Page 1 of 2 [ 25 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

13 Feb 2014, 10:54 am

In Poland, the death penalty has been abolished.

In 1988, a pedophile murderer, killed and raped four boys, for which he received four death sentence.
Unfortunately, our stupid government abolished the death penalty, because they wanted to please the European Union.

At the beginning of 1989, the highest dimension of punishment was the death penalty, the next in order were 25 years of imprisonment, we don have life sentence at this time
Life imprisonment was introduced to the Polish Criminal Code in 1997, as a replacement for the abolished the death penalty.

As the first free government in Poland abolished the death penalty in 1989, this pervert got a penalty of 25 years imprisonment, the highest possible at the time, was released yesterday.

Prime Minister Tusk's government proposed a bill which passed parliament in November. This law provides for the most dangerous criminals who are the greatest risk of recidivism can be placed in a special psychiatric hospital. To make this happen warden before the end of the sentence must file an application in court on this issue. But the court can't examine the request before this guy left prison.
Unfortunately this pervert already out of jail, our retired judge of the Supreme Court, said f*****g stupid thing that court shouldn't condemn a man twice for the same offense, that it is against our Polish Constitution.
As if that bastard was still some human rights, after he raped four boys.

Chief Commander of our, Polish state police, granted gave him 24h protection, so people do not lynched this bastard, and so as not to hurt the other boys.

In my opinion, granting police protection to such a bastard is a mockery and a waste of Polish taxpayer money.

If someone lynch the bastard, it would do just what executioner should have done a long time ago.

According to me, Poland foolishly did that abolished the death penalty after the change of regime.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

13 Feb 2014, 11:54 am

if the death penalty is effective, then murder or serious crime rates would be far less than those countries that don't have the death penalty.

The empirical evidence suggests otherwise.

Besides, the death penalty seem to be less about satisfying justice and more about satisfying a primordial bloodlust within ourselves. an eye for an eye makes the world blind.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

13 Feb 2014, 12:25 pm

The death penalty is about revenge, not justice. Two wrongs do not make a right, and killing to set an example an example for potential killers, seems a bit ironic. A person risking the death penalty, has nothing to lose, and will thus be more likely to kill both investigators, police officers and witnesses to escape punishment... not to mention the threat he may pose to other inmates or prison guards.

Killing paedophile child killers is tempting, but life (in which case "life" really means life) in prison is a better way to solve the problem.



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

13 Feb 2014, 12:37 pm

Kurgan wrote:
The death penalty is about revenge, not justice. Two wrongs do not make a right, and killing to set an example an example for potential killers, seems a bit ironic. A person risking the death penalty, has nothing to lose, and will thus be more likely to kill both investigators, police officers and witnesses to escape punishment... not to mention the threat he may pose to other inmates or prison guards.

Killing paedophile child killers is tempting, but life (in which case "life" really means life) in prison is a better way to solve the problem.


Unfortunately, the court can not sentence him to life in prison, because when the death penalty was abolished in Poland in 1989, the highest possible sentence was 25 years in prison. Now the Polish judicial system has a problem and many Poles would like to restore the death penalty for the most serious crimes.



thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,124

13 Feb 2014, 1:57 pm

I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

13 Feb 2014, 2:07 pm

thewhitrbbit wrote:
I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.


I could not disagree, maybe except the last one , large scale fraud/embellishmen.

I believe that the death penalty should only happen if the effect of the crime was death, or some barbarian behavior, torture, rape, etc.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

13 Feb 2014, 2:11 pm

pawelk1986 wrote:
thewhitrbbit wrote:
I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.


I could not disagree, maybe except the last one , large scale fraud/embellishmen.

I believe that the death penalty should only happen if the effect of the crime was death, or some barbarian behavior, torture, rape, etc.


The average American death row inmate, is caged inside a 73 sq. ft. cell, for 23 hours everyday for 12 years. This sounds like barbarian behaviour to me.



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,899
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

13 Feb 2014, 2:38 pm

Kurgan wrote:
pawelk1986 wrote:
thewhitrbbit wrote:
I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.


I could not disagree, maybe except the last one , large scale fraud/embellishmen.

I believe that the death penalty should only happen if the effect of the crime was death, or some barbarian behavior, torture, rape, etc.


The average American death row inmate, is caged inside a 73 sq. ft. cell, for 23 hours everyday for 12 years. This sounds like barbarian behaviour to me.


I don't knew what death row look in america, but no one is on death row for innocence, surely had to be solid evidence by which they were sentenced to death,



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

13 Feb 2014, 2:44 pm

pawelk1986 wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
pawelk1986 wrote:
thewhitrbbit wrote:
I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.


I could not disagree, maybe except the last one , large scale fraud/embellishmen.

I believe that the death penalty should only happen if the effect of the crime was death, or some barbarian behavior, torture, rape, etc.


The average American death row inmate, is caged inside a 73 sq. ft. cell, for 23 hours everyday for 12 years. This sounds like barbarian behaviour to me.


I don't knew what death row look in america, but no one is on death row for innocence, surely had to be solid evidence by which they were sentenced to death,


Regardless of whether they're innocent or not, it's not a humane way to treat someone. 15 death row inmates have been released after proven to be innocent since 1992, and at least 39 have been executed with at least a strong doubt of guilt during American history. It's reasonable to assume that it's worse in less democratic nations.

One major problem with the capital punishment in the US, is that it mostly applies to those with no capital. You'll rarely see rich white people at the death row, but you'll see plenty of black people with a low-income background.



League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,205
Location: Pacific Northwest

13 Feb 2014, 5:05 pm

The governor in the state of Washington is talking about getting rid of the death penalty as well. He isn't against it he said but his reasons were inmates are rarely executed in their state and it's cheaper to house an inmate for the rest of their lives than putting them to death. Here it's expensive to put someone to death than it is to house an inmate.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 27,205
Location: Pacific Northwest

13 Feb 2014, 5:16 pm

pawelk1986 wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
pawelk1986 wrote:
thewhitrbbit wrote:
I believe there are certain crimes to which you don't deserve to live. Willful murder, forceful rape, rape of a child, large scale fraud/embellishment.

There are crimes that are so heinous that you don't deserve to live.

That said, there should be clear and convincing proof you committed the crime. If there is, you should be executed within 1 year of your sentence. Executions should be done by hanging, quickly and painlessly.

You could make it a lot cheaper than life in prison, and even then I don't' care that much. I'd rather spend the extra money and have him put to death than to know he is spending the rest of his life in prison, getting free food, free medical care, free cable tv and relax for the rest of their lives.

They need to feel the pain their victims felt.


I could not disagree, maybe except the last one , large scale fraud/embellishmen.

I believe that the death penalty should only happen if the effect of the crime was death, or some barbarian behavior, torture, rape, etc.


The average American death row inmate, is caged inside a 73 sq. ft. cell, for 23 hours everyday for 12 years. This sounds like barbarian behaviour to me.


I don't knew what death row look in america, but no one is on death row for innocence, surely had to be solid evidence by which they were sentenced to death,


I have heard of a few cases where innocent people were on death row and freed because they were wrongly convicted and were finally proven innocent and some others were executed unfortunately. Jesse Tafero for example. Earl Washington who was freed finally in the year 2000. People use innocent cases to argue against the death penalty and these cases get brought up.


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

13 Feb 2014, 5:20 pm

Kurgan wrote:

Killing paedophile child killers is tempting, but life (in which case "life" really means life) in prison is a better way to solve the problem.


child killers , fair enough, but i barely see what the point is in jailing paedophiles as they have diminished responsibility over their behaviour. I would argue that a maximum security asylum in this case would be more appropriate than a jail containing general population prisoners.

Paedophilia should be viewed as a illness, rather than criminality in the conventional sense.

I think this place has the right idea. It keeps sexually predatory individuals away from children, and keeps them away from violent individuals that would harm them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Place_for_Paedophiles
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEt3-kuVl5Y [/youtube]


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile


Last edited by thomas81 on 13 Feb 2014, 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

13 Feb 2014, 5:29 pm

Although I have posted at length about my opposition to the death penalty (especially for crimes other than murder, like rape) I have recently come across another argument against it.

This, however, is specific to the United States, as it is a US tradition.

If one has the death penalty as a possible sentence, one needs to have a Death-Qualified Jury.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death-qualified_jury

From the Wiki link:

The indisputable source of all Truth wrote:
A death-qualified jury is a jury in a criminal law case in the United States in which the death penalty is a prospective sentence. Such a jury will be composed of jurors who:
  1. Are not categorically opposed to the imposition of capital punishment;
  2. Are not of the belief that the death penalty must be imposed in all instances of capital murder—that is, they would consider life imprisonment as a possible penalty.

The problem is that death-qualified juries are not representative of the population, which undermines the entire purpose of having a jury in the first place.

They are:

- More likely to convict (on the basis of the same facts)
- Less likely to be women
- Less likely to be minorities

... than a jury which is not selected for Death qualification. So, the existence of the death penalty introduces bias - and more importantly, lower standards of evidence than normal for conviction in those situations where a wrongful sentence would be irreversible.

Technically, one could choose *not* to qualify the jury for Death during jury selection, but then one would face a significant risk of jury nullification (acquittal despite belief of guilt). I believe many prosecutors are unwilling to take that risk.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

13 Feb 2014, 5:32 pm

thomas81 wrote:
Kurgan wrote:

Killing paedophile child killers is tempting, but life (in which case "life" really means life) in prison is a better way to solve the problem.


child killers , fair enough, but i barely see what the point is in jailing paedophiles as they have diminished responsibility over their behaviour. I would argue that a maximum security asylum in this case would be more appropriate than a jail containing general population prisoners.

Paedophilia should be viewed as a illness, rather than criminality in the conventional sense.

I think this place has the right idea. It keeps sexually predatory individuals away from children, and keeps them away from violent individuals that would harm them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Place_for_Paedophiles
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEt3-kuVl5Y [/youtube]


In the case of paedophiles, their brain is damaged, so it can't be "cured" per se. A paedophile subject can choose not to act out on his sexual urges, though.



thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,124

13 Feb 2014, 6:06 pm

I believe inmates should be executed within a year of their sentence. If you don't have the evidence, life in prison.

I am very aware of the issues of executing an innocent person. Exactly why I believe we need a standard of evidence higher than reasonable doubt to execute. It needs to be clear and convincing. I would make a rule that no death penalty without DNA evidence.

When I talk about fraud, the reason I include it is because fraud can almost be a death sentence. Imagine the old lady who is defrauded out of her money, she now has no money to provide for herself.

I certainly would intent it more for Bernie Madoff level fraud.



thomas81
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 May 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,147
Location: County Down, Northern Ireland

13 Feb 2014, 6:11 pm

Ultimately, these debates on law and crime leave a bad taste in my mouth because they serve to detract from the underlying, root debate.

We ought to worry first on how to raise the least of us before we deal with the worst of us. People are not innately evil; most of these crimes are the product of the problem of poverty and social decay that have not been dealt with. Replace this rotten system and with it will go most of the motives and opportunities for crime.


_________________
Being 'normal' is over rated.

My deviant art profile