Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Is it time to rethink the death penalty?

124»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 880 ✭✭✭batman75


    Death penalty is a minefield. What if the wrong person is executed? The other issue is a humane justice system which seeks not to advocate an eye for an eye. Even in the eye for an eye argument it's not going to bring back the person murdered by killing the convicted.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 341 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    While it may not be cheaper, it reduces the chance of re-offending, and thus removes the a clear and present threat to society. If they can do this to a 4 week old baby, and show no remorse, they are a danger to society. Surely we should remove threats to society?

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 341 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    Child cruelty, pedophiles, rapists, and murderers. Only then when the evidence is overwhelming, and the margin of error is miniscule, say, 0.05%.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 96,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    As a general rule of thumb in democracies it's cheaper to keep someone in prison for the rest of their lives than pay for the legal challenges on death row.

    The EU took the neighbours to task over the lack of an appeals process in whole life sentences. In the end all the UK had to show was that the home secretary could overrule them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,994 ✭✭✭✭Calahonda52


    In George Orwell's Animal Farm, the Seven Commandments of Animalism are progressively altered by the pigs to justify their increasing power and privilege. Initially, the commandments are intended to ensure equality and prevent the return of human-like oppression. However, they are rewritten to accommodate the pigs' desire for comfort and control, eventually culminating in a single commandment: "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others". Here's a breakdown of the changes:

    1. 1. "No animal shall imitate a human."This was modified to "No animal shall imitate a human without necessity". This allowed the pigs to walk on two legs and even wear clothes, while still appearing to uphold the rule. 
    2. 2. "Four legs good, two legs bad."This commandment was reversed to "Four legs good, two legs better", further solidifying the pigs' dominance and emphasizing their superiority over the other animals. 
    3. 3. "No animal shall kill any other animal."This was altered to "No animal shall kill any other animal without cause", allowing the pigs to justify the killing of other animals for their own benefit. 
    4. 4. "No animal shall drink alcohol."This was changed to "No animal shall drink alcohol to excess", allowing the pigs to indulge in alcohol while maintaining a facade of following the rules. 
    5. 5. "No animal shall sleep in a bed."This was modified to "No animal shall sleep in a bed with sheets", enabling the pigs to sleep in the farmhouse bed with blankets, while seemingly adhering to the commandment. 
    6. 6. "No animal shall wear clothes."This was changed to "No animal shall wear clothes without a good reason", allowing the pigs to wear clothes without being seen as breaking the rule. 
    7. 7. "All animals are equal."This was ultimately simplified to "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others", highlighting the pigs' unchecked power and manipulation of the other animals. 

    These changes demonstrate how power can corrupt, even in the face of seemingly idealistic principles. The pigs systematically manipulate the commandments to serve their own interests, highlighting the dangers of unchecked authority and the importance of vigilance in protecting equality and justice. 

    “I can’t pay my staff or mortgage with instagram likes”.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 857 ✭✭✭BP_RS3813


    Death penalty in theory is great - execute guilty party so they cannot re offend and is could be cheaper in thr long run but you need to be 100% sure that you have the right guy/gal. Unfortunatly so justice system is 100% right all of the time hence we cannot risk executing an innocent life.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 74,541 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The death penalty cannot reduce the chance of re-offending versus life in prison. They are both zero. One has the risk of murdering innocent people, the other does not.

    The death penalty exists only for weak, pathetic men to enact their fantasies at this stage. Pathetic men love the idea of it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 341 ✭✭2Greyfoxes


    So, strong men protect the lives of those who brutally assault 4 week old babies.

    Thanks for clearing that up for me.

    Clever word play may win debates, but it doesn't make it true.

    Understanding and explaining things, is not the same as justifying them, if in doubt… please re-read this statement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,142 ✭✭✭donegal_man


    I honestly believe there would be fewer murder convictions if the death penalty were to be reinstated. Every jury would include at least one person afraid of sending a potentially innocent person to the gallows.

    Further, where would you find someone willing to carry out the sentence? Literally looks someone in the eye before killing them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 364 ✭✭Me_Grapes


    The chance of re-offending for a person sentenced to life in prison is not 0%.

    Escape.

    Crimes while on temporary/compassionate leave.

    Crimes against other prisoners.

    Crimes against other guards.

    Crimes against doctors who need to treat them.

    I'm not pro death penalty for the point you made in your 3rd sentence, but it is not true to say the chance or recidivism is the same for a person alive in a jail cell as it is for an un-alive person.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 545 ✭✭✭New Scottman




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 18,426 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Someone who is wrongly imprisoned suffers a grievous injustice.

    An appeal or case review may at some future time uncover the truth and they can be released and compensated, ref. Birmingham Six.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,879 ✭✭✭Pauliedragon


    I agree. Most states in the US that don't have the death penalty have lower murder rates than the ones that do have it. So the idea it's serves as a deterrent doesn't seem to be necessarily true also.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 96,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    It could be like jury service , the executioner is picked from those who voted for the death penalty.

    Also if an innocent person is executed the the executioner is automatically guilty of murder. This could get very messy with advances in forensic science if the verdict changes again.



  • Site Banned Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Raichų


    they’re certainly not guilty of murder do you think laws are so badly written?

    Are the gardai/police guilty of false imprisonment and wrongful arrest if someone’s found guilty and later the verdict is overturned? Generally also even when someone’s sentenced to death it’s not carried out until all appeals etc have been exhausted and there’s little chance or just no chance of the conviction being overturned.

    as for who performs the execution it depends on the method.

    I know for firing squads at least all but one of the rifle men is firing blanks so no one knows who fired the killing shot.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 96,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    The law only goes to just beyond a "reasonable doubt". It's not 100% and will never be for all cases even if we all had bodycams. DNA evidence was a step change and there may be others in future, science marches on etc. or there may be deathbed confessions or pardons during regime changes.

    Unlike most other crimes against the person the main witness is usually dead so it's mostly circumstantial evidence for murder cases. It's said that in parts of Australia murders happen in town because everyone knows how good the local bush trackers are.

    Execution has been used as a political football in re-election campaigns, so I'm very suspicious that those who are pro-death penalty have ulterior motives and are from socioeconomic groups less likely to be executed. Or are paid up members of the the Leopards Eating People's Faces party.

    Different recoil from a blank. cf. Isaac Newton's Third Law of Motion



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 96,589 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Vigilante Cop: What do you think about reading a suspect his rights?

    Sledge Hammer: I prefer to read him his *last* rites, if you know what I mean...

    Vigilante: What do you think about the death penalty?

    Sledge Hammer: It's too lenient. There's always the possibility of reincarnation.

    Whole life term isn't lenient.



  • Site Banned Posts: 1,745 ✭✭✭Raichų


    look, I’m not saying I agree with executions because I simply don’t think other humans have any right to decide who does or doesn’t die.

    That said I do believe some people need killing. It’s a conundrum because I also strongly believe as I said, it’s not our right to decide.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 3,057 ✭✭✭Hoop66


    Can you think of any differences between execution and imprisonment that make drawing an equivalence between the two pointless?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 545 ✭✭✭New Scottman


    One that springs to mind is this:

    Imprisonment offers the possibility that the original sentence might be overturned — or the prisoner might eventually be pardoned — whereas with execution no future correction is possible.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,482 ✭✭✭✭Esel
    Not Your Ornery Onager


    Rethink all you want - it's never going to happen.

    Not your ornery onager



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 880 ✭✭✭batman75


    They are still alive and can be compensated. Once killed their is no ability to fix a miscarriage of justice.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 54,531 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    not that it'll add too much to the debate, but this is entertaining. apologies for the clickbaity video title and the opening screens.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,870 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    No, no, no. .05% margin is unacceptable.

    The point is if you're trying to build a humane society then the state should set the example.

    No modern and developed country should be murdering its citizens. Simple as that.

    It doesn't prevent crime as seen in other countries and nothing positive comes from it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,409 ✭✭✭scottser


    It's one thing to have the death penalty and then look to abolish it, but quite another to not have it and then seek to introduce it. The Death Penalty as a concept is cruel, barbaric, old-fashioned, has been widely misused and is a feature of despotic and authoritarian regimes. It's a bad look for a nation, and as you say, who in their right mind would sign up to actually administer the actual lethal shot?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,215 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Overwhelming? You mean more than beyond a reasonable doubt? Do you think people are being thrown into prison now without overwhelming evidence?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 857 ✭✭✭BP_RS3813


    In principle it is right, at least in my opinion anyway. However unless we can be sure 100% of their guilt, then we cannot use it. Even a .0000001% chance of executing an innocent is too much. We cannot ever gurantee this hence we should not use it.



Advertisement