What do you have to do to get convicted of murder these days?

thebman · 12-02-2009 02:30PM

Svalbard wrote: »

Oh of course, Arginite, top argument.
Thou shalt not kill...unless you are being victimized. Yes I forgot that addendum. How can people actually have opinions like that in this day and age?

I think the eye for an eye part helps justify it.

Anyway killing is wrong in most circumstances. Its wrong to say that in all circumstances becuase people can be pushed to extremes by tools.

cornbb · 12-02-2009 02:31PM

Deleted User wrote: »

who's gonna sell all those gates?

Nice, real nice. Thank you for demonstrating the real reason that Padraig Nally got away with murder: prejudice.

cornbb · 12-02-2009 02:33PM

thebman wrote: »

Anyway killing is wrong in most circumstances. Its wrong to say that in all circumstances becuase people can be pushed to extremes by tools.

It would be acceptable to kill in order to save your own life in the immediate term. To kill because you were just too darned stressed out to contain yourself is wrong, I think.

12-02-2009 02:39PM

cornbb wrote: »

Nice, real nice. Thank you for demonstrating the real reason that Padraig Nally got away with murder: prejudice.

lol ya, whatever ya wanna call it.

ARGINITE · 12-02-2009 02:42PM

cornbb wrote: »

I would be devastated of course! But your question is pointless. How would you feel if you were the widow or child of the man who was shot?

I would think twice about following in my father foot steps.

conlonbmw · 12-02-2009 02:43PM

cornbb wrote: »

It would be acceptable to kill in order to save your own life in the immediate term. To kill because you were just too darned stressed out to contain yourself is wrong, I think.

You should be allowed to kill these

Scumbag that breaks into your house.

Nonce that messes with your kids.

Rapists, especially of elderly women.

All criminals with 50 or more convictions should be tagged and DNA tested.

Think how easy it would be to solve a crime when you can prove with GPS that the crim was within 3 feet of the area at the right time, and they left DNA evidence.

12-02-2009 02:47PM

i agree with all the above..

cornbb · 12-02-2009 02:56PM

ARGINITE wrote: »

I would think twice about following in my father foot steps.

Of course. He wasn't a good man. But that's beside the point. The fact that he did something bad doesn't entitle anyone to kill him. We have a justice system to punish him. Before anyone goes off on a rant about how crap the justice system is, I know, its far from perfect, but if it starts becoming acceptable for people to take justice into their own hands we might as well forget about civilisation and go back into the trees flinging our crap at each other.

Svalbard · 12-02-2009 02:57PM

This thread began with the OP expressing disbelief that people who have taken the lives of others are not convicted of murder and receive lenient sentences.
Reading the opinions on this board it is hardly a surprise really. Murder seems strangely acceptable to you people. Its no wonder the courts of this country reflect this.
Murder is wrong in all circumstances. One person does not have the right to take the life of another. I am actually in disbelief that most people on here don't agree.

cornbb · 12-02-2009 03:02PM

Svalbard wrote: »

This thread began with the OP expressing disbelief that people who have taken the lives of others are not convicted of murder and receive lenient sentences.
Reading the opinions on this board it is hardly a surprise really. Murder seems strangely acceptable to you people. Its no wonder the courts of this country reflect this.
Murder is wrong in all circumstances. One person does not have the right to take the life of another. I am actually in disbelief that most people on here don't agree.

QFT. Far too many people aren't interested in justice, they are interested in revenge and are motivated by outrage.

conlonbmw · 12-02-2009 03:06PM

Svalbard wrote: »

This thread began with the OP expressing disbelief that people who have taken the lives of others are not convicted of murder and receive lenient sentences.
Reading the opinions on this board it is hardly a surprise really. Murder seems strangely acceptable to you people. Its no wonder the courts of this country reflect this.
Murder is wrong in all circumstances. One person does not have the right to take the life of another. I am actually in disbelief that most people on here don't agree.

Heres a scenario especially for you

you are woken up in the middle of the night with a gun or blade to your neck, and scumbag starts getting frisky with your family (wife or kids),

you have a chance to stop it by killing scumbag.

What would you do?

SoWatchaWant · 12-02-2009 03:12PM

There was a good one a while back, a man stabbed another man something like 20 times in the eyes face and groin, and tried to get it down to self-defence as opposed to murder. He did not succeed.

Svalbard · 12-02-2009 03:15PM

conlonbmw wrote: »

Heres a scenario especially for you

you are woken up in the middle of the night with a gun or blade to your neck, and scumbag starts getting frisky with your family (wife or kids),

you have a chance to stop it by killing scumbag.

What would you do?

Is killing said scumbag my only choice?

Dudess · 12-02-2009 03:21PM

Well there's self defence to consider. I think people are underestimating the extent of what Nally, living alone in a very remote area, was going through. It would be absolutely terrifying for anyone, let alone someone who's shoving on in years like Nally.

12-02-2009 03:24PM

Pub07 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gardas-son-guilty-of-killing-traveller-1636784.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0202/breaking74.htm

And remember that other case recently where some 18/19 year old ran out of his house with knives and killed a guy who was standing outside thehouse with some friends, he got done for manslaughter too.

And then there was the case of the guy who shot his friend from point blank range with a shotgun in a car and left him in a permanent vegetative state - he gets 9 years, prob out in 6 years.

The justice system in this country is a joke, it's almost as bad as the political system, what do you have to do to get convicted of murder in Ireland these days...do you have to tie someone up and use a blowtorch on them or something?

I heard that the 14 year old knacker was the one who provoked the fight.

12-02-2009 03:27PM

longshanks wrote: »

if you kill a fella with three of your posh mates you only get a couple of years, and time off (from prison) to do your exams

In reference to this, the lad that died was not innocent at all.Plus the person who gave him the fatal blow was never arrested.It was papers like the Sunday World with their anti- south side, anti fee paying that made that case so big.

Vegeta · 12-02-2009 03:37PM

Deleted User wrote: »

In reference to this, the lad that died was not innocent at all.

What was he convicted of?

12-02-2009 03:40PM

Vegeta wrote: »

What was he convicted of?

can't convict somebody who is dead.

At the end of the day.It was a fight that went wrong, guarantee if one of the "posh" lads had got killed, you would hear nothing about it in the "Sunday Wurlid"

Blazer · 12-02-2009 03:41PM

Svalbard wrote: »

Is killing said scumbag my only choice?

Of course not...you can talk nice to him while he rapes your wife and children in the hope he'll realise what a naughty boy he's been and beg your forgiveness.
Of course he might then decide just to kill ye all.
At what point exactly will you decide to try and stop this guy?
Before he rapes your wife?
Before he rapes your children?
Before he kills your wife?
Before he kills your children?
Before he kills you?

Here's the dilemna..how far is this guy going to go?
Can you trust him when he tells you that "oh i'm just gonna do the missus".
He's already proved his trustworthiness by breaking into your house and holding you capture.
Are you going to take his word on this or are you thinking to yourself..this guy is not going to just stop with his wife?

Yes the political system in this country is a joke...there was a laywer on the Matt Cooper show recently..
He was explain why so many get off on manslaughter is that to prove first degree murder is nearly impossible for the under-resourced police to prove and most of the time they accept Manslaughter as a poor substitute.

Vegeta · 12-02-2009 03:43PM

Deleted User wrote: »

can't convict somebody who is dead.

So he was innocent, or are people guilty before they go to court :P

Or is it ok to beat someone to death if they start/get into a fight with you?

Just joshing you, "blameless" would have been a better choice of word

Also the Nally thing, I'm old, I'm being terrorised, do I move out of the area or kill someone hmmmmmmm

javaboy · 12-02-2009 03:47PM

Deleted User wrote: »

guarantee if one of the "posh" lads had got killed, you would hear nothing about it in the "Sunday Wurlid"

That's crap. If anything "Tragic death of rich kid" gets more column space than "Tragic death of poor kid".

12-02-2009 03:47PM

Vegeta wrote: »

So he was innocent, or are people guilty before they go to court :P

Or is it ok to beat someone to death if they start/get into a fight with you?

Just joshing you, "blameless" would have been a better choice of word

Also the Nally thing, I'm old, I'm being terrorised, do I move out of the area or kill someone hmmmmmmm

Yeah sorry. I minced my words.It just gets on my nerves, the ****e that happened with regards to that fight.I don't think neither party wanted to kill eachother.It was just misfortune.

12-02-2009 03:49PM

javaboy wrote: »

That's crap. If anything "Tragic death of rich kid" gets more column space than "Tragic death of poor kid".

Ah, only to put down rich people and their love of Cocaine.I was referring to the Sunday World, not the indo.

Holsten · 12-02-2009 03:51PM

If you never need to kill someone, make sure you do it on Irish soil, couldn't name a country where you'd get a lesser sentence.

These people mentioned should have been put to death.

12-02-2009 03:54PM

Solve murder with murder Holsten!Huzzah.

Pub07 · 12-02-2009 03:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

At the end of the day.It was a fight that went wrong, guarantee if one of the "posh" lads had got killed, you would hear nothing about it in the "Sunday Wurlid"

A group of rugby players repeatedly kicking a small guy while he is incapacitated on the ground for a sustained period of time is alot more than a fight gone wrong. If the culprits were scumbags and not posh guys from good familys they would've done some serious time for it.

Pub07 · 12-02-2009 04:00PM

Svalbard wrote: »

Is killing said scumbag my only choice?

Probably. What else are you gonna do if he is going to harm/kill your wife and kids.

Dudess · 12-02-2009 04:00PM

Is it moreso because they can afford the best legal representation possible rather than a pro wealthy and powerful status quo?

big b · 12-02-2009 04:04PM

The supposition that "it's better that 100 guilty men go free, than 1 innocent man is imprisoned" has been abused by the legal profession to the point that it's damn near impossible to prove that anyone did anything.

Enough money will buy you a not guilty or a greatly reduced charge in far too many cases, imo.

Holsten · 12-02-2009 04:41PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Solve murder with murder Holsten!Huzzah.

Nothing to do with solving it, it's just simply punishment.

What do you have to do to get convicted of murder these days?

Comments