nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

The Death Sentence - Yea or nay

[Deleted User]

For my sins, I follow the Sunday World Facebook page and their comments section is forever calling for the death sentence. ''Hang them'' is one that you'll usually see. I think sometimes that this place is a little more well read and educated than the good folk on those pages and so I pose this question;

Would you support bringing in the death penalty for certian crimes? I'm not gonna include the option for Don't Know, this is gonna be a simple Yes or No poll but it will be private. In the comments, you can discuss the merits of your answer such as what crimes you'd support it for and what circumstances and, indeed, any reservations you may have about it. I'll add my own in when it's all up and running.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

blackcard

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The state shouldn't have the power to kill people.

The State would effectively be killing people on behalf of all the citizens. If it was up to me, I personally wouldn't pull that trigger or inject someone so I wouldn't want the state doing it on my behalf

valoren

The death penalty should be legal but invoking it should only be implemented sparingly in extreme cases. Using it ought to depend on the heinousness and callousness of the crime and should it be used, there must be irrefutable evidence or better yet eye witnesses to identify the criminal. If however, there is a lack of bona fide evidence and/or no witnesses, the death penalty should never be called upon. People need to have the confidence to know that should someone do something that can only be effectively deemed as evil per any right thinking persons moral code, then that person is going to die as soon as they are convicted per the law. Not in 10 or 20 years, as soon as possible.

People also need to have the confidence in a system that will not be abused where patently dangerous people are executed with the barest of evidence. Life imprisonment is more apt in such cases.

end of the road

HigginsJ wrote: »

Out of interest, for those who say no due to possible wronful conviction, what if the convicted person comes out and openly admits that they are indeed guilty and do not fight the charges, would you accept the death penalty in these cases?

no . i would never accept the death penalty under any circumstances.

it doesn't deterr, it doesn't lower crime, it doesn't cost less then life in prison, and the evidence could never be sufficient to remove all doubt to allow for it's implementation.

P.Walnuts

Anyone think a death sentence would be preferable to life without parole? I know I'd rather go out early doors than rot in a cell for 40+ years...

HigginsJ

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The thread is about domestic criminals and I stand by my statement. There's not a shred of evidence that the death penalty lowers crime.

I don't have the figures for the crime numbers but I assume the numbers convicted of murder/child sexual abuse are low and while technically a crime I wouldn't class it along with the likes of theft, fraud, assault etc.

In no way would I expect the death penalty to have a knock on affect for the "everyday" criminal who will go about their business regardless. It is on a completely different scale so should it not be treated completely differently?

joe40

Definitely no. Every western democracy has banned capital punishment with one notable exception. Even disregarding the potential for wrongful convictions capital punishment serves no purpose other than revenge on a society level. It is not a deterrent

HigginsJ

Omackeral wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_Royale_(film)

I have seen a version of this that was filmed in Scotland, it was awful, terrible and enjoyable all at once. I somehow think that Stone Cold Steve Austin was in it but I could be wrong.

Kylo Ren

No.

I'd rather the government have as limited power as possible; whatever the amount to get by is. The right to kill its citizens is far beyond this.

For me, if one person has been innocently killed then the whole scheme is not worth it. I think we can all agree, far more than one person has been innocently executed by their state.

Wabbit Ears

100% yes. For sure. No doubt about it.

Minderbinder

valoren wrote: »

The death penalty should be legal but invoking it should only be implemented sparingly in extreme cases.

Isn't that the way our judges currently think about prison sentences?

freshpopcorn

It doesn't achieve much where it's legal. So without a doubt I'd be against it!

vita.s

No, absolutely not. As someone already said, it has no place in civilized society.

The amount of people who have been exonerated from death row should be conclusive evidence that the government cannot be trusted with this power.

Ronaldinho

end of the road wrote: »

no . i would never accept the death penalty under any circumstances.

it doesn't cost less then life in prison

It doesn't??

alchemist33

HigginsJ wrote: »

Out of interest, for those who say no due to possible wronful conviction, what if the convicted person comes out and openly admits that they are indeed guilty and do not fight the charges, would you accept the death penalty in these cases?

Many people have confessed to crimes they haven't committed too (e.g. for the notoriety, or to protect others) so I'd still say no.

soups05

How can anyone say the death penalty does not lower crime rates? I have never heard of someone committing a crime AFTER they have been put to death so surely it does reduce crime. As for the view that you can never be 100% certain there is an easy way around that. Have something like a 10 strikes rule,at the 10th offense hang them, no more repeat offending for that lad. if ten is too low then try 50.

no years of appeals, automatic sentence carried out on conviction.

it would at least make some think twice before breaking the law, and before anyone says what about shoplifters etc, is a one euro bar worth someone's life? well that would be up to them. how much do you want that bar? enough to risk your life but not enough to pay a euro? fine, then you have decided your life is worth less than a euro if your on conviction number 9 and you steal a bar.

I would venture that most people who are against it have never been the victim of crime, or repeated crimes.

I may be a little biased in my thinking but i have never heard a convincing reason why guys on 50,100,200 convictions are still walking around like they are untouchable.

ancapailldorcha

HigginsJ wrote: »

I don't have the figures for the crime numbers but I assume the numbers convicted of murder/child sexual abuse are low and while technically a crime I wouldn't class it along with the likes of theft, fraud, assault etc.

In no way would I expect the death penalty to have a knock on affect for the "everyday" criminal who will go about their business regardless. It is on a completely different scale so should it not be treated completely differently?

I'm not arguing that all crimes are equal. I'm arguing that the death penalty is immoral as it's just state-sanctioned murder. The state is neither competent enough to ensure that only those who are guilty would be executed nor is it honest enough that the death penalty wouldn't be abused.

houlihand

yay

Academic

While I'm against the death penalty anywhere, it needs to be said that given its history, Ireland has better reason than most countries not to want the state to have the power to kill its citizens.

Greentopia

Absolutely not. For all the reasons already given by those who feel the same. Not possible anyway as one of the rules of EU membership is to have capital punishment removed from all members statute books.

major bill

When you read stories like that Spanish girl getting raped by a man out on bail you can't help but think a trip to the mountains and bullet to the head would be the quickest option

Maybe a bit too extreme but light sentences don't help either, nobody is scared going to court.

Conall Cernach

P.Walnuts wrote: »

Anyone think a death sentence would be preferable to life without parole? I know I'd rather go out early doors than rot in a cell for 40+ years...

Maybe that should be the choice some get offered. Go now while you're still in sort of decent shape or die an old man having known nothing but fear and loneliness for decades.

kerry cow

Yes .
Why is it that in the 80's and 90's growing up we never had many murders .what had happened in the recent years to spin this murderous era in to evil times .
Crime needs punishment .
Why not 100 lashes every Saturday morning on o connell Street .let it be a warning .
People need to wake up .
Look at the hit men , the guys who break in to old people's homes and trash them .
The rapist and murders .

end of the road

soups05 wrote: »

How can anyone say the death penalty does not lower crime rates? I have never heard of someone committing a crime AFTER they have been put to death so surely it does reduce crime.

very easily, because it doesn't reduce crime. it doesn't work like that.

soups05 wrote: »

As for the view that you can never be 100% certain there is an easy way around that. Have something like a 10 strikes rule,at the 10th offense hang them, no more repeat offending for that lad. if ten is too low then try 50.

plenty of others to take his place, so a waste of time as it still isn't achieving the aim of reducing crime. so not only would no evidence ever be sufficient to allow for it, but executing people doesn't reduce crime.

soups05 wrote: »

no years of appeals, automatic sentence carried out on conviction.

can't be done. the evidence can never be sufficient enough to allow for that.

soups05 wrote: »

it would at least make some think twice before breaking the law, and before anyone says what about shoplifters etc, is a one euro bar worth someone's life? well that would be up to them. how much do you want that bar? enough to risk your life but not enough to pay a euro? fine, then you have decided your life is worth less than a euro if your on conviction number 9 and you steal a bar.

it would not make people think twice before breaking the law, we all ready have plenty of evidence to prove this.

soups05 wrote: »

I would venture that most people who are against it have never been the victim of crime, or repeated crimes.

you would likely venture wrong. that old copout statement is often used by supporters of failed ideas to deal with crime, toards people who don't support said failed ideas because they know they don't work, because there has been plenty of proof for it.

soups05 wrote: »

I may be a little biased in my thinking but i have never heard a convincing reason why guys on 50,100,200 convictions are still walking around like they are untouchable.

there isn't a convincing argument for the death penalty either.

alchemist33

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/6287

The above website has an agenda, but it's figures are taken from an FBI report. States with the death penalty have higher murder rates than those that don't. There may be other factors at play, such as gun ownership, drug crime etc., but this shows the argument that the death penalty acts as a deterrent holds little water.

The_Valeyard

100% definite no.

[Deleted User]

kerry cow wrote: »

Yes .
Why is it that in the 80's and 90's growing up we never had many murders .what had happened in the recent years to spin this murderous era in to evil times .

Disappearance of Philip Cairns, Jerry McCabe, Leinster Triangle missing cases, Catherine Nevin 'Black Widow' case, Sophie Tuscon DuPlantier, Veronica Guerin, Raoinead Murray. All very high profile murders/possible murders during those years from off the top of my head.

Gangland killing and round the clock news has obviously upped the ante.

freshpopcorn

kerry cow wrote: »

Yes .
Why is it that in the 80's and 90's growing up we never had many murders .what had happened in the recent years to spin this murderous era in to evil times .
Crime needs punishment .
Why not 100 lashes every Saturday morning on o connell Street .let it be a warning .
People need to wake up .
Look at the hit men , the guys who break in to old people's homes and trash them .
The rapist and murders .

Just a few off the top of my head. They are plenty of more murder cases that happened in the 1980's/1990's
Declan Flynn was murdered in 1982 in a Homophobic attack.
Veronica Guerin.
Jerry Mccabe.
Jack White.
Charles Brooke Pickard.
Patricia Doherty.
Sophie Toscan du Plantier.
Eileen Costello- O'Shaughnessy. Taxi driver murdered in Glaway.

You might also include the six missing women from the 1990's!

freshpopcorn

Omackeral wrote: »

Disappearance of Philip Cairns, Jerry McCabe, Leinster Triangle missing cases, Catherine Nevin 'Black Widow' case, Sophie Tuscon DuPlantier, Veronica Guerin, Raoinead Murray. All very high profile murders/possible murders during those years from off the top of my head.

Gangland killing and round the clock news has obviously upped the ante.

I just wrote a similar post. A lot of people look back on the past with rose tinted glass. I have relatives who'd openly tell you nobody died in road crashes in the 1960's/1970's!

[Deleted User]

alchemist33 wrote: »

Many people have confessed to crimes they haven't committed too (e.g. for the notoriety, or to protect others) so I'd still say no.

People might call BS on this but it's pretty much an open secret in some prisons that there are guys in there for murders they didn't commit. One such case was a father protecting his son.

ger vallely

I think no. As was said previously there have been innocent people killed this way. But I would like to see actual hard time brought back. I agree with the idea of reform in prison and I do believe people can change. Hard labour and unattractive living conditions may be more of a deterrent than what we have in place now.