Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Love2u

jank wrote: »

Did you hear yourself say that? I think it shows how out of touch so many people are to the human condition and what some people are capable of.

Just when I thought it was all over, epluribusunum left the building and now you are taking his place. How much more nonsense do we have to listen to now.

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

I didn't say it, I typed it.

How exactly am I out of touch with it? I've visited more concentration camps and attended more lectures on the holocaust in Irish universities than 95% of the people of this forum. Stop coming up with baseless assumptions because people disagree with your point of view.

Which in turn makes your opinion and assumption more worthwhile? Really?
Pot...Kettle..

I just think when people start worrying more about the lives of the perpetrators of genocide and war that we let this whole new liberal progressiveness get in the way. Its thinly veiled social engineering. There is no wiggle room in that argument. Just because I favour capital punishment doesn't mean that I want all criminals hanged drawn and quartered. It should be reserved for the most violent and extreme kinds of crime proven in a court of law.

Something else I never understand are people who are massively pro-choice but are against the death penalty. It's OK to abort an innocent unborn child, but that child grows up to murder and rape a family the state cannot put him to death?

osarusan

NiallSparky wrote: »

I would not have called for or supported the death penalty in the case of Hitler or anyone else.

jank wrote: »

Did you hear yourself say that? I think it shows how out of touch so many people are to the human condition and what some people are capable of.

NiallSparky wrote: »

How exactly am I out of touch with it? I've visited more concentration camps and attended more lectures on the holocaust in Irish universities than 95% of the people of this forum.

jank wrote: »

Which in turn makes your opinion and assumption more worthwhile? Really?
Pot...Kettle..

Quality debating there Jank.

Amirani

jank wrote: »

I just think when people start worrying more about the lives of the perpetrators of genocide and war that we let this whole new liberal progressiveness get in the way.

Can you please either point out one instance of this happening or else apologise for making ridiculous accusations? Just one instance is fine.

wp_rathead

jank wrote: »

Something else I never understand are people who are massively pro-choice but are against the death penalty. It's OK to abort an innocent unborn child, but that child grows up to murder and rape a family the state cannot put him to death?

i counter that by finding it interesting how many pro-life people are pro- death penalty.. ..but lets not turn this thread into an abortion thread, the thread is mad enough on its own merits ha

Love2u

jank wrote: »

Which in turn makes your opinion and assumption more worthwhile? Really?
Pot...Kettle..

I just think when people start worrying more about the lives of the perpetrators of genocide and war that we let this whole new liberal progressiveness get in the way. Its thinly veiled social engineering. There is no wiggle room in that argument. Just because I favour capital punishment doesn't mean that I want all criminals hanged drawn and quartered. It should be reserved for the most violent and extreme kinds of crime proven in a court of law.

Something else I never understand are people who are massively pro-choice but are against the death penalty. It's OK to abort an innocent unborn child, but that child grows up to murder and rape a family the state cannot put him to death?

As much as i want to stay on topic in this thread, i must ask if you have proven figures and facts for your pro-choice, against the death penalty statement? Please don't assume on my behalf that this is the case, speak only for yourself unless you want to produce figures for me.

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

Can you please either point out one instance of this happening or else apologise for making ridiculous accusations? Just one instance is fine.

Because it is more 'humane' to keep them in jail all their natural born lives?

Amirani

jank wrote: »

Because it is more 'humane' to keep them in jail all their natural born lives?

I don't see how you equate that with people supposedly worrying more about perpetrators of genocide than their victims.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

jank wrote: »

Because it is more 'humane' to keep them in jail all their natural born lives?

Not really the same as worrying about the lives of the perpetrators, is it?

I'd be inclined to worry about other perpetrators thought who'll follow in his footseps and do anything I can to avoid a repeat.

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

I don't see how you equate that with people supposedly worrying more about perpetrators of genocide than their victims.

Of course you can. Why therefore are you defending their rights to be treated as humanely as possible?

Humane is of course subjective in anycase. Just because you may feel better that people are no longer put to death doesnt mean locking them up until they are 92 is more 'humane'. The key word here is "feel better".

old hippy

...

old hippy

jank wrote: »

Of course you can. Why therefore are you defending their rights to be treated as humanely as possible?

He doesn't support the death penalty, that's why. Neither do I. Doesn't mean we care more for the perps than the victims.

jank

old hippy wrote: »

He doesn't support the death penalty, that's why. Neither do I. Doesn't mean we care more for the perps than the victims.

What is the primary factor behind that support?

Amirani

jank wrote: »

What is the primary factor behind that support?

What support?

allibastor

NiallSparky wrote: »

What support?

I dont knwo what the big issue is. Some people just should not have a right to life. simple as that.

In a case where someone is a serial murder, no matter what you do they will still have killed many people. they will never be able to contribute to the world. it will cost lots of money to keep them in jail and to rehabilitate them. money which could go to helping sick kids or curing some disease or something like that.

Can anyone tell me what Ian Huntly has done for the world? What about Ian Brady?Aurimas Andruska?Magdelena Luczak and Mariusz Krezolek?

Can anyone tell me what they will ever be able to contribute to the world.

Amirani

allibastor wrote: »

I dont knwo what the big issue is. Some people just should not have a right to life. simple as that.

What gives you the right to make that decision when the majority of Irish people have decided otherwise?

allibastor

NiallSparky wrote: »

What gives you the right to make that decision when the majority of Irish people have decided otherwise?

Forgive me there Mr. Sparky, But I am not actually going out to put the bullet in thier heads, though I would in a second to most of these scum.

What gives you the right to demand they receive better treatment than the people they harmed. In the case of the couple who systematically beat and killed thier 4 year old son/step child. They will receive three meals a day and warm safe surroundings for how ever long they are inside. They fed a 4 year old salt and knocked him out by holding him under water. why should they get better then he received.

Amirani

allibastor wrote: »

What gives you the right to demand they receive better treatment than the people they harmed.

I didn't decide or demand that, the people of Ireland did. How can you argue against that? The Irish electorate decided that it didn't want to engage in revenge killings. Is there anything morally wrong about that?

Jumboman

NiallSparky wrote: »

What gives you the right to make that decision when the majority of Irish people have decided otherwise?

If their was a referendum to execute the worst child molesters in the country do you really think the public would vote no to that ?

Would you defend the human rights of a serial child molester ?

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

What support?

Your lack of support for a death penalty. Is it that its more humane? You think all killing is wrong? Is it altruism? Is it democracy?

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

I didn't decide or demand that, the people of Ireland did. How can you argue against that? The Irish electorate decided that it didn't want to engage in revenge killings. Is there anything morally wrong about that?

To turn this around..The Irish electorate decided that it did not want abortion in the 1983 referendum. Is there anything morally wrong with that?

allibastor

NiallSparky wrote: »

I didn't decide or demand that, the people of Ireland did. How can you argue against that? The Irish electorate decided that it didn't want to engage in revenge killings. Is there anything morally wrong about that?

Again, it was an older referndum to outright ban all executions. I think now a days we are more liberal, as said we are now looking at abortion.

old hippy

jank wrote: »

What is the primary factor behind that support?

Er, that would be - I'm not in favour of the death penalty/revenge killings/murder.

Amirani

allibastor wrote: »

Again, it was an older referndum to outright ban all executions. I think now a days we are more liberal, as said we are now looking at abortion.

Liberal societies are less likely to support the death penalty?

Amirani

jank wrote: »

Your lack of support for a death penalty. Is it that its more humane? You think all killing is wrong? Is it altruism? Is it democracy?

I don't support the death penalty because I don't condone murder.

Incarceration isn't the best punitive alternative, but it's necessary to remove their freedom in order to protect the general public. Ideally, they'd be doing something proactive to help repay their debt to their victims and society in general. This isn't really feasible though.

Amirani

Jumboman wrote: »

If their was a referendum to execute the worst child molesters in the country do you really think the public would vote no to that ?

Would you defend the human rights of a serial child molester ?

I do believe the public have rejected the chance to have the re-introduction of the death penalty in Ireland. Serial child molesters already existed when this referendum was held, why would they change their mind now?

You'll have to define "human rights" for me before I do that. I'm not going to say yes to that question and have people accusing me of being a child abuse sympathiser.

I would defend their right to not be be murdered and not be tortured, even if they didn't afford that privilege to their victims. That's what makes us better than them.

old hippy

Jumboman wrote: »

If their was a referendum to execute the worst child molesters in the country do you really think the public would vote no to that ?

Would you defend the human rights of a serial child molester ?

This smacks of desperation a bit. It's like, oh come on, you must want somebody executed.

No, I don't want anyone executed. Even the lowly molester who has become something of a Godwinesque character to chuck in the mix...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

jank wrote: »

Your lack of support for a death penalty. Is it that its more humane? You think all killing is wrong? Is it altruism? Is it democracy?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I oppose the death penalty on three counts, all of which I have stated numerous times in this thread:
1 - Fallability.
2 - Cost (both of appeals and leaving the EU).
3 - Pointlessness.

"Was Hitler a murderer?" does not address any of these three points in the same way "how would you feel if you mother/wife/girlfriend/child was raped and murdered?" does not engage me, and is therefore a pointless, strawman argument.

Pretty sure the same goes for everyone else here who's against the death penalty, but if you can find evidence to the contrary go debate it with them.

allibastor

old hippy wrote: »

This smacks of desperation a bit. It's like, oh come on, you must want somebody executed.

No, I don't want anyone executed. Even the lowly molester who has become something of a Godwinesque character to chuck in the mix...

Its not so much desperation though, at the end of the day crimes such as this, where are the positive figures to show that the types of people ever go on to be useful members of society.

would you condone the use of large amounts of government money to keep someone on special lockdown, maybe costing the tax payer 250K a year.
This money can go to better causes like saving someones life.

Jumboman

old hippy wrote: »

This smacks of desperation a bit. It's like, oh come on, you must want somebody executed.

No, I don't want anyone executed. Even the lowly molester who has become something of a Godwinesque character to chuck in the mix...

I'm trying to understand how someone could defend the human rights of a serial child molester.

allibastor

NiallSparky wrote: »

I do believe the public have rejected the chance to have the re-introduction of the death penalty in Ireland. Serial child molesters already existed when this referendum was held, why would they change their mind now?

You'll have to define "human rights" for me before I do that. I'm not going to say yes to that question and have people accusing me of being a child abuse sympathiser.

I would defend their right to not be be murdered and not be tortured, even if they didn't afford that privilege to their victims. That's what makes us better than them.

To be fair also, they are humanly killed off. And it makes us better to be able to rationalise why they deserve to exist. We dont set the government out to kill random people. you dont get the death penalty for an accidental killing, you get it for a very serious crime in which you intentially set out to murder, possibly more than once.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

allibastor wrote: »

Its not so much desperation though, at the end of the day crimes such as this, where are the positive figures to show that the types of people ever go on to be useful members of society.

would you condone the use of large amounts of government money to keep someone on special lockdown, maybe costing the tax payer 250K a year.
This money can go to better causes like saving someones life.

If you're arguing pro death penalty from a cost point of view you haven't done your research.

allibastor

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If you're arguing pro death penalty from a cost point of view you haven't done your research.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cost-of-keeping-each-prisoner-in-portlaoise-runs-to-240000-26366573.html

allibastor

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If you're arguing pro death penalty from a cost point of view you haven't done your research.

https://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/death_penalty/frequently_asked_questions_about_the_costs_of_california's_death_penalty.shtml

This artcile relates more to the cost of appeals and all that other stuff. A prisoner has the right of appeal to have the death conviction overturned, but not the custodial sentance.

old hippy

Jumboman wrote: »

I'm trying to understand how someone could defend the human rights of a serial child molester.

Let me make it simple for you. I'm against the death penalty and I'm against knee jerk reactionaries. Got it? Excellent.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

allibastor wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/cost-of-keeping-each-prisoner-in-portlaoise-runs-to-240000-26366573.html

allibastor wrote: »

https://www.aclunc.org/issues/criminal_justice/death_penalty/frequently_asked_questions_about_the_costs_of_california's_death_penalty.shtml

This artcile relates more to the cost of appeals and all that other stuff. A prisoner has the right of appeal to have the death conviction overturned, but not the custodial sentance.

First one - tells me it costs 250,000 euro a year to house prisoners in Portlaoise jail and 100,000 in Mountjoy: how much does a lenghty appeals process cost in comparison? How much does it cost to execute someone?

Second one - I'll assume you've read all those documents, so can you give me a synopsis of whichever one you wish to debate and the points that are relevant to your argument?

jank

The cost of housing prisoners is extortionate.

old hippy

jank wrote: »

The cost of housing prisoners is extortionate.

The cost of taking lives is even greater.

end of the road

the death penalty costs tripple of what it would cost to keep someone in prison for life, the people of ireland in 2001 voted to abolish the death penalty in ireland so move on, nobody has the right to take another persons life, to say the taking of a life is wrong yet say that its okay to take the life of the person who did it is nonsense and invalidates the idea that its wrong to take a life, i don't have never and will never support the death penalty and nobody will convince me otherwise

Ray Palmer

Jumboman wrote: »

If their was a referendum to execute the worst child molesters in the country do you really think the public would vote no to that ?

Would you defend the human rights of a serial child molester ?

I actually don't think they would. They asked the Late Late show audience would did they think the death penalty be applied to Sadam Huessain (sp?) and only a few people said he should . The people who said he should hadn't grown up in this country.

He was a little worse than a single child molester

Love2u

end of the road wrote: »

the death penalty costs tripple of what it would cost to keep someone in prison for life, the people of ireland in 2001 voted to abolish the death penalty in ireland so move on, nobody has the right to take another persons life, to say the taking of a life is wrong yet say that its okay to take the life of the person who did it is nonsense and invalidates the idea that its wrong to take a life, i don't have never and will never support the death penalty and nobody will convince me otherwise

I'll second that!

Jumboman

Ray Palmer wrote: »

I actually don't think they would. They asked the Late Late show audience would did they think the death penalty be applied to Sadam Huessain (sp?) and only a few people said he should . The people who said he should hadn't grown up in this country.

He was a little worse than a single child molester

We cant really judge Sadam because the americans put out a lot of propaganda about him who knows whats true and what isnt. Its also none of our business if sadam was a monster then his own people should have brought him to justice.

Jumboman

old hippy wrote: »

Let me make it simple for you. I'm against the death penalty and I'm against knee jerk reactionaries. Got it? Excellent.

Even for a serial child molester ?

Amirani

Jumboman wrote: »

We cant really judge Sadam because the americans put out a lot of propaganda about him who knows whats true and what isnt. Its also none of our business if sadam was a monster then his own people should have brought him to justice.

This is a ridiculous statement. Made all the more funny by the fact that people were copiously using Hitler as an example earlier in the thread.

Why is it none of our business if some evil dictator is committing genocide? Can you please explain that?

old hippy

Jumboman wrote: »

Even for a serial child molester ?

I refer you to my previous reply. Do I have to spell it out for you?

Amirani

Jumboman wrote: »

Even for a serial child molester ?

The poster already answered this question. Why are you needlessly stirring the ****?

Ray Palmer

Jumboman wrote: »

We cant really judge Sadam because the americans put out a lot of propaganda about him who knows whats true and what isnt. Its also none of our business if sadam was a monster then his own people should have brought him to justice.

It does give an insight into the way people in Ireland think which was my point.

end of the road

Jumboman wrote: »

Even for a serial child molester ?

yes, the death penalty is never justified under any circumstances

Jumboman

end of the road wrote: »

the death penalty costs tripple of what it would cost to keep someone in prison for life, the people of ireland in 2001 voted to abolish the death penalty in ireland so move on, nobody has the right to take another persons life, to say the taking of a life is wrong yet say that its okay to take the life of the person who did it is nonsense and invalidates the idea that its wrong to take a life, i don't have never and will never support the death penalty and nobody will convince me otherwise

The taking of innocent life is wrong but there is a huge difference between the state deciding to kill a scumbag and someone who goes out and kills a 90 year old woman or kills a child etc.

Jumboman

Ray Palmer wrote: »

It does give an insight into the way people in Ireland think which was my point.

I would of voted no to execute saddam because I dont know enough about him and I dont trust what they say on the news.