Death penalty for serious crimes?

JUSTaCURIOCITY

Should death penalty should be accepted by nations around the world ?

Drakmord

I agree with the death penalty for very serious crimes.
I believe it would be a huge deterrent for crime and would make people think twice about what they were about to do.
I believe Malaysia has the death penalty for involvement with drugs, and they have severely reduced drug problems when compared with Ireland.

Mena

Wouldn't this be better served in the Politics forum? Also, shorten the title and remove the caps

JUSTaCURIOCITY

The Caps are to pay attention miss
What is your respond to question tho please .

JUSTaCURIOCITY

I wonder why many young Irish people are thinking that Death penalty is not a human solution to a problem. I heard opinions that it is a 'Natzi ' way to punish for a crime .I do not subscribe under that kind of attitude. I would allow the negative elements to disappear and allow honest people without sources to live to take money that at the moment Government spent on prisoners and Special Forces against Crime

galwayrush

Our current system is no deterrent, so yes, give the Death Penalty a chance.

Mena

In my view, the death penalty does not work. It hardly serves as a deterrent to serious crime, can be applied in the wrong cases, and at best, prevents re-offending.

JUSTaCURIOCITY

Well done - when this poll will finish i will print it and show all Friends as a sample that maybe I am not an only ' Nazi' in Ireland ....smiles
I believe that if that penalty would-be legal, there will be very little problem with paedophiles, rapes and nut-cases institutes.
Our kids will be more open to people , strangers without fear to be raped or kidnapped

JUSTaCURIOCITY

Mena wrote: »

In my view, the death penalty does not work. It hardly serves as a deterrent to serious crime, can be applied in the wrong cases, and at best, prevents re-offending.

What do you mean by that "offending" ?

cooperla

I'm in favour of the death penalty for murderers, rapists, child molesters, and probably more. Or at least a punishment to fit the crime.

Holsten

For murder yes, anything below that, no.

galwayrush

Holsten wrote: »

For murder yes, anything below that, no.

As long as self defence is not mistaken for murder.
I would definitely have the death penalty for kiddie fiddlers.

Mena

JUSTaCURIOCITY wrote: »

What do you mean by that "offending" ?

re·of·fend [ r ə fénd ] (past and past participle re·of·fend·ed, present participle re·of·fend·ing, 3rd person present singular re·of·fends)

intransitive verb
Definition: offend again: to commit a second or subsequent offense

What I meant was, at best, it will stop those dealt with under the death penalty from committing the crime, or any crime, again. However, it does not work as a deterrent to crime in the first place.

In fact, the murder rate in the US is 6 times that of Britain and 5 times that of Australia. Neither country has the DP. Texas has twice the murder rate of Wisconsin, a state that doesn't have the DP. Texas and Oklahoma have historically executed the most number of DR inmates, yet in 2003 their state murder rates increased, and both have murder rates higher than the national average.

Source: Link. Note - that source would be biased.

JUSTaCURIOCITY

What about theory that if the 'DEATH PENALTY' was officially accepted by nations - there would be a danger of eliminating everyone accuses of murder like in Middle Ages... The danger of expansion of that penalty into different crimes and offences - like stealing from banks and so on ? People might have no limit then. And what about those who were wrongly accused for crime they didn’t not do ... ?

Johnny Utah

Yes, I agree in the death penalty...............





























for those that misuse the Caps Lock key.

JUSTaCURIOCITY

Mena wrote: »

re·of·fend [ r ə fénd ] (past and past participle re·of·fend·ed, present participle re·of·fend·ing, 3rd person present singular re·of·fends)

intransitive verb
Definition: offend again: to commit a second or subsequent offense

What I meant was, at best, it will stop those dealt with under the death penalty from committing the crime, or any crime, again. However, it does not work as a deterrent to crime in the first place.



Source: Link. Note - that source would be biased.

Yea.....Mena - I might be not blessed being Irish. I am not stupid though....... And also cannot read between words in sentence you just wrote above.....So avoid your Irish ignorance and get to the point please..
I was asking you - what did you mean by saying that DP won't ( in your opinion ) prevent 'reoffending' .But without that ridiculous presentation you did it all would make a bigger sense .
On the other hang - I agree with your point - America provides DP - indeed , but because of different law in each state and open boarders all over country .Criminals are just doing what they want and running to different state avowing punishment . US should be more connected by a law and legislation .

JUSTaCURIOCITY

.. avoiding punishment i ment

pwd

In principal I agree tbh. But to allow the death penalty, you need to assume that the justice sytem is flawless. It's not flawless anywhere and never will be.

Mena

JUSTaCURIOCITY wrote: »

Yea.....Mena - I might be not blessed being Irish. I am not stupid though....... And also cannot read between words in sentence you just wrote above.....So avoid your Irish ignorance and get to the point please..
I was asking you - what did you mean by saying that DP won't ( in your opinion ) prevent 'reoffending' .But without that ridiculous presentation you did it all would make a bigger sense .
On the other hang - I agree with your point - America provides DP - indeed , but because of different law in each state and open boarders all over country .Criminals are just doing what they want and running to different state avowing punishment . US should be more connected by a law and legislation .

I am not Irish either, I'm an immigrant who has lived in Ireland for eight years. Don't assume anything

I thought I did get directly to my point. From your post, I understood that you did not understand my reference to "re-offence" and thought the easiest way to explain that was with a dictionary explanation. It had nothing to do with you being stupid or not as I could clearly see that English was not your first language. If you thought my presentation was ridiculous that's fine, I'll keep it in mind in future.

You agreeing with my point however certainly tells me that my "ridiculous presentation" worked.

TheVan

I don't think its relevant whether the death penalty "works" (although I'd argue it doesn't - look at murder rates in the US).

What's relevant is whether society accepts the removal of someone's life by the State - institutional murder. Some societies accept this in extreme circumstances, personally I don't.

Also, just to point out that the ECHR bans the death penalty.

JUSTaCURIOCITY

Mena wrote: »

I am not Irish either, I'm an immigrant who has lived in Ireland for eight years. Don't assume anything

I thought I did get directly to my point. From your post, I understood that you did not understand my reference to "re-offence" and thought the easiest way to explain that was with a dictionary explanation. It had nothing to do with you being stupid or not as I could clearly see that English was not your first language. If you thought my presentation was ridiculous that's fine, I'll keep it in mind in future.

You agreeing with my point however certainly tells me that my "ridiculous presentation" worked.

true, true Mona :-) it worked

dermot_sheehan

Death Penalty has not been on the books since 1990 and no executions have been carried out since 1954. This is more appropriate for the politics forum.

JUSTaCURIOCITY

gabhain7 wrote: »

Death Penalty has not been on the books since 1990 and no executions have been carried out since 1954. This is more appropriate for the politics forum.

Sorry we are talking about law here not elections ....
Besides I do not get suggestions like taking about children should be forum ' family' or forum ‘childcare’?? What is the difference? But thanks for another concern like that. But do you think you can agree to kill murderer, even the one who would be related to you personally or would affect your life. Would you say: @Yes Your Honour, Kill Him .He destroyed me and my family ‘.... Would you or you would not?

Mena

JUSTaCURIOCITY wrote: »

Sorry we are talking about law here not elections ....
Besides I do not get suggestions like taking about children should be forum ' family' or forum ‘childcare’?? What is the difference? But thanks for another concern like that. But do you think you can agree to kill murderer, even the one who would be related to you personally or would affect your life. Would you say: @Yes Your Honour, Kill Him .He destroyed me and my family ‘.... Would you or you would not?

Well, I see it as a politics topic as all the courts do is enforce the law, which is brought in by the politicians.

My 2c

JUSTaCURIOCITY

No comments ....for further discussion on topic Re :' is it a right forum for a subject or wrong ? '
who is with me here ? I just want to understand a public opinion about DP....

JUSTaCURIOCITY

I started with ' legal forum ' on soc - but it automatically ump to politic forum - not my false ...
I apologise all those who are not satisfy with a form and place of conversation .

marcsignal

I agree with it for certain serious crimes, Capital Murder for example (The murder of a Policeman/woman), or serial murderers like Freddie West or The Moors Murders in England.

galwayrush wrote: »

As long as self defence is not mistaken for murder.

Yes I agree, that's a very important aspect that must be considered.

galwayrush wrote: »

I would definitely have the death penalty for kiddie fiddlers.

Much and all as I consider paedophiles and rapists the lowest of the low, I'm undecided if the death penalty should be mandatory in these cases. Certainly there are some cases where it would, imo, be appropriate. However I think Castration (Chemical or otherwise) and prison for the rest of their natural lives should apply in the majority of these cases.

I would be open to the idea, in some cases, that a castrated rape offender could be released back into society, provided it could be determined by the experts, that he was no longer a violent risk to anyone, but only after serving a long custodial sentence for his original crime first.

dermot_sheehan

It was moved to politics since it has not been a legal issue in Ireland for quite some time.

The Death Penalty has not been lawful for 19 years, whether it is brought back or not is a political issue not a legal one.

Contrast for example with the United States where it is on the statute books and would be considered a current legal issue.

mountainyman

It is vengeance by the state I think it should be widely used. I would like one person a year killed for driving in the bus lane, one person a year for littering, one person a year for vandalism etc.

grizzly

I'd be against the death penalty. Because the legal system is very far from perfect (eg Donegal cops) and the poor would be the only ones that would be killed. People with money could afford to argue their sentences down/off in court.

Het-Field

Its the ultimate form of state hypocracy.

I completely disagree with the revolving door criminal justice scheme that we have in place, but the Death Penalty is not the answer. It would be far better to open up more prision, which can accomodate much longer sentences.