Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

crazygeryy · 28-06-2013 05:20PM

Dostoevsky wrote: »

No, the death penalty makes remarkably little sense, even as punishment. The following is one of Dostoevsky's finest pieces [from Prince Myshkin in The Idiot (1868)], made much more poignant because Dostoevsky himself had been sentenced to death in 1848 and underwent what turned out (unknown to him beforehand) to be a mock execution so he knew what he was talking about when he wrote about the thoughts of the condemned man:

Dostoyevsky on capital punishment

'... And I may tell you—believe it or not, as you like—that when that man stepped upon the scaffold he CRIED, he did indeed,—he was as white as a bit of paper. Isn’t it a dreadful idea that he should have cried —cried! Whoever heard of a grown man crying from fear—not a child, but a man who never had cried before—a grown man of forty-five years. Imagine what must have been going on in that man’s mind at such a moment; what dreadful convulsions his whole spirit must have endured; it is an outrage on the soul that’s what it is. Because it is said ‘thou shalt not kill,’ is he to be killed because he murdered some one else? No, it is not right, it’s an impossible theory. I assure you, I saw the sight a month ago and it’s dancing before my eyes to this moment. I dream of it, often....'

read that heap of crap to the mother and daughter who were brutally murdered last week in kilorglin.im sure it would make it all better.
yes bring back the death penalty particularly for cases like that.
how can it not be good you get rid of murderers and rapists whofor the most part clearly cannot be rehabilitated.
and by the way that quote was from 1868 what the hell did dostoevsky know about all the maniacs that are running around today. **** all.

Cody Pomeray · 28-06-2013 05:25PM

Hitchens wrote: »

when we had the death penalty here - and carried it through - there were very few murders committed

Do you have a link for that?

Murder and manslaughter in the famine era was almost double what it was in the early 21st century
http://books.google.ie/books?id=U-zAOTg22O4C&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=violence+in+europe+ian+o%27donnell&source=bl&ots=tt-Qk--_X6&sig=V6q5AHgSLWyBJyBYjwPgA-Ay13Y&hl=en&ei=RYHUS9OxNZT5-AbtlNGaDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CAsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=violence%20in%20europe%20ian%20o'donnell&f=false

chart:
http://omg.wthax.org/6XhLUP.png

NegativeCreep · 28-06-2013 05:28PM

No. And definitely not for rape. The amount of times people are wrongly accused of rape is sickening. I think there'd be too great of a risk of someone innocent being put to death.

TheFOB · 28-06-2013 05:34PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Do you have a link for that?

Murder and manslaughter in the famine era was almost double what it was in the early 21st century
http://books.google.ie/books?id=U-zAOTg22O4C&pg=PA79&lpg=PA79&dq=violence+in+europe+ian+o%27donnell&source=bl&ots=tt-Qk--_X6&sig=V6q5AHgSLWyBJyBYjwPgA-Ay13Y&hl=en&ei=RYHUS9OxNZT5-AbtlNGaDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CAsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=violence%20in%20europe%20ian%20o'donnell&f=false

http://www.crimecouncil.gov.ie/statistics_cri_crime_murder.html

The last execution was carried out in 1954.

Cody Pomeray · 28-06-2013 05:43PM

TheFOB wrote: »

http://www.crimecouncil.gov.ie/statistics_cri_crime_murder.html

The last execution was carried out in 1954.

You must be having a laugh...

I have provided evidence going back to the 19th century, which suggests a pretty enormous homicide rate compared to today.

http://omg.wthax.org/6XhLUP.png

TheFOB · 28-06-2013 05:44PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

You must be having a laugh...

I have provided evidence going back to the 19th century, which suggests a pretty enormous homicide rate compared to today.

Your link dosn't really make sense and I'm not crawling through a online book looking for what your getting at.

Cody Pomeray · 28-06-2013 05:47PM

TheFOB wrote: »

Your link dosn't really make sense and I'm not crawling through a online book looking for what your getting at.

I have included a chart to clarify things.

The chapter on Ireland is pretty short, if you enter Ireland into the search box. It explains the factors why crime was low in the 1950s... doesn't suggest any relationship with the death penalty.

Overall, homicidal crime was higher in Ireland when the death penalty existed.

TheFOB · 28-06-2013 05:54PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

You must be having a laugh...

I have provided evidence going back to the 19th century, which suggests a pretty enormous homicide rate compared to today.

http://omg.wthax.org/6XhLUP.png

You could argue that the police in Ireland in the 19th century were like the RUC of it's day, really just maintaining the British rule and did not have the trust of the people. How many crimes were actually solved back then, did people literally get away with murder??

washman3 · 28-06-2013 05:58PM

The 'top brass' at Anglo Irish Bank would almost certainly face the death penalty, if they acted as they did here. in a country like China.
How many here would agree with that.? i would for one.!!

Or put another way, would they act as they did if they knew the consequences would be a death penalty?
Just think about it.!!

Me_Grapes · 28-06-2013 06:01PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

I have included a chart to clarify things.

The chapter on Ireland is pretty short, if you enter Ireland into the search box. It explains the factors why crime was low in the 1950s... doesn't suggest any relationship with the death penalty.

Overall, homicidal crime was higher in Ireland when the death penalty existed.

So what you're saying is homicidal crime was higher in Ireland during times of penal law, uprisings and civil war?

What I'd be interested in is the statistics since the formation of the free state in 1937.

JJayoo · 28-06-2013 06:03PM

The reintroduction of hard labour where a person could work to lower their sentence would be a better idea IMO, obviously you would need to have much higher mandatory sentences to begin with.

Cody Pomeray · 28-06-2013 06:16PM

TheFOB wrote: »

You could argue that the police in Ireland in the 19th century were like the RUC of it's day, really just maintaining the British rule and did not have the trust of the people. How many crimes were actually solved back then, did people literally get away with murder??

That's not related to the death penalty though. That's a debate on policing more generally. Can't be lumped in with something so extreme as the Death Penalty.

If you're comparing homicide rates to the 1950s to the present day, you'd be better served looking at alcohol consumption and then drug consumption in later years. I've seen plenty of papers discuss the role of alcohol and illicit drug consumption in Irish society (which was actually quite low in the 50s) (e.g. Drinking in Ireland: A Review of Trends in Alcohol Consumption, Alcohol Related Problems and Policies towards Alcohol). This makes sense, because drug/alcohol use seems to have positively correlated with crime rates in Ireland throughout history.

The reference to the death penalty makes no sense. We had the death penalty when our homicidal crime rates were at record highs.

TheFOB · 28-06-2013 06:22PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

That's not related to the death penalty though. That's a debate on policing more generally. Can't be lumped in with something so extreme as the Death Penalty.

If you're comparing homicide rates to the 1950s to the present day, you'd be better served looking at alcohol consumption and then drug consumption in later years. I've seen plenty of papers discuss the role of alcohol and illicit drug consumption in Irish society (which was actually quite low in the 50s) (e.g. Drinking in Ireland: A Review of Trends in Alcohol Consumption, Alcohol Related Problems and Policies towards Alcohol). This makes sense, because drug/alcohol use seems to have positively correlated with crime rates in Ireland throughout history.

The reference to the death penalty makes no sense. We had the death penalty when our homicidal crime rates were at record highs.

People didn't trust the RIC, as a result crime was high, the police were ineffective because noone wanted to deal with them and so no crimes were solved. Therefore any law or deterrent on the books would have been ineffective.

TBH I'm in favour of capital punishment because it provides justice. Send them to prison for 30 - 40 years and then kill them.

Cody Pomeray · 28-06-2013 06:24PM

TheFOB wrote: »

People didn't trust the RIC, as a result crime was high, the police were ineffective because noone wanted to deal with them and so no crimes were solved.

Actually, academics looking into Irish crime have suggested that crime is lowest when people take the law into their own hands and don't depend on the state to do so - i.e. during the 1950s.

You're just making this up because you want to promote the Death Penalty, not because you think there is any evidence leading you to this position - there clearly isnt so whatever. Invent whatever scenarios you like.

TheFOB · 28-06-2013 06:28PM

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Actually, academics looking into Irish crime have suggested that crime is lowest when people take the law into their own hands and don't depend on the state to do so - i.e. during the 1950s.

You're just making this up because you want to promote the Death Penalty, not because you think there is any evidence leading you to this position - there clearly isnt so whatever. Invent whatever scenarios you like.

Yes it was just a theory of mine and I'm not an expert on 19th century Ireland.

twowheelsonly · 28-06-2013 06:28PM

frank reynolds wrote: »

maybe they could consider a life sentence meaning a life sentence. this country is horrible. a murderer will serve a "life" sentence of what - 8 years is it? so thats probably, in reality about 5-6 years... for MURDER....

ridiculous kip.

no wonder crime is high - the criminals are not afraid because they KNOW that they wont be missing out on much of their lives by being locked up with their friends with playstations and free food and board for a couple of years.

so actually, i DO think they should bring it back in... for murder or child rape etc...

It tends to be 15+ years, with many serving a lot longer, not 5-6. That's a myth. Also there's no remission on a life sentence.

Personally I think that Jail should be much tougher. Ultimately there should be 'graded' jails.
First time in or a single sentence - The 'cushier' jail so that you're deprived of your freedom and not a lot more.
Next time around, tougher Jail, no TV, less visits/phone calls etc.
3rd and subsequent sentences, Tough Jail - 1 hour exercise a day, 1 visit a month subject to good behaviour. No phone calls, gym, TV, school or any of the 'luxuries' available in the other jails.

The amount of habitual criminals doing 'life by installments' is horrific. These people offer society nothing and are mostly leading a criminal lifestyle by choice. Reward them by giving them nothing.

Most murders in this country by the way tend to be one-off by people that would otherwise never be in trouble with the law. A lot of them tend to be otherwise decent enough people that made a massive mistake. That's no consolation for the families obviously.

Spike Witwicky · 28-06-2013 06:32PM

No. The death penalty should not be brought back because if one innocent person is put to death then it's one too many

Look at Damien Echols.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three
18 years on Death Row for a crime he didnt commit but was convicted of. Based on nothing but hearsay and a forced confession.

But i do agree sentancing is too leniant. Prison should be an absolute ****hole that no sane person would ever want to return to.

namloc1980 · 28-06-2013 06:50PM

No. It has no place in Ireland whatsoever. It is completely illegal anyway under the constitution and also under EU law. And we're also a party to the European Convention on Human Rights where it is completely illegal in all circumstances. The 21st amendment removed all mention from our constitution and I doubt there is any significant movement to bring it back in Ireland.

pheno · 28-06-2013 07:34PM

Candie wrote: »

And what if the court is wrong? Should that persons family get to send to original family to the death chamber for killing their family member? How many deaths cancel one another out?

Obviously for proven cases there should be a death penalty. For example, the guy that killed a mother and young daughter recently. It is known who did it because there is visual proof. Cases like that is where the death penalty should apply. That person killed two people, why should he live? He deserves to die.

pheno · 28-06-2013 07:36PM

Holsten wrote: »

"In 1996, Issac Ramirez stole a VCR, worth $199, from a Sears in Los Angeles, CA. Walking out of the store in daylight, he was promptly caught and arrested. Having previously been convicted of two previous shoplifting related robberies, this offense was Ramirez's third strike, and he was sentenced to a prison term of 25 years to life"

Just an example.

In your view this man should be in prison for the rest of his life?!?!?!?!

Not the rest of his life, but 25 years yes. He is an example of a human degenerate. He done it 3 times. He won't learn.

WumBuster · 28-06-2013 07:39PM

Yes, but only in extreme cases where the person is a true psychopath who can never be rehabilitated. In that case there is no point wasting anymore taxpayers' money on these people.

crazy cabbage · 28-06-2013 07:48PM

WumBuster wrote: »

Yes, but only in extreme cases where the person is a true psychopath who can never be rehabilitated. In that case there is no point wasting anymore taxpayers' money on these people.

It isn't illegal to be a psychopath.

Some of the best business people and politicians in the world are psychopaths.

2% of people are psychopaths in the general population.

6% (3 times as many!!!) of CEO's of major corporations and politician are psychopaths.

figures taken from a ted talk

Killer Wench · 28-06-2013 07:48PM

As an observer, sometimes I can't tell if people truly hold such extreme views towards travelers and 'knackers'. If what I have read is truly reflective of how many feel towards these groups, I don't think the death penalty would be the right thing to reinstate. On my side of the world, there are several states that do have the death penalty in existence, and unfortunately, through careful re-consideration of cases, it has been brought to light that people have been executed for crimes they did not commit. Everyone has internalized stereotypes to a certain degree, so when Juries were presented evidence, they were likely to associate these stereotypes with the defendant before them. Ending the death penalty is something I think European countries have done right.

namloc1980 · 28-06-2013 07:53PM

pheno wrote: »

Obviously for proven cases there should be a death penalty. For example, the guy that killed a mother and young daughter recently. It is known who did it because there is visual proof. Cases like that is where the death penalty should apply. That person killed two people, why should he live? He deserves to die.

Nobody has the right to deny life to another human either in crime or in punishment.

WumBuster · 28-06-2013 07:54PM

crazy cabbage wrote: »

It isn't illegal to be a psychopath.

Some of the best business people and politicians in the world are psychopaths.

2% of people are psychopaths in the general population.

6% (3 times as many!!!) of CEO's of major corporations and polatiotions are psychopath.

figures taken from a ted talk

Ok well we could narrow it down to violent psychopaths. As for the ''best buisness people and politicians in the world'' it is arguably that 2-6% of the population that cause most of the problems for the rest of society. We dont 'need' these people, as they get their success/gratification at the expense of others.

Downlinz · 28-06-2013 07:56PM

washman3 wrote: »

The 'top brass' at Anglo Irish Bank would almost certainly face the death penalty, if they acted as they did here. in a country like China.
How many here would agree with that.? i would for one.!!

Yes but they wouldn't have acted this way in China, it'd be unthinkable. Society has to accept responsibility for creating an environment where this kind of behaviour is acceptable from those at the top in positions of influence. We created a society of false professionalism, where so long as you wear a suit, look and suit professional it's "ok" to act the maggot and be utterly incompetent at your job. Those kind of characters are riddled throughout politics, the gardai and the banks in particular. People aren't being held accountable at times that matter, 5 years after billions have been poured down the drain is too late. It was the same for haughy and bertie, same nonsense cover ups from the gardai to protect shatter.
It's a democracy and nothing will change until we ditch the establishment, all the major parties are rotten to their core.

Irish people are unfortunately ultra conservative and will continue to retreat to "the lads who aren't that shower in government" every time something bad happens. Other side of the same coin and nothing changes.

crazy cabbage · 28-06-2013 08:00PM

WumBuster wrote: »

Ok well we could narrow it down to violent psychopaths. As for the ''best buisness people and politicians in the world'' it is arguably that 2-6% of the population that cause most of the problems for the rest of society. We dont 'need' these people, as they get their success/gratification at the expense of others.

They get their success/gratification from being good at what they do. Just like me. Just like most of us.
They have a mental disorder and you want to put them down because of it.

No I do not agree with premeditated murder by anyone even if sanctioned by the state.

28-06-2013 08:56PM

pheno wrote: »

Obviously for proven cases there should be a death penalty. For example, the guy that killed a mother and young daughter recently. It is known who did it because there is visual proof. Cases like that is where the death penalty should apply. That person killed two people, why should he live? He deserves to die.

But ALL death penalty cases are proven to the satisfaction of the jury! They STILL get it wrong sometimes.

Innocent people don't deserve to die because of miscarriages of justice, quite apart from any moral concerns I have.

Hitchens · 28-06-2013 09:04PM

Candie wrote: »

But ALL death penalty cases are proven to the satisfaction of the jury! They STILL get it wrong sometimes.

Innocent people don't deserve to die because of miscarriages of justice, quite apart from any moral concerns I have.

what would you do to a domesticated dog who attacks and kills a child?

28-06-2013 09:10PM

Hitchens wrote: »

what would you do to a domesticated dog who attacks and kills a child?

I wouldn't treat a dog like a human being any more than I'd treat a human being like a dog.

Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Comments