Welcome to the original English language Poland and Polish discussion group board. This message forum is a place where English-speaking Poles, foreigners (expats) living in Poland, and anyone with a genuine interest in Poland can discuss and read the views of others concerning Poland. Subjects include: Polish news and current affairs; Life in Poland; politics; genealogy research; Polish culture and history; advice and tips on visiting Poland; Polish property and investment issues. The aim of our group is to increase awareness of wonderful Poland using the English language and allow and foster the honest debate and exchange of opinions on anything vaguely related to Poland and Polish - positive, negative and/or neutral! To state the obvious: all opinions and views expressed on this site are solely those of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of anyone else! Messages consisting of ads will be deleted.
I thought this might stimulate some debate....I think Poland has a good point.
Hopefully Dajwid will not find it too "deathly" dull now that I have put this comment about him in!
Poland was the only EU country which did not support a proposal by the
European Commission to establish a European Day Against the Death
Penalty. The Polish representation argued there was no need for such a
day because all EU countries had abolished capital punishment. Warsaw
claims that Europe needs a day devoted to the protection of life in
general, which would condemn abortion, euthanasia as well as the death
PiS / LPR wanted to bring the death penalty back earlier this year.
I'm lost...are they the ones in power in this strange coalition government?
I am very much against the death penalty, but I'm sure that some forum members are pro, particularly those in the States.
Nobody has the right to take the life of another. Unfortunately, a lot of the public (meaning voters) think otherwise.
To be member of the Council of Europe it is a precondition that there is no death penalty, but politicians around Europe go up in the estimation of their constituents by occasionally making a lot of noise about it.
LPR/PiS should listen to what JP2 said on the matter.
This is the only issue PiS/LPR have gotten right.
Murderers, rapists, and child molesters should be shot on the spot.
Murderers, rapists, and child molesters should be shot on the spot.
Too quick, something slow and painfull would be better
How about throwing them to the lions like the Romans used to do? I bet tickets for that would sell out quickly
“Nobody has the right to take the life of another.”
Agreed, in principle, but that said, there are three exceptions:
Two and a half exceptions are premised on forfeiture;
1) There are some interpersonal actions that are so beyond, even wide societal parameters, as to constitute forfeiture (i.e. serial killing, child kidnap with murder)
2) Actions which endanger the society and nation. Broadly classed as the undoing or countervailing of actions for which others have died. Treason falls into this category.
3) A) Necessity; forfeiture: Self-defense. One is defending against homicidal intent.
3) B) Necessity; absence of alternatives: Self-preservation. As the primary presumption is one of a prerogative for survival there is no legal premise of mandated self-sacrifice. Imminent and urgent circumstances can qualify for this exception. The example most cited is that of two people lost at sea with only one life-preserver. There can be no legal consequence for someone fighting for their life to the detriment of another in a situation where both parties are victims and there are no alternatives for survival.
It is important to note that exceptions 1) and 2) are adjudicated matters and not individual personal actions. Exceptions 3) A) and B) recognize the limited options available to victims of others or of circumstance.
What if you get it wrong and kill an innocent human being?
To me putting a murderer to death is to commit just the same crime as he/she have committed. More blood on the hands of other people. Who are we to judge when someone should die? Lock them up and remove them from society by all means, but the need to re-enact what they have done to somehow show them the error of their ways seems to me very primitive and base thinking.
death penalty stats by country 2006
How many civilised countries are on this list?
If someone did anything to my kids, sorry, prison is not enough.
It's only natural that you should feel like that Dajwid, but vengeance cannot change the past. At the end of the day the risk we take in living on this planet is that anything can happen.
“What if you get it wrong and kill an innocent human being?”
One makes policy on the presumption that “one will get it right”. As to implementation; the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” can be debated as to degree but cannot be used to dissuade society from action any more than a hospital should be dissuaded from operating on a patient because of the possibility of a doctor making a mistake.
”To me putting a murderer to death is to commit just the same crime as he/she have committed.”
But it is not the same. The crime of murder is the taking of life by an individual or individuals on the basis of self determined criteria.
“More blood on the hands of other people.”
No, this is the distinction of “forfeiture”; the blood is solely upon the hands of the murderer who by action “forfeits” their own right to live.
“Who are we to judge when someone should die?”
As individuals we are generally not empowered or informed to decide upon the guilt and subsequent punishment of others. That is the function of social and governmental institutions created for that purpose.
“Lock them up and remove them from society by all means,”
But locking them up does not remove them from society, they merely become segregated individuals housed by society, fed by society and interacting with other segregated members of society. Functionally they become the equivalents of other segregated and enclaved sub-groups, (astronauts, monks, tenured university lecturers)
“but the need to re-enact what they have done”
Not a re-enactment, theirs is sole action upon individually determined criteria; execution of sentence is the culmination of non-individual action.
“to somehow show them the error of their ways”
That would be, presumptively, the effect of incarceration. One doesn’t “show” an executed person anything; one removes the self forfeited guilty party.
“seems to me very primitive and base thinking.”
No, individually based retribution is primitive. The entrusting of social consequence to governmental institutions for the benefit of broader society is quite an advanced state of human interpersonal evolution.
“death penalty stats by country 2006
How many civilised countries are on this list?”
The error is to look at aggregated numbers. Each of these cases deserves to be considered individually. A woman that kills the children of her fiancé’s family that opposed her marriage should be considered to have forfeited her own life; be it in Jordan or in any other country.
“but vengeance cannot change the past.”
It is not a question of vengeance but of consequence.
“At the end of the day the risk we take in living on this planet is that anything can happen.”
You deserve better than that; societies aspire to more.
"Lock them up and remove them from society by all means"
Why? That costs money. Swift death penalty is much more cost effective. That way you have more resources for education, public safety, etc.
Maybe it would be if death penalties were carried out swiftly. But in most states in the US they are not. Prisoners stay on death row for years, appealing, and appealing and costing the tax payer huge amounts of money in legal fees. Just recently a 45 year old in Texas was executed. He'd been appealing his sentence at the tax payers expense since he was 20!
The lawyers bills alone, paid by the taxpayer, are more costly than keeping somebody in gaol for life.
The rule of law is costly; lawlessness costs even more.
Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small
Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He all.
—Friedrich Von Logau (1614–1655): Retribution
God's mills grind slow but sure.
-George Herbert (1593 - 1633): Jacula Prudentum.
"You deserve better than that; societies aspire to more. "
Our desires and needs are of little consequence in the face of say natural disasters. Societies' aspirations can be wiped out in a day. Look at the tsunami or the mississipi storms. Life is full of chaos and random events. In the same way every human on this planet has his or her own needs and desires personalities etc.
Based on the spectrum of mental health and personality disorders, murder and other crimes are therefore bound to happen whether or not you have the death penalty.
Killing another person is not going to stop others from committing the same crimes and it will not change the past to bring a loved one back - hence my comment. Society should be concentrating on the causes to increase understanding among people, not the consequences. Proactive not reactive is the way forward in any evolved society.
If you look at the mental state of our civilisation as a whole, going back over history, then you see we are evolving by increased communication, greater understanding/tolerance and less overall brutality. The fact that so many people now live on this planet with fewer wars than in centuries before is a clear sign of greater collective intelligence. Obviously shit still happens. It always will. You will never create utopia. You can only learn from it.
But what really galls people in the UK is the fact that the original premise on which they abolished capital punishment was that "life imprisonment means for the rest of the criminal's life", not 10 years.
Murder is the foulest, most repugnant thing that can be done to a person - it takes away everything you have. A murderer should not get out again, ever. A rape victim can "recover" in a way a murder victim cannot. But even then, you have to ask yourself some serious questions. The average time spent inside for rape in the UK, at 5 years, is quite long by European standards.
I am on balance against the death penalty, except where you catch the perpetrator in flagrante delicto and slaughter him on the spot.
Varsovian I agree with all you say. Life should be life and those serving life should be given more useful work to do to benefit society, so that on the one hand they are put away to stop them being a danger and on the other hand they are paying their own keep.
Secondly I think people like homeowners should be given more power to attack anyone trying to burgle or attack them, rather than criminals being able to sue victims for damages. They also need to do more to control children to stop them committing acts of mindless violence. A curfew would be a good idea.
Of course the government thinks this will all cost money whereas the cost of victims of crime is not a state cost so they don't care if someone's life is ruined.