, with due regard for the powers and tasks of the Union and for the principle of subsidiarity, the rights as they result, in particular, from the constitutional traditions and international obligations common to the Member States, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Social Charters adopted by the Union and by the Council of Europe and the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights.

The Court is, to use international language which I appreciate is dubious in an EU context, recognizing customary international law and using it to extend the competence of the Union in this regard.

So while Art 6 is clear about not extending the scope of Union competence per se, 6(3) is back to the position that the Court has taken in driving EC human rights law i.e. that there is already customary law which governs this and is within the competence of the EU.

I think you will find that this is why the UK and Poland expressed reservations on the Charter.

usernamegoes wrote: »

We are a member of the Council of Europe which is nothing to do with the EU and we have incorporated the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Irish law but that could be removed by ordinary legislation.

If you are considering the European Convention of Human Rights then you are correct that we could remove the protections afforded by it from our constitution. The only issue would then be action against the State for non compliance with their international obligations and this is the situation that the UK was in until the Human Rights Act 1998 finally made it onto the Statute books and is certainly not an ideal position to leave human rights in.

However, now the EU has acceded to the ECHR so I'm not sure that this is as clear as it was back in the days when the UK simply had not implemented its obligations under that convention.

helen1

Who was the last person who got the death penalty

Nodin

deepsouthtalla wrote: »

have a look around that site, with the Irish liberal/pc media all we here in Ireland is about the "poor" Death Row inmate, what about the victims family?? like the film "Dead Man Walking" u never heard about the Victims family in the book or the film all u heard was the inmate "poor Me" story

...what about the long proven history of miscarriages of justice?

seamus

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Is locking someone away in a dangerous and stessful environment for life with no access to the opposite sex actually any more humane than a bullet to the head?

Definite case to be made for cruel and unusual punishment if you ask me.

"Punishment" in a legal context usually refers to the removal of specific freedoms from a person. "Cruel and unusual" usually refers to anything beyond removal of those freedoms which will result in physical or mental injury to the person.
I think it's fairly self-evident that locking someone in a cell and confining them to a set routine, while looking after their physical needs, couldn't be called "cruel and unusual" punishment.

Something being "humane" generally means that it gets the job done while minimising suffering and maintaining dignity as best is possible. In that regard, 20 years in the clink or a bullet in the head could be equally humane IMO.

The problem is that the death penalty removes one of the only things which cannot be restored or compensated for - a person's life. We only get one life, there is no afterlife, there is no redemption or eternal damnation. Once a person is gone, they're gone, it's final. You can lock someone up for 20 years, but if they're found innocent, you can do something to make amends, you can set them up for life in a luxury villa in barbados or whatever. But if someone is dead, you cannot undo that decision in any way. You cannot make any form of amends.

Thinking about it though, I would be in favour of allowing prisoners an option. To some people, 20 years in prison is worse than a death sentence. To others, it isn't. So why not provide an optional punishment in such cases? Life in prison, or suicide.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Also in the case of murder I could imagine a victim's family really being sickened that the murderer can continue living their life whilst their son/daughter is in the ground.

In many cases, families lament the death of a criminal by whatever means because they feel that death is the easy way out, and spending time in prison makes them feel better that their child's killer is facing ongoing retribution. As I say, there is no afterlife, so there's a fair argument to say that being killed is the easy way out. If it's vengeance you're after, a lifetime behind bars and without freedom may be tougher than dying.

Depends on the individual's perspective, I guess.

johnnyskeleton

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

A big bonanza for lawyers.

Not if the state kept killing the clients it wouldn't.

Bottle_of_Smoke

seamus wrote: »

In many cases, families lament the death of a criminal by whatever means because they feel that death is the easy way out, and spending time in prison makes them feel better that their child's killer is facing ongoing retribution. As I say, there is no afterlife, so there's a fair argument to say that being killed is the easy way out. If it's vengeance you're after, a lifetime behind bars and without freedom may be tougher than dying.

Depends on the individual's perspective, I guess.

True, I guess the occasional calls for death sentences are perhaps a response to light sentences handed out for serious crimes.

Was a bit of a conundrum when people were calling for the execution of Ian Huntley whilst he himself was actively attempting suicide

Bruthal

helen1 wrote: »

Who was the last person who got the death penalty

In ireland it was Michael Manning in 1954

caseyann

I would be yes,and then a NO.But thats what separates me from the murderers and pedos and rapists and serial killer of this country.