Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Ush1 · 02-07-2013 10:21AM

Jumboman wrote: »

And being kicked out of the EU is a bad thing ?:rolleyes:

Most definitely.

Ush1 · 02-07-2013 10:23AM

seb65 wrote: »

It actually is a deterrent. If the serial killer/rapist is dead, they ain't committing no more crimes.

They'd find it hard to kill someone locked up for life in solitary also.

Look at crime statistics for states where the death penalty is regularly used, it's not a deterrent.

Jumboman · 02-07-2013 12:40PM

Dostoevsky wrote: »

We'll just see how incredibly bad it is when the rightwing dregs of British society start, in the event of our being "kicked out" of the EU, claiming the Irish people as British and part of what they call their "British Isles" and advocating, through their numerous media outlets in Ireland, that the Irish "reunite" with them against the rest of Europe.

Irish people have come a long way from the bad days of being the whipping boy for Britannia, of being John Bull's other island. The EU, and our membership of it, is a protector of Irish sovereignty against the abuses of the British state. People who don't realise just how dark the dark days were and how important our membership of the EU is to creating a new Ireland should start reading/watching more than British media/Sunday Independent.

The EU is a protector of Irish sovereignty ? Are you taken the piss ? We have no sovereignty left thanks to the EU.

I advocate a independent Ireland which is neither part of the UK or the EU something along the lines of Iceland or Norway. But the eurofiles would not like that because they have an inferiority complex about Ireland.

Hitchens · 02-07-2013 01:07PM

Ush1 wrote: »

They'd find it hard to kill someone locked up for life in solitary also.

Look at crime statistics for states where the death penalty is regularly used, it's not a deterrent.

How does anyone know? It's likely the murder rate would be a lot higher if those states didn't have the DP.

(and you can ignore the USA statisics as they have been debunked many times)

upstairs for coffee · 02-07-2013 01:22PM

How can any state prohibit murder by law but then sanction the death penalty? Contradiction?

Ush1 · 02-07-2013 02:06PM

Hitchens wrote: »

How does anyone know? It's likely the murder rate would be a lot higher if those states didn't have the DP.

(and you can ignore the USA statisics as they have been debunked many times)

Well states with the death penalty have the highest violent crime rates.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout

What do you mean by "debunked"?

end of the road · 02-07-2013 02:58PM

Hitchens wrote: »

How does anyone know?

because common sense dictates that if someone is going to murder someone else their going to do it whatever the punishment, same with any crime

Hitchens wrote: »

It's likely the murder rate would be a lot higher if those states didn't have the DP.

nonsense, if they have a high murder rate even with the death penalty chances are more likely that if they abolished it the murder rate would stay the same, the only reason why they have the death penalty is because their revengeful blood hounds who preach about the bible yet do everything that goes against its teachings. you couldn't make it up

Hitchens wrote: »

(and you can ignore the USA statisics as they have been debunked many times)

no they haven't

rox5 · 02-07-2013 03:31PM

Yes I would support it. Life should mean life (as in they stay their prisons and rot until they die) for rapists, murderers, etc, but some seem to just get out of jail way too soon for good behavior and stupid excuses like that, and they up re-offending again.

Jimmy Garlic · 02-07-2013 05:45PM

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

How can any state prohibit murder by law but then sanction the death penalty? Contradiction?

A few examples from the UK:

Beverley Allitt: also known as "Angel of Death"; paediatric nurse who killed four babies in her care and injured at least nine others; sentenced to life imprisonment in 1991

Ian Brady and Myra Hindley: also known as "Moors Murderers"; murdered five children, aged between 10 and 17, and buried them in Saddleworth Moor

Levi Bellfield: also known as the "Bus Stop Stalker"; convicted of the 2002 Murder of Amanda Dowler and two fatal hammer attacks on young women in South West London in 2003 and 2004

Peter Sutcliffe: also known as the "Yorkshire Ripper"; convicted in 1981 of murdering 13 women and attacking seven more from 1975 to 1980

Getting rid of psychopaths like them would not be murder, it would be a public service. The fact that millions of pounds is spent every year to look after those animals is scandalous (they can't be put in the general prison population after all, they need special units)

mattjack · 02-07-2013 06:04PM

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

A few examples from the UK:

Getting rid of psychopaths like them would not be murder, it would be a public service. The fact that millions of pounds is spent every year to look after those animals is scandalous (they can't be put in the general prison population after all, they need special units)

Three of those individuals were/are diagnosed as being mentally ill , hardly appropriate to be executing people with severe mental illness.

upstairs for coffee · 02-07-2013 06:14PM

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

A few examples from the UK:

Getting rid of psychopaths like them would not be murder, it would be a public service. The fact that millions of pounds is spent every year to look after those animals is scandalous (they can't be put in the general prison population after all, they need special units)

You have deflected from my question though. How can a state legitimately prohibit murder yet sanction it on an individual basis?

Yeah sure, sometimes I get on the rabble bandwagon and my instinctive visceral urge is to say "Kill all rapists and pedophiles!" when I hear shocking stories. But on reflection I wouldn't be comfortable living with state sanctioned murder.

Look at this, the last words of a death row inmate Texas - http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_info/porterhenrylast.html

end of the road · 02-07-2013 06:26PM

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

Getting rid of psychopaths like them would not be murder

yes it would, if what they did is classed as murder which it is and rightly so

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

it would be a public service.

for ferrel blood hounds who like standing and cheering at people being killed, yet the same people would give out about muslim countries doing the exact same thing even if they do it for less.

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

The fact that millions of pounds is spent every year to look after those animals is scandalous

that much would still be spent even with the death penalty, infact more would be spent

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

they can't be put in the general prison population after all

yes, because whether you like it or not the prisons have a duty of care to them like all prisoners.

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

they need special units

special units which would have to be there anyway even if the death penalty was used for them, the psychiatric units would have to be there for the other patients that would need them, and the protection blocks in the prisons would have to be there for other prisoners for many reasons, so no extra money is being spent so no point in trying to make out it is.

cd07 · 02-07-2013 06:33PM

without a doubt! Although not the PC death penalty, for the likes of that scumbag that killed Jill Meagher one should be battered to death.

Hitchens · 02-07-2013 06:55PM

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

Look at this, the last words of a death row inmate Texas - http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_info/porterhenrylast.html

and your point is........................? :rolleyes:

crazy cabbage · 02-07-2013 07:07PM

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

How can any state prohibit murder by law but then sanction the death penalty? Contradiction?

By definition Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being

If the state sanctioned it by very definition it wouldn't be murder as it would no longer bu unlawful

Having said that i would never agree with the death penalty and agree with you 100%. But the answer to your question is no. It is not a contradiction if it is sanctioned.

upstairs for coffee · 02-07-2013 07:19PM

Hitchens wrote: »

and your point is........................? :rolleyes:

And my point is..............where do you draw the line with who gets the death sentence? Is it specific to pedophiles and rapists or do you include people like that in the link.

Your username isn't doing its namesake justice

crazy cabbage · 02-07-2013 07:19PM

rox5 wrote: »

Yes I would support it. Life should mean life (as in they stay their prisons and rot until they die) for rapists, murderers, etc, but some seem to just get out of jail way too soon for good behavior and stupid excuses like that, and they up re-offending again.

I do not know what defines good behavior but i think that early release would be reasonable IF we had a proper rehabilitation program.

The purpose of jails is to protect society from harm for these people. If these people are rehabilitated properly well then i see no reason why they should be kept in jail as they would no longer be a treat to society. Ok. Clearly there has to be a minimum time away from society in some sort of establishment though.

But we simply don't rehabilitate people in this country though so i agree with you in that there is people getting out way to early. But i disagree with just locking them up until they die.

Hitchens · 02-07-2013 07:28PM

upstairs for coffee wrote: »

do you include people like that in the link.

people like what exactly....................????????? what's so significant about the fellow in the link??

what does an anonymous message board username have to do with any of this??

crazy cabbage · 02-07-2013 08:02PM

Hitchens wrote: »

people like what exactly....................????????? what's so significant about the fellow in the link??

what does an anonymous message board username have to do with any of this??

Let not talk about any particular case.

Let imagine that i kill someone one. The circumstances do not matter. I was initally very bitter and uncooperative. I am rightly sent to jail. I go into a rehabilitation program and work with therapists and councilors to get to the root of the problem. Initally i make no progress and laugh at them. Sure there is nothing wrong with me. I made a mistake sure but it was just a flash of anger at the wrong time in the wrong place. It could have happened to anyone i think to myself
Then i start to make progress and start to see where i went wrong. I begin to get very emotional over some of the things that i have done in my life. Not just the murder but other things to that no one knew about. Things like not never going to see my parents after my brother died. Or some of my old friends that were always there for me but i was never there for them. Some silly things that i have never thought about before. I bring these up in sessions and i begin to make progress. I also start my education again. Have always been interesting in biology so i start a biology degree from my cell.
The years roll by and i truly become very sorry for what i have done. I have got my degree plus another one to boot. The counclers and therapists all agree that i have make excellent progress and all agree that i would likely never recommit. They say there is as much chance of me recommiting as any given person on any given street.

Put the family of the deceased aside. Do you believe that the person depicted above should spend the rest of this life in jail. The purpose of jail is to protect society but in this case there is now nothing to protect society from. What is the point? He could be a productive member of society. What does him staying in jail achieve? Aside form revenge for the deceased family? But revenge doesn't justify anything. What does it achieve?

rox5 · 02-07-2013 08:15PM

crazy cabbage wrote: »

I do not know what defines good behavior but i think that early release would be reasonable IF we had a proper rehabilitation program.

The purpose of jails is to protect society from harm for these people. If these people are rehabilitated properly well then i see no reason why they should be kept in jail as they would no longer be a treat to society. Ok. Clearly there has to be a minimum time away from society in some sort of establishment though.

But we simply don't rehabilitate people in this country though so i agree with you in that there is people getting out way to early. But i disagree with just locking them up until they die.

I actually agree with you at that, it's just I believe those who cannot be rehabilated and who will just reoffend again and again no matter what help they get, should either get life in prison or death penalty for EXTREME cases.

But you are right on rehabilating these people right at the start, most of the worst criminals start out with petty small crime, if they had be rehabilated right the start, given the push in the right direction, maybe we would have less crime to deal with.

SV · 02-07-2013 08:18PM

end of the road wrote: »

exactly, thats why it should never be brought in, if it was, then that would mean multiple people doing a monstrous thing and giving up their rights to be treated as equals, where would it stop

See, this is a stupid argument that I always hear with stuff like this.

They're completely different situations, raping and murdering an innocent person is not the same as a person going through a trial, found to be guilty and being killed in a humane way.
To suggest it's the same thing and that you're 'just as bad' is ridiculous.

crazy cabbage · 02-07-2013 08:21PM

rox5 wrote: »

I actually agree with you at that, it's just I believe those who cannot be rehabilated and who will just reoffend again and again no matter what help they get, should either get life in prison or death penalty for EXTREME cases.

But you are right on rehabilating these people right at the start, most of the worst criminals start out with petty small crime, if they had be rehabilated right the start, given the push in the right direction, maybe we would have less crime to deal with.

How do we know that they can not be rehabilitated?

The only way we could possible know that is if they are a psychopath and this is medicaly shown. Like i have said before most psychopaths go on to live almost perfectly normal lives but if they do turn to murder? I dont know but killing them becouse they have an illness doesn't sit right with me.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 02-07-2013 08:22PM

seb65 wrote: »

It actually is a deterrent. If the serial killer/rapist is dead, they ain't committing no more crimes.

Not entirely sure you understand "deterrent"

Jumboman wrote: »

The EU is a protector of Irish sovereignty ? Are you taken the piss ? We have no sovereignty left thanks to the EU.

Not true. We have no sovereignity left because we autorised FF to create an environment in which we could willingly sacrifice it.

I advocate a independent Ireland which is neither part of the UK or the EU sometime along the lines of Iceland or Norway. But the eurofiles would not like that because they have an inferiority complex about Ireland.

Yeah, why not? I don't live there any more and it'll be fun to watch from a distance.

Back on topic: has anyone given a good practical reason for reinstituting the death penalty complete with ojectives and methods of achievement along with a workable plan to deal with the economic implications yet, or am asking stupid questions again?

Sciprio · 02-07-2013 08:24PM

At sometimes i do think about it. But then i think that if they get put to death it would be all over for them so they won't care. I think life in the most horrible conditions making them longing to be dead would be a better idea.

I am not sadistic or anything i just like justice to be served!

end of the road · 02-07-2013 08:26PM

SV wrote: »

They're completely different situations, raping and murdering an innocent person is not the same as a person going through a trial, found to be guilty and being killed in a humane way.
To suggest it's the same thing and that you're 'just as bad' is ridiculous.

no it isn't, the state has said this person can't commit that rape or murder and rightly so, however it then turns round and says.
remember we said you couldn't commit that murder? well now were going to kill you because we can even though we have said that you couldn't do it, one rule for one and another rule for someone else, to punish a particular crime by commiting said crime is ridiculous and hypocritical

crazy cabbage · 02-07-2013 08:28PM

Sciprio wrote: »

At sometimes i do think about it. But then i think that if they get put to death it would be all over for them so they won't care. I think life in the most horrible conditions making them longing to be dead would be a better idea.

I am not sadistic or anything i just like justice to be served!

read below

crazy cabbage wrote: »

Let imagine that i kill someone one. The circumstances do not matter. I was initally very bitter and uncooperative. I am rightly sent to jail. I go into a rehabilitation program and work with therapists and councilors to get to the root of the problem. Initally i make no progress and laugh at them. Sure there is nothing wrong with me. I made a mistake sure but it was just a flash of anger at the wrong time in the wrong place. It could have happened to anyone i think to myself
Then i start to make progress and start to see where i went wrong. I begin to get very emotional over some of the things that i have done in my life. Not just the murder but other things to that no one knew about. Things like not never going to see my parents after my brother died. Or some of my old friends that were always there for me but i was never there for them. Some silly things that i have never thought about before. I bring these up in sessions and i begin to make progress. I also start my education again. Have always been interesting in biology so i start a biology degree from my cell.
The years roll by and i truly become very sorry for what i have done. I have got my degree plus another one to boot. The counclers and therapists all agree that i have make excellent progress and all agree that i would likely never recommit. They say there is as much chance of me recommiting as any given person on any given street.

Put the family of the deceased aside. Do you believe that the person depicted above should spend the rest of this life in jail. The purpose of jail is to protect society but in this case there is now nothing to protect society from. What is the point? He could be a productive member of society. What does him staying in jail achieve? Aside form revenge for the deceased family? But revenge doesn't justify anything. What does it achieve?

Do you not think justice was served there? Why continue surving justice where there is no longer a need? Because it makes you feel better?

SV · 02-07-2013 08:33PM

end of the road wrote: »

no it isn't, the state has said this person can't commit that rape or murder and rightly so, however it then turns round and says.
remember we said you couldn't commit that murder? well now were going to kill you because we can even though we have said that you couldn't do it, one rule for one and another rule for someone else, to punish a particular crime by commiting said crime is ridiculous and hypocritical

The punishment for murder is murder.
That's a simple equation right there, if you don't murder then you will not be murdered by the state.

It would not be a crime to kill someone who it had been decided by judge, jury and trial that they were deserving of said punishment.
I have no idea how people find it hard to get their head around this.

Hitchens · 04-07-2013 10:24PM

Venables will receive another new identity at great expense to taxpayer.

Denise Fergus and Ralph Bulger said they were ‘filled with terror’ by the decision to grant parole to Jon Venables, 30.

Rehabilitated, yeah sure!

hsianloon · 04-07-2013 10:29PM

Its a very effective and cheap punishment. Its fatal flaw is being irreversible.

But I don't think we should do away with it. It has its place in crimes so heinous that anything short of ending a criminals life is travesty to the victim and justice.

It should be used only when there is no room at all for doubt eg evidence that's so indisputable eg the defence lawyer just gets on his knees and begs for any scrap he can

My view is that its a good punishment but encumbered by a judiciary and investigative efforts that aren't there yet. If my house window is broken...I'm going to fix it, not break the other ones so they match

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 04-07-2013 10:31PM

Hitchens wrote: »

Venables will receive another new identity at great expense to taxpayer.

Denise Fergus and Ralph Bulger said they were ‘filled with terror’ by the decision to grant parole to Jon Venables, 30.

Rehabilitated, yeah sure!

So, are you saying it didnt work in this one case or it never works, full stop?

Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Comments