should the death penalty be reintroduced

sovtek

berliner wrote: »

it's ironic most people here are against the death penalty and in support of muslims opening mosques wherever they want.Ironic because muslim countries kill and mutilate (chop off hands) of their citizens as a punishment.

OMG you found people with religious and moral contradictions. How extraordinary.

mike65

How did you divine that wisdom?

Mike

Riddle101

I'm pro treaty. there are so many scum outhere getting away with s**t and there's nothing been done about it. Gangsters who have murdered, rapists and psycopaths get off with anything and all we're supposed to do is watch Ireland turn into another Columbia. It's the very reason why Limerick has been voted the most dangerous City in Europe

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

RobAMerc wrote: »

Please re-read my post with your brain in.
Your not getting the point. Scaring these filth into stopping would only be a happy side effect of the plan if it happened. If not then they would re-offend, we would kill them, and we're done with them - either way the scum stops offending.

Your point is/was wait until the commit the crime and get caught, was it not?

My responce was/is: how is this preventing the crime that they've just commited? And how is it preventing future crime if they do not get caught?

Was it not?

If we want to breed people for organ donors, there are more efficent ways. Not as ethical, granted, but who gives a sh1t as long as it gets the job done?

Mena

I'm undecided on this, but leaning towards "fry the fecker". One thing I remember vividly growing up in a country with a death penalty is the fear of the cops nabbing me and hanging for something I did or didn't do. No idea why I recall this but I do.

uptherebels

axer wrote: »

What about doctors, social workers, security personnel, soldiers etc ? Many people have to deal with the scum of our society.

very big difference in the way that they "deal" with them.You cant compare the dangers that a garda in this country faces with what a doctor or even a soldier has to put up with in their daily job.

Manic Moran

Social workers and doctors tend not to have an adversarial relationship with the 'scum' with which they deal. Either the 'scum' comes to them seeking help, or they go to the 'scum' seeking to help. Police, on the other hand, have an adversarial relationship to begin with: They're the enforcers, and when it comes to the criminal 'scum,' they are absolutely not welcome, and not there to help.

NTM

Tea drinker

I'm more or less against the death penalty, there has been a few cases of wrongful deaths, ans there is just no going back from this.
I would prefer to go in a different direction. what if we had value for money in the prison service?

1. No more wasting money (20mill) on expensive land when these guys should be kept in a swamp.
2. For some inhuman acts you give up your rights to be treated in a humane manner.
3. I believe in Punishment, not just confinment. It gives both victim and perp the chance to get over the crime. It also reinforces on the perp that he did something wrong, and that worse is waiting for him if he returns. To deprive the perp of the opportunity to suffer for his crimes violates his rights.
4. People have a right to safe streets, they are paying for it.
5. repeat offenders should be put away for a long, long time, in a cheap ass prison. These guys cost a fortune on the streets. Put them to work in prison, making tents and bedding to sleep in.

ejmaztec

I don't believe in the death penalty, but I do believe that the prison regime itself is too soft and too lax. Easily available drugs also makes a mockery of the whole system.

It seems to me that, apart from the lack of travelling, the life of an incarcerated con isn't too different from life on the outside. They should all be put to work on the kind of task that will give them the incentive not to return.

Executive Steve

Lol @ the idea of the irish government being competent enough to kill someone


The death penalty is not a deterrent - it is a very powerful signal that life is not worth protecting.

State killing is wrong in all of its forms.

Kama

For those who believe prison is too lax:

Have any of you been in prison? Or even visited one?
Its easy to say 'prison is too easy'. Even easier if you have no experience of one.

If you believe prison, and the retribution/punitive approach works, reducing crime by hurting the people who commit crimes, then it follows that the perceived fact that it isn't working (increased recidivism/reoffending/crime generally) is because it's 'too lax'. Another way of looking at it is that it doesn't deter, tends not to rehabilitate, and makes people more likely to be rearrested, which accounts for the same fact: repeat offending.

Berliner, I'm amused by the irony that the people who tend to talk about how awful shari'ah is tend to be all for making prison as painful, degrading and hurtful a process as possible.

Orchard Rebel

The argument is moot. The EU has abolished the death penalty in perpetuity, meaning we'd have to leave the EU in order to restore it. Not sure how far the pro-death penalty lobby would get with the "let's leave the EU so we can execute people" argument.

wes

Orchard Rebel wrote: »

The argument is moot. The EU has abolished the death penalty in perpetuity, meaning we'd have to leave the EU in order to restore it. Not sure how far the pro-death penalty lobby would get with the "let's leave the EU so we can execute people" argument.

I am actually not against the death penalty per se, but I don't think it worth leaving the EU for.

Also, its doesn't seem to be a effective deterrent and in a lot of cases seems more like revenge imho.

ejmaztec

[cm]tyranny wrote: »

Lol @ the idea of the irish government being competent enough to kill someone

That's obviously why they chose English people to do most of it for them.

http://www.irishpost.co.uk/news/story/?trs=eyeykfgb

Hangman for the Irish State
By Malcolm Rogers

HIS noose, ropes, black hood and the rest of his hanging equipment lie stowed away in a black box at Mountjoy Prison and his grim chamber still stands in the grounds of the jail where he carried out the last State-sanctioned execution in the Republic of Ireland in 1954.

Just before despatching 25-year-old Limerick murderer Michael Manning to eternity hangman Albert Pierrepoint announced to the gathered group of prison guards and priests: “I love hanging Irishmen — they always go quietly and without trouble.

“They’re Christian men and they believe they’re going to a better place.”

Minutes later the condemned man — who had been found guilty of the murder of a 65-year-old nurse — was hanging at the end of Pierrepoint’s noose the knot at the back having neatly broken his neck as he fell through the trapdoor.

At the time Manning’s hanging passed almost without note.

The death penalty was then an accepted part of Irish life and few questioned it let alone protested outside the prison gates.

And although the Catholic Church has been remarkably consistent in its condemnation of capital punishment since the middle ages Archbishop McQuaid — so often responsible for giving guidance on matters Christian — remained silent on the Limerick man’s fate.

Two years after Manning’s execution — exactly 50 years ago this summer — Albert Pierrepoint resigned as British Chief Executioner.

He’d been official hangman in Britain since 1932 and as Ireland didn’t have anyone to fill such a position Pierrepoint became the unofficial hangman of this country as well — employed independently by the Irish State.

Dublin man George Bernard Shaw may have said: “Put an Irishman on the spit and you can always get another Irishman to turn him” but it seems to have been impossible to get one Irishman to hang another.

Thirty-five people were hanged for murder between 1922 and 1954. They included one woman — Annie Walsh of Co. Limerick who was executed on August 5 1925 at Dublin’s Mountjoy prison for the murder of her husband.

Albert Pierrepoint or his uncle Tom were responsible for despatching 29 of the 35 to their death — the others were shot by military firing squad.

The Pierrepoints also plied their trade in the North.

In the 20th century there were nine hangings in Belfast and Derry with either Henry Pierrepoint or his brother Thomas officiating.

Henry’s son Albert only visited the North twice helping his uncle to hang Tom Williams in Belfast in 1942.

The very first execution which Albert Pierrepoint officiated at was in Mountjoy Prison in Dublin on December 29 1932 when he assisted his uncle Thomas at the hanging of Patrick McDermott — a 26-year-old killer.

This launched a long career in the business.

Albert Pierrepoint was by far the most prolific British hangman of the 20th century.

In office between 1932 and 1956 he executed an estimated 433 men and 17 women — including six US soldiers at Shepton Mallet, some 200 war criminals and over a dozen Irishmen.

Fighting Irish

I don't care either way about death penalties but if it was up to me i'd just make prisons pretty much like they are in Prison Break(last season), it wouldn't take much money to run that

montydorito

The death penalty is a waste of a good Guinea pigs lets use the scumbags for once ....the thought of making them work is in itself a good idea but they are a bunch of f***ing w****Rs ..so that wont work.....killing them is easy choice but in my eyes.....we should utilise these c***S for once ....almost like a human farm...(Guinea pigs )
A few reasons and benefits
1. even though the majority will be infected with disease..They should be forced to give blood
2. used by companies to test new products such as perfume ect these companies could pay the government to use these inmates ...thus paying to house these pigs
3. used by the medical scientists to test for cures such as cancer .....instead of them having to spending years researching, testing animals ,spending millions on artificial tissue ect going through millions of tests before they can even look at human patient
4. think of the disease they could cure using inmates as Guinea pigs ....the benefits would be vast lives saved(they murdered) money(they stole) time saved(they wasted through their crimes) all in one
5.they will have the chance to repay back to society what they took ...whats is great they have no choice ... eg making them work they can just refuse.. but inject them with medicine they will be powerless to refuse.
6.death is sweet release for some inmates who deserve nothing less than years of torture (regarding the case of the man who raped someone for nearly a day)
7.the time to develop a drug would be dropped significantly
8.prisons would become less crowded as more and more inmates are used as Guinea pigs
9.80% of criminals today are repeat offends in England a proper punishment system in Ireland would defer repeat offenders
10 Ireland has the softest prisons in the world ....the Carlsberg slogan springs to mind if Carlsberg did prisons they Probably be the best in the World.. well Ireland certainly has this down to a tee

While many will disagree with this...it’s only an idea which certainly couldn’t make the situation any worse than it is
While the usual objections will be human rights, lets just see how they violated someone rights and to what extreme and lets by all means violate their rights..An eye for an eye kind of thing except mankind benefits from this exchange for a change

Elmo

The argument is moot. The EU has abolished the death penalty in perpetuity, meaning we'd have to leave the EU in order to restore it. Not sure how far the pro-death penalty lobby would get with the "let's leave the EU so we can execute people" argument.

It is funny that you say that because I was sure that 34% (63% of the 34%) of the Irish Electorate abolished the Death Penalty and not the EU. But prehaps the EU has more power than the People

Low turn out could be a reason to retake that Referundum. Also we didn't get this kind of discussion during the last referundum, most people have forgot that there was a referundum on the subject.

Wonder how brussels would have felt if we had said NO to the abolishion of the death penalty.


PS: - I am totally againist the Death penalty. One of the good things about the EU.

FTA69

johnnyc wrote: »

I am pro death penalty as i believe it deters murders,

It doesn't. The type of person that would kill another human being isn't concerned about the death penalty. In America they have capital punishment and the murder rate is higher in some cities there than it was in Belfast in the 1980s. Likewise they have a "three strikes" rule which hasn't stopped people in their tracks at all.

political groups from carrying out murdering rampages,

People have been executing Republicans for decades, you are talking about people prepared to starve themselves to death. What difference is a death penalty going to make?

and also the shipment of mass amount of drugs by cartels(the one in cork comes to my mind) it seems a waste of public finances to lock up these people.

People will always smuggle drugs because of the astronomical amount of money involved. Risk is always measured against reward, and the "reward" of millions of euros is usually deemed to be worth the hassle.

I'm against the death penalty largely because I disagree with it morally, however there is also the fact that it is pointless and just doesn't work.

Kevster

johnnyc wrote: »

just wondering what peoples opinions on the re-introduction of the death penalty. I am pro death penalty as i believe it deters murders, political groups from carrying out murdering rampages, and also the shipment of mass amount of drugs by cartels(the one in cork comes to my mind) it seems a waste of public finances to lock up these people.

Can I just say that, in US states where they have introduced the death penalty, violent crime actually rose. The death penalty therefore does NOT deter crime. If you want to save money by reducing the amount of people there are in prisons, then tackle each of society's problems at the grass-roots level. Many of our criminals don't know any better, and they need to be looked-after properly from the moment they are born, and not from the moment they commit a crime in adulthood/adolesence.

... ...be proactive, not reactive.

Kevin

Jim_Are_Great

Just to get this out there, executing a convict is by no means cheaper than extended incarceration. Take America, the best example available of a state with a large execution rate accompanied by credible surveys, as an example. They, like Ireland, have a (largely) adversarial criminal justice system. This means that a large part of the court costs are taken by the state. In practise, a lot of execution cases are taken against poorer people which, by virtue of state legal aid, would mean that the state bears virtually 100% of the legal costs.

Now, in an Ireland in which the death penalty operated, I can only hope and assume that there would be a higher threshold for an execution conviction than for an imprisonment conviction. If anyone thinks this assumption is invalid, go ahead and explain. Otherwise, with this added threshold, the legal proceedings become more complex and thus lengthier. Without wanting to sound trite, this means and exponential increase in tax-subsidised legal proceedings. Then you've got state-subsidised medical bills and the obligatory appeal-pending incarceration funds.

The most comprehensive death penalty study in the US found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment.

As far as I'm concerned, there are a host of other reasons for having no death penalty. But the economic one is one that gets thrown around fallaciously all too often, in my opinion.

Here
are
some
sources

Manic Moran

The problem with looking at the economics of the American system is that it takes well over a decade, often 20 years to go from 'conviction' to 'execution'. That's a hell of a lot of money per prisoner.

The system needs to be streamlined.

NTM

Orchard Rebel

Elmo wrote: »

It is funny that you say that because I was sure that 34% (63% of the 34%) of the Irish Electorate abolished the Death Penalty and not the EU. But prehaps the EU has more power than the People

Low turn out could be a reason to retake that Referundum. Also we didn't get this kind of discussion during the last referundum, most people have forgot that there was a referundum on the subject.

Wonder how brussels would have felt if we had said NO to the abolishion of the death penalty.


PS: - I am totally againist the Death penalty. One of the good things about the EU.

I think you're talking about the 21st Amendment to the Constitution, which was indeed passed by the Irish people in 2001. However, what that did was to bring Ireland into line with Protocol 13 of the ECHR, which prohibits Member States from reintroducing capital punishment. Capital punishment had actually been abolished (by statute) back in 1990.

Had we rejected the 21st Amendment, our membership of the EU would have been in jeopardy because the 13th Protocol is required to be adopted by all Member States and candidate states - there is no opt out. The government would have been forced to put the question to us again (Nice style) or else contemplate removing the country from the EU.

Back in 2006, the right-wing Polish government made comments supporting the restoration of the death penalty in Member States. This was met with derision by other members. Therefore the only likely way for Ireland to have another referendum on capital punishment would be to leave the EU.

Elmo

Had we rejected the 21st Amendment, our membership of the EU would have been in jeopardy because the 13th Protocol is required to be adopted by all Member States and candidate states - there is no opt out. The government would have been forced to put the question to us again (Nice style) or else contemplate removing the country from the EU.

Thank god for the EU

However, what that did was to bring Ireland into line with Protocol 13 of the ECHR, which prohibits Member States from reintroducing capital punishment.

But if we had voted NO surely we would have been in line with Protocol 13 of the ECHR since we wouldn't have reintroduced capital punishment rather we would have continued with the same consitution but our government wouldn't have been able to execute anyone since that would mean reintroducing capital punishment which had already been removed by "statute"

We have removed the Death Penalty through statute, referendum and EU membership (through several other referendums), it isn't going to come back to easily.

Dave!

[cm]tyranny wrote: »

Lol @ the idea of the irish government being competent enough to kill someone

Been to hospital lately? The HSE is a very efficient killing machine!

extragon

This is not a debate anyone would think of having - if it wasn't for the US. Otherwise, it would just be a barbaric practice done in places like Iran and China.

re. deterrance. No modern society would execute enough people to have a deterrant effect. You'd need to execute nearly everyone guilty of murder. Instead, it would only be used on "worst cases," mostly psychopaths, to distract public opinion from the failings of education, mental health, drug policies, and policing.

turgon

extragon wrote: »

No modern society would execute enough people to have a deterrant effect.

Thats the bottom line.

corkstudent

Now here's the problem: right-wingers tend to use logic and theory rather than actual experience.

Uh, actually, most right wingers have no grasp of logic at all. That's the issue here. They go for what seems immediately obvious, but isn't necessarily factual. They aren't able to apply reason to things, only "common sense".

Orchard Rebel

Elmo wrote: »

But if we had voted NO surely we would have been in line with Protocol 13 of the ECHR since we wouldn't have reintroduced capital punishment rather we would have continued with the same consitution but our government wouldn't have been able to execute anyone since that would mean reintroducing capital punishment which had already been removed by "statute"

Don't think so. Adoption of Protocol 13 meant the Constitution had to be amended to remove the references to the death penalty and to abolish it in perpetuity. The 1990 Act abolished the death penalty but did not rule out its reintroduction, which would (before 2001) have been constitutional.

If we'd rejected the 21st Amendment, I thnk we would have been in breach of treaty, causing a potential EU crisis, similar to what we have now.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we adopted the 13th Protocol. My fear, if terrorism increases in Europe, is that there will be a move to remove it.

Elmo

After agreeing to Protocol 13 the government didn't need to write it out of the constitution since they could not inact the constitution since that would mean going back on the statue which prevented them from inacting the death penalty. If they had try to change the statue they would automatically be in violation of the EU, regardless of the Irish constitution?????????

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we adopted the 13th Protocol. My fear, if terrorism increases in Europe, is that there will be a move to remove it.

Does our constitution not prevent the Death Penalty? therefore the EU could not introduce the Death Penalty back into Irish Law?

As for the crisis, I have still to notice it.

yeah-buddy

montydorito wrote: »

The death penalty is a waste of a good Guinea pigs lets use the scumbags for once ....the thought of making them work is in itself a good idea but they are a bunch of f***ing w****Rs ..so that wont work.....killing them is easy choice but in my eyes.....we should utilise these c***S for once ....almost like a human farm...(Guinea pigs )
A few reasons and benefits
1. even though the majority will be infected with disease..They should be forced to give blood
2. used by companies to test new products such as perfume ect these companies could pay the government to use these inmates ...thus paying to house these pigs
3. used by the medical scientists to test for cures such as cancer .....instead of them having to spending years researching, testing animals ,spending millions on artificial tissue ect going through millions of tests before they can even look at human patient
4. think of the disease they could cure using inmates as Guinea pigs ....the benefits would be vast lives saved(they murdered) money(they stole) time saved(they wasted through their crimes) all in one
5.they will have the chance to repay back to society what they took ...whats is great they have no choice ... eg making them work they can just refuse.. but inject them with medicine they will be powerless to refuse.
6.death is sweet release for some inmates who deserve nothing less than years of torture (regarding the case of the man who raped someone for nearly a day)
7.the time to develop a drug would be dropped significantly
8.prisons would become less crowded as more and more inmates are used as Guinea pigs
9.80% of criminals today are repeat offends in England a proper punishment system in Ireland would defer repeat offenders
10 Ireland has the softest prisons in the world ....the Carlsberg slogan springs to mind if Carlsberg did prisons they Probably be the best in the World.. well Ireland certainly has this down to a tee

While many will disagree with this...it’s only an idea which certainly couldn’t make the situation any worse than it is
While the usual objections will be human rights, lets just see how they violated someone rights and to what extreme and lets by all means violate their rights..An eye for an eye kind of thing except mankind benefits from this exchange for a change

i disagree