Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

OldNotWIse

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Is this your way of avoiding the argument, by any chance?

I think its some kind of misplaced counter attack. Some people asked the poster if he/she reads News of the World as the constant drivel about beasts/monsters/animals and the general take 'em out and burn them in the streets sentiment would suggest, and seemingly the appropriate response to that assertion is to ask what papers we read...I think, but I cant really see clearly here with all the pitchforks obscuring my view.

Jumboman

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Is this your way of avoiding the argument, by any chance?

I think you have answered my question!

Jumboman

OldNotWIse wrote: »

If you ceased referring to them as beasts, animals, monsters etc people might take you more seriously. It's almost as if you swallowed a bale of News of the Worlds.

What else would you call these Scumbags ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Jumboman wrote: »

I think you have answered my question!

As you did mine, so to speak. I'll assume you're leaving my original point correct and unchallenged?

truedoom

Always liked the idea of the prison in the Dark Knight Rises.

Big hole in the ground that you can't escape from (unless you are a child, and bruce wayne).

but for some things, i do think the death penalty should be introduced. I'm talking for things like torture/rape/serial killings. Something you have to be consciously aware that you're doing.

Mal-Adjusted

Jumboman wrote: »

I think you have answered my question!

He really hasn't

OldNotWIse

Jumboman wrote: »

What else would you call these Scumbags ?

Criminals. I think we've been over these grounds before.

end of the road

truedoom wrote: »

Always liked the idea of the prison in the Dark Knight Rises.

Big hole in the ground that you can't escape from (unless you are a child, and bruce wayne).

but for some things, i do think the death penalty should be introduced. I'm talking for things like torture/rape/serial killings. Something you have to be consciously aware that you're doing.

by introducing the death penalty for those crimes your actually condoning those crimes by allowing the same thing, well at least murder

loveisdivine

I think the only way to really tackle the peadophile issue is to make help available to people who are experiencing thoughts of that nature. If there wasn't such hysteria around the issue, people might be more willing to come forward and speak to a professional about their feelings, before those feelings turn into actions.

At the end of the day, nobody wakes up and decides that they are going to start finding children attractive. I believe this is a mental health issue that people need help to overcome/manage.

Mr Williams

ABC101 wrote: »

As far as I am aware (open to correction) but the EU does not allow member states to have implement the Death Penalty.

So even if the citizens of Ireland wanted capital punishment it would not be enacted.

Problem with the death penalty is that it is Terminal. Once done, no going back.

I don't have enough faith in the Gardai Siochana to ensure they had the right person.

Look at the Frank Mc Brearty case and the Ian Baily situation. Both of these men could have been executed despite the lack of evidence.

You see... Ireland is the land of Zero Accountability... even if the wrong person was hanged / shot / head chopped off / electrocuted / lethal injection or whatever... there would be no accountability, except the taxpayer would have to cough up more money to the surviving relatives etc.

Those people who wrongly persecuted an innocent person would still be free to enjoy life, pensioned off early etc etc. After all why should one care... when the taxpayer will be picking up the tab.

John Lonegan had an interesting article in the media recently,

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/you-dont-hear-of-the-boys-in-welloff-areas-being-stopped-30075748.html

He expressed grave concern that the new generation of criminals do not have empathy. They are hardened people, unable to understand the sufferings of others.

I don't think Ireland has an answer to these types of criminals.

I'm not a fan of the EU. If your concerned about the EU not allowing it then all we have to do is to f**k these beasts into the general prison population and let some civically minded prisoners take care of them.

Why should they be given special protection in prison at the tax payers expense ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Mr Williams wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the EU. If your concerned about the EU not allowing it then all we have to do is to f**k these beasts into the general prison population and let some civically minded prisoners take care of them.

Why should they be given special protection in prison at the tax payers expense ?

Are we to assume, then, that you're happy to take the EU handouts and backtrack a bit on the death penalty, so?

In any case, I don't think there's any extra expense to the taxpayer - it's just a different section of the same prison with the same costs.

end of the road

Mr Williams wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the EU. If your concerned about the EU not allowing it then all we have to do is to f**k these beasts into the general prison population and let some civically minded prisoners take care of them.

Why should they be given special protection in prison at the tax payers expense ?

because the law requires it, and the prison has a duty of care to its inmates, tough ****, get over it

olliesgirl55

I used to support the death penalty however I don't anymore. I think the sentences should be tougher and life sentences should mean whole natural life and not like 20 years.
Some criminals like child sex offenders should never be released back into society because they cannot be rehabilitated.

Mr Williams

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Criminals. I think we've been over these grounds before.

If they are criminals then why cant they be put in a normal criminal jail ?

Mr Williams

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Are we to assume, then, that you're happy to take the EU handouts and backtrack a bit on the death penalty, so?

In any case, I don't think there's any extra expense to the taxpayer - it's just a different section of the same prison with the same costs.

EU handouts what are you talking about ? they took more off us than they ever gave us. Despite what politicians may say Ireland would be far better off outside the EU.

The fact that we have to look after sex beasts shows you how f**ked up the EU is.

Mr Williams

end of the road wrote: »

because the law requires it, and the prison has a duty of care to its inmates, tough ****, get over it

"Duty of care" for the likes of Larry Murphy costs a fortune. I dont see why these animals should get special treatment ?

end of the road

Mr Williams wrote: »

If they are criminals then why cant they be put in a normal criminal jail ?

they are, just kept away from the other prisoners, i've all ready explained it so go back and read my post again

end of the road

Mr Williams wrote: »

EU handouts what are you talking about ? they took more off us than they ever gave us. Despite what politicians may say Ireland would be far better off outside the EU.

really? so if we left the EU how exactly would we fund ourselves? what do we have that other countries don't? oh yes thats right nothing, both ourselves and britain have lost everything that we could use to fund ourselves in a world outside the EU, i agree its far from perfect but better in then out.

Mr Williams wrote: »

The fact that we have to look after sex beasts shows you how f**ked up the EU is.

really? their are actual problems within the EU, this isn't one of them, countries outside the EU also put sex offenders away from the other prisoners, because their laws require it and the prisons have a duty of care to the prisoners, you don't like that and thats fine but its not going to change so i suggest you get over it

end of the road

Mr Williams wrote: »

"Duty of care" for the likes of Larry Murphy costs a fortune.

no it doesn't

Mr Williams wrote: »

I dont see why these animals should get special treatment ?

go back and read the thread, all explained to you

ABC101

@ Mr Williams,

I think you are missing a few things... first of all you are "insulting" the Beasts by referring to evil people as beasts.

Secondly... Crime is a very important industry in Ireland...the Govt / "establishment" makes a lot of money out of it.

If 10,000 extra spaces in prison where created, crime in Ireland could be almost eliminated..

However the security industry would collapse... the Govt makes money on every transaction, from you buying your 4th TV because your previous 3 where stolen, to paying higher insurance levies for property damage and so and on, a window gets smashed, vat is paid on the new glass, vat is paid on the labour and so on and on. The govt is creaming it in.

There is no doubt in my mind that crime is tolerated in Ireland as it is a big money spinner for the establishment.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

olliesgirl55 wrote: »

I used to support the death penalty however I don't anymore. I think the sentences should be tougher and life sentences should mean whole natural life and not like 20 years.
Some criminals like child sex offenders should never be released back into society because they cannot be rehabilitated.

Someone else tried to pull this one off but failed miserably, so I'll give you the same chance to prove this.

Mr Williams wrote: »

EU handouts what are you talking about ? they took more off us than they ever gave us. Despite what politicians may say Ireland would be far better off outside the EU.

You're serious...?

http://eustructuralfunds.gov.ie/

Amirani

I'll just leave this here...


Death row inmate Glenn Ford released 30 years after wrongful conviction

http://gu.com/p/3nen4

Amirani

Glenn becomes the 144th death row inmate that was later found to be innocent over the past few decades: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

Shame on the supporters of death on here who would have enjoyed and wallowed in his death.

I Heart Internet

NiallSparky wrote: »

I'll just leave this here...


Death row inmate Glenn Ford released 30 years after wrongful conviction

http://gu.com/p/3nen4

Whether Glenn Ford was put to death or spent all his life in prison, a very grave injustice would have (and has) been done to him.

This injustice would have happened whether there was a death penalty or not. But at least, in this case, he hasn't already been killed so he, and the society that would have killed him, get a second chance.

The death penalty is always wrong, in all cases, everywhere. Even where the person is 110% guilty (who can know?) and positively asking to be killed.

OldNotWIse

Mr Williams wrote: »

If they are criminals then why cant they be put in a normal criminal jail ?

If they are animals why are they not kept in the zoo?

J_E

NiallSparky wrote: »

Glenn becomes the 144th death row inmate that was later found to be innocent over the past few decades: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

Shame on the supporters of death on here who would have enjoyed and wallowed in his death.

Exactly... A lot of people here might enjoy venting their little revenge fantasies on unsuspecting targets but there are real people with lives being thrown around here, and the jury isn't always fair or right.

sinead88

Absolutely not. The death penalty is barbaric. I think that treatment of offenders needs to be based on reformation or at least justice, rather than revenge seeking. Add to that the fact that the death penalty has been proven not to act as a deterrent to crime, and that it's more expensive, given the lengthy appeals process, to put someone to death rather than incarcerate them for life, and there is no logical or ethical reason for the death penalty to be considered viable.

asteroth

end of the road wrote: »

really? so if we left the EU how exactly would we fund ourselves? what do we have that other countries don't? oh yes thats right nothing, both ourselves and britain have lost everything that we could use to fund ourselves in a world outside the EU, i agree its far from perfect but better in then out.

really? their are actual problems within the EU, this isn't one of them, countries outside the EU also put sex offenders away from the other prisoners, because their laws require it and the prisons have a duty of care to the prisoners, you don't like that and thats fine but its not going to change so i suggest you get over it

How do other countries in the world that are not in the EU "fund" themselves? How did Austria or Denmark or Portugal survive prior to EU membership? So Norway has a load of oil, fine. What has Iceland got that makes them so able to put food in their mouths without being in the EU?
Were Malta and Cyprus dying of starvation and eating rats before they joined the EU?

Mr Williams

asteroth wrote: »

How do other countries in the world that are not in the EU "fund" themselves? How did Austria or Denmark or Portugal survive prior to EU membership? So Norway has a load of oil, fine. What has Iceland got that makes them so able to put food in their mouths without being in the EU?
Were Malta and Cyprus dying of starvation and eating rats before they joined the EU?

Good point the EU has raped us economically yet we still have clowns willing to defend it. By their logic Ireland would not even exist without the EU:rolleyes:

Mr Williams

sinead88 wrote: »

Absolutely not. The death penalty is barbaric. I think that treatment of offenders needs to be based on reformation or at least justice, rather than revenge seeking. Add to that the fact that the death penalty has been proven not to act as a deterrent to crime, and that it's more expensive, given the lengthy appeals process, to put someone to death rather than incarcerate them for life, and there is no logical or ethical reason for the death penalty to be considered viable.

Giving someone a lethal injection is not barbaric. It would be too good for a child killer.

Mr Williams

NiallSparky wrote: »

I'll just leave this here...


Death row inmate Glenn Ford released 30 years after wrongful conviction

http://gu.com/p/3nen4

I knew some bright spark would bring up this story. I'm talking about sex beasts not murderers. If someone is convicted of rape on multiple occasions what is the chances they are innocent ?

Mr Williams

OldNotWIse wrote: »

If they are animals why are they not kept in the zoo?

Thats not a bad idea. They should put them in with the lions.

I think its an insult to criminals to lump them in with sex beasts.

Sex beasts are not criminals they are animals.

Mr Williams

Its time we started listening to the victims of crime not the human rights brigade.

djflawless

Mr Williams wrote: »

Its time we started listening to the victims of crime not the human rights brigade.

Somebody give this man a medal!

end of the road

Mr Williams wrote: »

Its time we started listening to the victims of crime not the human rights brigade.

who are the human rights brigade, another made up organisation like the PC brigade i expect

Holsten

Mr Williams wrote: »

Its time we started listening to the victims of crime not the human rights brigade.

No it's not, and it never will be.

If I'm a victim of robbery I'll want TERRIBLE things to happen to the robber, but does he actually deserve that? No, probably not.

Mr Williams

Holsten wrote: »

No it's not, and it never will be.

If I'm a victim of robbery I'll want TERRIBLE things to happen to the robber, but does he actually deserve that? No, probably not.

Robbery is not the same as rape or killing a child. No body is calling for the death penalty for robbery.

but where do you draw the line for the death penalty?

child abuse? but how much abuse? if they rape a child, should they get the death penalty? but what if they only rub up against them? mastrubate on them? digitally rape them?
french kiss them?
orally rape them?

what if someone burgles an elderly person that wont live alone anymore?

what about adults? if someone rapes someone completely sober, drags them off the street?
what if the injured party is hammered? so drunk they dont know what they are doing?

what if someone kills someone in self defence?
what if someone kills someone that killed a member of their family?

what if someone kills someone who raped a member of their family?

all im saying is there is a huge amount of offences from small to large, they all effect the injured party differently.

as it is there is huge inconsistences in sentences being handed down by judges..

how would we decide where to draw the line? what offences are punishable by death? which ones are less that they just deserve life in prison?

Mr Williams

bubblypop wrote: »

but where do you draw the line for the death penalty?

child abuse? but how much abuse? if they rape a child, should they get the death penalty? but what if they only rub up against them? mastrubate on them? digitally rape them?
french kiss them?
orally rape them?

what if someone burgles an elderly person that wont live alone anymore?

what about adults? if someone rapes someone completely sober, drags them off the street?
what if the injured party is hammered? so drunk they dont know what they are doing?

what if someone kills someone in self defence?
what if someone kills someone that killed a member of their family?

what if someone kills someone who raped a member of their family?

all im saying is there is a huge amount of offences from small to large, they all effect the injured party differently.

as it is there is huge inconsistences in sentences being handed down by judges..

how would we decide where to draw the line? what offences are punishable by death? which ones are less that they just deserve life in prison?

Heres somebody who would be a good candidate for the death penalty.

Even doctors who have "treated" this beast (at great cost to the tax payer) admit it has been a waste of time.

Would you really want someone like this living beside you ?

http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/high-risk-paedo-scully-back-on-streets

Mr Williams

Mr Williams wrote: »

Heres somebody who would be a good candidate for the death penalty.

Even doctors who have "treated" this beast (at great cost to the tax payer) admit it has been a waste of time.

Would you really want someone like this living beside you ?

http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/high-risk-paedo-scully-back-on-streets

im a believer in serious sentences.

send people to prison for life ( meaning actual life, till they die!!)
or else give them good long sentences, 30 40 years kind of sentences.

no-one that gives a victim a life sentence trying to deal with what happened to them, should be allowed out.

keeping them in prison is better than allowing them an escape by death.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

end of the road wrote: »

who are the human rights brigade, another made up organisation like the PC brigade i expect

In fairness, he did answer this. It's the EU apparently.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Mr Williams wrote: »

Heres somebody who would be a good candidate for the death penalty.

Even doctors who have "treated" this beast (at great cost to the tax payer) admit it has been a waste of time.

Would you really want someone like this living beside you ?

http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/high-risk-paedo-scully-back-on-streets

Constanntly highlighting people who you think should be executed (not to mention quoting and ignoring entire posts in the process!) is, again, not really how debate works.

You want to tell us why, not who.

Refering to them (or perceived anti-death plently groups) with tabloid rhetoric doesn't help either - it just hides the fact that you haven't actually come up with any arguments in favour of the death peanlty yet - just candidates.

on the river

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Constanntly highlighting people who you think should be executed (not to mention quoting and ignoring entire posts in the process!) is, again, not really how debate works.

You want to tell us why, not who.

Refering to them (or perceived anti-death plently groups) with tabloid rhetoric doesn't help either - it just hides the fact that you haven't actually come up with any arguments in favour of the death peanlty yet - just candidates.

COST COST COST

The tax payer would save millions on reintroducing the death penalty.

Overcrowding solved in a shot

Crime rates decrease dramatically

and

Crime gangs would leave the country in fear of their lives.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

on the river wrote: »

COST COST COST

The tax payer would save millions on reintroducing the death penalty.

Overcrowding solved in a shot

Crime rates decrease dramatically

and

Crime gangs would leave the country in fear of their lives.

Sorry - I meant one accurate argument. These are, with all due respect, awful.

Cost? Please outline your economic plan that will deal with the economic consequences of leaving the EU and the costs of reintroducing the punt as currency as well as who you think is going to buy Irish bonds when it happens?

1 - Appeals process costs more than 40 years in jail (and don't go down the line of "we don't need appeals" - if you're embarking on killing someone, you better be damn bloody sure you've got the right person).

2 - What overcrowding?

3 - Where? Why? How?

4 - Crime gangs already have their lives on the line - it's an occupational hazard. They don't seem to be all that scared.

Mal-Adjusted

Why do some posters insist that the only two options are either executions or else they'll live next door to us?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Why do some posters insist that the only two options are either executions or else they'll live next door to us?

Maybe one of them is in the next cell?? :P:pac:

OldNotWIse

Mr Williams wrote: »

Heres somebody who would be a good candidate for the death penalty.

Even doctors who have "treated" this beast (at great cost to the tax payer) admit it has been a waste of time.

Would you really want someone like this living beside you ?

http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/high-risk-paedo-scully-back-on-streets

Still with the beast? You should put down that copy of the Mirror

Edit: Sorry my mistake, the Sunday World

MrPudding

Mr Williams wrote: »

The EU says that life sentences breach "human rights".

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/jul/09/whole-life-jail-sentences-without-review-breach-human-rights

This is the problem when you read as far as the headline and even then, you don't understand it.

Whole-life jail sentences without any prospect of release amount to inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners, the European court of human rights has ruled.

The EU has an issue where a person is sentenced to life in prison and is told at the time of sentencing that they will never get out.

The EU has no problem with people that should not be on the streets being kept in prison for the rest of their natural lives, if they continue to pose a threat. All they are saying is there needs to be a mechanism whereby an assessment is made as to whether or not they should be released. If the result of the assessment is that they should remain in prison, then, assuming the decision was correctly made, then that is perfectly ok.

Perhaps you should actually read up on the subject. In fact, why don't you start with the very article you yourself posted, here is an interesting quote from the ECHR:

ECHR wrote:

[...]the finding of a violation in the applicants' cases should not be understood as giving them any prospect of imminent release. Whether or not they should be released would depend, for example, on whether there were still legitimate penological grounds for their continued detention and whether they should continue to be detained on grounds of dangerousness. These questions were not in issue.

Confirmation, then, that the issue is not keeping a personin prison for their entire life, it is simply not giving them the chance of a review that is the issue.

Whilst you may not be willing to accept you are wrong here, and further, whist you may not accept the non-too subtle difference between what you are trying to argue and what was actually held, you are wrong.

MrP

on the river

The irish prison system is in shambleshttp://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1204/490756-prisons-interim-report/ it seems some posts on this thread are endorsing prisoners to reoffend. Their is too many loop holes in the

justise system which need to be fixed. Any major crimes murder, rape, mass kllings should with out doubt recieve the

death penalty. victims are entitled to true justice agains their attackers. being on a holiday camp for 20 years is not

justise just expense for the taxpayer and a nice break for the crimnial.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

on the river wrote: »

The irish prison system is in shambleshttp://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1204/490756-prisons-interim-report/ it seems some posts on this thread are endorsing prisoners to reoffend. Their is too many loop holes in the

justise system which need to be fixed. Any major crimes murder, rape, mass kllings should with out doubt recieve the

death penalty. victims are entitled to true justice agains their attackers. being on a holiday camp for 20 years is not

justise just expense for the taxpayer and a nice break for the crimnial.

Another one who can't be bothered to read the argument in the article posted - not only that, you then go on to contradict your own argument.