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; } } }

Child Item

Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Jimmy Garlic

I would but only in circumstances where it would be appropriate and if the sentence was carried out quickly (within 12 months). I think the death penalty for some crimes is necessary, eg, premeditated murder, serial rape, child abuse. Who agrees with me?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

How do you know they did this?

Jumboman wrote: »

Did what ?

What you sid they did. See below:

Jumboman wrote: »

That was a regional dispute. Its not the same as going half way around the world to invade a country that was never a threat to america.

Love2u

Jumboman wrote: »

I didnt put words in anyones mouth please read your pervious post.

No, you read my previous posts. I see now your shifting the topic to wars........what next!......as the song goes "time to say goodbye".......

Jumboman

Jon Venables deserves the death penalty he has repeatedly proven that he is pure evil.

I wonder would the human rights brigade object to him living in their area.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/james-bulger-murderer-jon-venables-freed-from-prison-for-second-time-29548084.html
Jon Venables, one of the two killers of toddler James Bulger, has been freed from prison for a second time.

mattjack

For what offence should Jon Venables be executed for ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Jumboman wrote: »

Jon Venables deserves the death penalty he has repeatedly proven that he is pure evil.

I wonder would the human rights brigade object to him living in their area.

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/james-bulger-murderer-jon-venables-freed-from-prison-for-second-time-29548084.html
Jon Venables, one of the two killers of toddler James Bulger, has been freed from prison for a second time.

I remember you as the guy who claimed that the media lies about the wars in iraq and Libya and that they should never be trusted. So how can we trust what they are saying here? About Venables, Bush, Qadaffi or anyone?

On a sidenote, for what crime should Venables be sentenced to death for?

Santa Cruz

uch wrote: »

Only for people who try skipping their Round

"try"

What would you recommend as punishment for those who actually succeed in skipping their round? Such a dastardly act merits immediate execution.

MRnotlob606

i would not support it because innocent people are bound to be killed

TireeTerror

I think its incredulous that so many think the death penalty is a suitable punishment for rape. I mean seriously, how could you even compare them? As bad as rape is, it certainly does not justify state killing. What principles are we basing this on to allow the state to take a human life?

If the death penalty was brought back, we would be sending out a clear message saying that under certain circumstances it is justified to take another persons life.

Many people have commented showing concern about people who were killed by the state and latterly proven to be innocent. I do not actually think this should be the main reason to refuse to allow its return. Of course it is a terrible thing for an innocent to be killed by the state, but depending on where your moral compass points, any killing, whether by a murderer or by the state, should be a crime. How can we educate people and try and teach them moral values, explaining to people the value of human life only to contradict ourselves when it suits us.

I'm sure many of you, like myself, have seen some videos online showing baying crowds of people beating or hacking other people to death. Usually they have been suspected of child abuse or rape, or perhaps even something as minor as stealing. The manner in which it turns into a frenzy is terrifying. Most of these videos I have had the misfortune of witnessing have been in an African country. Every time I've seen one I've had a chill run through me and it makes me question just how cruel the human race can be.

Even in our Western society the threads of moral fibre are very fragile. Its easy to think we are so advanced in comparison, yet only last night I read an article about a man who was apparently tortured, stripped naked, put into a wheelie bin which was taped shut and wedged against a tree and hidden in the undergrowth. Were it not far a dog discovering him, he would almost certainly have died. This was in Northern Ireland.

It is never easy to find an appropriate punishment for heinous crimes. We cannot condone killing another human or any physical punishment. To kill another will not punish them, the dead cannot feel nor learn from their mistakes. Whatever the cost to the taxpayer, we must be the better people and lead by example.

Jumboman

mattjack wrote: »

For what offence should Jon Venables be executed for ?

Hes a sadistic paedophile child killer. Do you really think he has anything positive to contribute to society ? Keeping him alive is a waste of tax payers money.

Jumboman

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I remember you as the guy who claimed that the media lies about the wars in iraq and Libya and that they should never be trusted. So how can we trust what they are saying here? About Venables, Bush, Qadaffi or anyone?

On a sidenote, for what crime should Venables be sentenced to death for?

I dont see anyone claiming Venables is innocent.

Amirani

TireeTerror wrote: »

I think its incredulous that so many think the death penalty is a suitable punishment for rape. I mean seriously, how could you even compare them? As bad as rape is, it certainly does not justify state killing. What principles are we basing this on to allow the state to take a human life?

An even bigger argument against death penalty for rape is that it means there's no incentive for a rapist to not murder their victim.

Jumboman

NiallSparky wrote: »

An even bigger argument against death penalty for rape is that it means there's no incentive for a rapist to not murder their victim.

What about repeat sex offeners like the guy in cork who was convicted of rape on 4 separate occasions prison is obviously no deterrent to him. If he was put down he would not have the opportunity to rape someone again.

AudreyHepburn

No.

Why should anyone have the right to say whether another lives or dies?

mattjack

Jumboman wrote: »

Hes a sadistic paedophile child killer. Do you really think he has anything positive to contribute to society ? Keeping him alive is a waste of tax payers money.

Why not answer the question you've been asked ? would you have liked him to have been executed after his original conviction at the age of ten or so or for downloading child pornography ?.

Billy de Bollix

Rape, child melostation, cruelty to animals, one direction fans, heroin addicts, fianna fail/green party.....actually ALL politicians. Should be ejected from this earth.

old hippy

Jumboman wrote: »

What about repeat sex offeners like the guy in cork who was convicted of rape on 4 separate occasions prison is obviously no deterrent to him. If he was put down he would not have the opportunity to rape someone again.

What do you mean by "put down"?

And what should Venebales be executed for?

Would you be happy to execute him?

catallus

"Put Down" as in killed. Like an animal.

I'd happily do it, for a fee.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

"Put Down" as in killed. Like an animal.

I'd happily do it, for a fee.

You'd do it for money? Like a happy go lucky mercenary, who enjoys murdering people for a fat pay cheque?

Not because you might be doing it on some kind of justice is served principle?

Interesting.

catallus

What, I'm supposed to do it for nothing?

Wabbit Ears

yea, you gotta ice the cake

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Jumboman wrote: »

Hes a sadistic paedophile child killer. Do you really think he has anything positive to contribute to society ? Keeping him alive is a waste of tax payers money.

You don't get sentence for being something, you get sentenced for doing something. Which crime should he be called for?

Jumboman wrote: »

I dont see anyone claiming Venables is innocent.

Doesn't answer my question: you have repeatedly stated you don't trust what you read in the media. Now you're linking to it. How do you know what you read is true? Is it a case of confirmation bias - i.e. if it's in line with your way thinking it must be true and if it isn't it must be bull****?

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

What, I'm supposed to do it for nothing?

Aha, it's not about "justice" then?

It's so you can get a nice wad of cash.

So, you don't actually care about the nature of the crimes he's served time for - you just want to off someone and get paid at the end.

catallus

old hippy wrote: »

Aha, it's not about "justice" then?

It's so you can get a nice wad of cash.

So, you don't actually care about the nature of the crimes he's served time for - you just want to off someone and get paid at the end.

Nobody can bring "justice" to the victims of Venables' crimes, or to the family of his first or subsequent victims.

To talk of any action that could bring about "justice" is absurd in this instance. The guy has been sucking air and eating and drinking and in relationships with other people for all his life since the day he murdered a small child.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

Nobody can bring "justice" to the victims of Venables' crimes, or to the family of his first or subsequent victims.

To talk of any action that could bring about "justice" is absurd in this instance. The guy has been sucking air and eating and drinking and in relationships with other people for all his life since the day he murdered a small child.

And you want to murder him, for money.

catallus

old hippy wrote: »

And you want to murder him, for money.

That is incorrect. Using the term murder for lawfully sanctioned killing of criminals is wilfully naive. But that's the only arrow in your quiver oldhippy, don't try and be so presumptuous as to have complete knowledge of my motives.

old hippy

catallus wrote: »

That is incorrect. Using the term murder for lawfully sanctioned killing of criminals is wilfully naive. But that's the only arrow in your quiver oldhippy, don't try and be so presumptuous as to have complete knowledge of my motives.

Murder is murder. And you want to do it for a fee.

That pretty much says it all.

catallus

old hippy wrote: »

Murder is murder. And you want to do it for a fee.

That pretty much says it all.

Reducing another person's ideas about anything in this fashion is infantile.

Jumboman

old hippy wrote: »

And you want to murder him, for money.

Murder is the "unlawful" killing of someone it wouldnt be murder if the state allowed it.

http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/murder?showCookiePolicy=true

Jumboman

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You don't get sentence for being something, you get sentenced for doing something. Which crime should he be called for?

I'm not a lawyer but hes clearly a threat to whatever community he lives in.

Also he will cost the british tax payer millions over his lifetime just for the authorities to keep an eye on him that money could be much better spent on people who really need it.

Do you think any parent will think "sure there is no problem the lad has served his time in prison I will let him play with my little johnny" ? or course they wouldnt. The "law" would be last thing on their minds if venables moved in beside them.

Doesn't answer my question: you have repeatedly stated you don't trust what you read in the media. Now you're linking to it. How do you know what you read is true? Is it a case of confirmation bias - i.e. if it's in line with your way thinking it must be true and if it isn't it must be bull****?

He was convicted of horrific crimes its not a tabloid rumor.

Do you not see a problem with someone like venables walking the streets ? for all we know he could be in Ireland.

TireeTerror

I t does not matter if it costs a lot of money to keep criminals. There is money there to pay for it.

Whether the taking of an others life is defined as murder if its done illegally is not important. As far as I am concerned, if it is sanctioned by the Government then it is also murder. Points of law can be argued back and forth all day, Im not interested in the legal aspects of the discussion. Im purely interested in how we as a society deal with these situations. We can judge and be horrified by the actions of evil people, but to sanction the taking of someone's life as a form of punishment reflects very badly upon us.

Someone mentioned a serial rapist who had done it 4 times. Just pay the bill and keep him locked up.

Some of the views in here are very extreme, and I hope a lot of it is just people getting carried away with things. If not, its a sad world we live in.