Disagree slightly. For life sentences, yes a miserable place like prisons in Russia. But for everything else more focus on rehab is needed. Otherwise scumbags are coming out harder and more likely to return to crime.

Is it not enough that the prisoners liberty is taken away for their sentence?
Making them eat gruel, sleeping on concrete in the cold and breaking rocks will not make the world a better place, or let you sleep easier at night!

Does financial execution of citizens count?

Its just that the fact is a lot of lives have been ended prematurely in this financial crisis,
due to the actions and inactions of our government(s).

I was sure he wouldn’t appear too. But it looks like China Inc PR Dept have no shame. Maybe they threatened to execute him too?

Being more savage than the savages makes a nation strong, eh?

How do you rehabilitate someone who has 90 convictions or someone who kicks a man to death for the “buzz”?
Execution works.

I wonder if Chinese Vice President, Xi Jinping, raised the human rights matter with Enda Kenny that only 9% of our 20,000 strong Irish Traveller community are over the age of 50, in contrast to 26% for the general population?

execution works? http://www.ncadp.org/index.cfm?content=5

OMG, I agree with Paul Carr. I don’t think human rights should be a taboo topic when leaders meet. We should be able to raise certain issues with the Chinese without them flying off the handle.

But if we do that, we should be prepared to listen to criticisms too.

Jesus Ciarán. Scary.

Ciaro – you say execution works?
Supposing you were innocent of the crime?
Look up “The Exonerated”
Killing people is wrong and immoral, whether done by an individual or by the State.

Réada, I understand how you might find what I say disagreeable. But scary….?

As always, Paul Carr tries to distract the story that criticizes China with unrelated topics…..

I am sorry, but i am with Paul on this one ….
China executed one lady in 2010 for having using unsafe products in Baby feed. About 42 babies died, many more have severe brain/health issues. That bitch should die, she killed many others to boost her profit line.
However, we have to draw the line somewhere. I do honestly believe that in as many cases as possible, life-in-prison is also appropriate.

No-one in Ireland has the right to bitch about China etc, unless they are 100% sure that they have a clear conscience first. How many of you voted FFailure/PDs in the last few years, and yet these two parties managed to turn a bad health service into one that sees 3000 people per year die totally unnecessarily. And Paul Carr was right to mention the extremely high mortality rate in the traveler community. Let he who has not sinned, cast the first stone.

Cal: It’s not clear to me what baby feed incident you are referring to. There was the 2008 tainted milk scandal which resulted in two men being executed.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal

Incidentally, I never wrote nor implied that I support the death penalty. As a matter of fact, I oppose it as a matter of principle.

Cal. If you think our man in China aka Paul gives a sh!t about travellers you’re mistaken. I’ve never seen him on a traveller thread. He uses any excuse to make China look better. All he cares about is the monieeee! I’m against capital punishment. Too many cases of miscarriages of justice. One is too many imo!

Reada: That’s not true. I was on this traveller thread just 3 days ago.

http://www.thejournal.ie/only-nine-per-cent-of-irish-travellers-are-over-50-394477-Mar2012/

Fair play Paul. I’ve been on a fair few myself and hadn’t come across you. And in fairness you only mentioned China once. Sorry Paul.

@Paul, Here is an extract of the news story … You are correct 2 people were executed, but one of them was a woman (not two men). Do you think for one second, that poisoning 300,000 babies doesnt warrant a death penalty, then we have to disagree. A Chinese friend of mine told me that 42 babies actually died, and thousands more were left with brain damage or serious health issues for life. In these sort of cases, i have absolutely no issues with the death penalty being used. Could you imagine how all those families would have felt? And like i said before, i dont support the death penalty for crimes like corruption etc, but to me, hearing the story of the Polish guy having his head danced on in the news today….. Death is almost too good for the bastards who saw it as a bit of fun …. In summary, manslaughter etc to me, does not warrant the death penalty… but crimes like the one i just mentioned, where out of pure greed and indifference to others, you murder people, then i dont think you deserve to live.

Prosecutions began yesterday against six people accused of deliberately contaminating milk supplies with a toxic chemical believed to have made as many as 300,000 infants sick and killed at least six.

The suspects include Zhang Yujun, described by state press as the “Mr Big of Poison”, who is said to have manufactured and sold nitrogen-rich melamine to milk traders in the northern Hebei province for over a year, thereby allowing them to foil mandatory protein content tests.

Zhang is accused of selling around 600 tons of a homemade melamine mixture between July 2007 and August 2008, earning 6.8m yuan (£678,000) from a product he knew to be poisonous, Xinhua news agency said.

Tian Wenhua, the sacked chairwoman of the Sanlu Group, the bankrupt dairy firm at the centre of the scandal, will be tried with other members of staff in Shijiazhuang, in Hebei Province, over the next week, accused of “selling fake and low-quality products”. Legal experts have said that she could face the death penalty.

Cal: Tian Wenhua was not executed. She got life in prison. Zhang Yujun and Geng Jinping, both men, were executed.

http://www.executedtoday.com/2010/11/24/2009-zhang-yujun-and-geng-jinping-for-tained-milk/

Thanks Paul for the update … i was under the impression she got executed … and in my own opinion, she deserved to be executed as well.

Yeah, cos that works…..
The reality of course is that prisoners do return to society, and it is our responsibility to ensure they are rehabilitated for OUR good.

They do. In contrast to the USA, China executes rich people and high profile politicians. You can get executed for things like graft, bribery, embezzlement, backdoor deals, nepotism, patronage, and statistical falsification.

Do they execute people who walk past a knocked down girl on a road? Do they execute the people who give the orders to soldiers to kill protesters? Do they execute those who occupy Tibet?

China has a population of 1.35 billion people, not 1.25. And Colm O’Gorman doesn’t head Amnesty International, he’s the executive director of Amnesty International Ireland.

The population of China is at best an estimate, it is widely acknowledged that the last census was probably low to a large margin.

So for economy, a murderer should kill as many as possible?

alcohol caffeine nicotine etc. are all drugs, you’ll have alot of hanging to do

Sure, you’re well hard, Mr. Internet Hangman….

If the death penalty is such a deterrent, then why do murders still happen in countries where there is capital punishment?
Look up Pierrepoint, Britains most famous hangman, and why he gave up hanging people….he also said the following;
‘I have come to the conclusion that executions solve nothing, and are only an antiquated relic of a primitive desire for revenge which takes the easy way and hands over the responsibility for revenge to other people…The trouble with the death penalty has always been that nobody wanted it for everybody, but everybody differed about who should get off’

Michael, if they just treat drug addiction like the illness it is, there wouldn’t be any drug dealers. Instead, it is handled by the civil authorities.
Perhaps the Minister of Justice would like to take on diabetes as well? Should the state arrest cancer patients?
Drug addiction, like alcoholism (just another form of it) are medical issues and are best treated as medical issues. Consider how “successful” the current policies are. They are so successful that “society is falling apart”, as you say. So we should do what? Keep going in that direction?

Mr Murphy,
I’ve no desire to be “well hard” and my comment was not motivated by a primitive desire for revenge. I am also familiar with what Pierrepoint said.
There is no satisfaction to be derived from the deprivation of life nor is it something that should be considered lightly. Drug dealers, however, are parasites that feed off the body of humanity. There is only way to deal with parasites and that is extermination.
Wilful murder is THE greatest evil an individual can effect and is an affront to civilisation. The punishment for the crime must reflect its horror. That being said, I realise that there is always potential for remorse and that is why, on reflection, a life sentence in gaol (gaol being a place of penal servitude and not luxurious living quarters).
My view may not be popular and I do not ask for concurrence, nevertheless I do feel something is necessary to prompt society to re-evaluate its penal code.

5th line should read: “There is only one way……etc”

“Personally, I’d have no conflict of conscience being the hangman for every drug dealer in the country” – are you some kind of sociopath? I’m just wondering, because “every drug dealer in the country” includes a lot of kids in their early 20′s who enjoy smoking weed and taking pills, and selling those to their friends. Who have never committed any other “crime” in their life.

The term ‘sociopath’ implies a disregard for the rights of others. I am concerned for the rights of the majority of people wishing to live their lives free from the curse of drugs and the social malaise caused by users and dealers. It is my right to live in a drug free society; it is not your right to use or sell drugs and society has told you so by making it illegal (please note ‘you’ does not imply you personally, but is merely representing the point). Please don’t use words unless you are aware of their correct meaning.

“kids in their early 20′s who enjoy smoking weed and taking pills, and selling those to their friends. Who have never committed any other “crime” in their life”.
Surely you must realise just how wrong the above sentence is (and I don’t just mean your reference to young goats a.k.a. kids). A person in their early 20′s is an adult and should have sufficient intelligence to understand the implications of using/selling drugs. I do not accept the nonsensical approach adopted by the purveyors of psycho-babble that being young somehow diminishes responsibility. When it comes to ‘smoking weed and taking pills’, I am somewhat perplexed by your inference that it’s perfectly alright to do this. I stand by my original comment.

“The term ‘sociopath’ implies a disregard for the rights of others. ”
No, the term ‘sociopath’ means (not implies, means) ‘a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience’.
Don’t harp on about the meaning of words when you can’t quote the correct meaning yourself. You expressed a desire to murder a group of people and stated you would not feel remorse for doing so.

Ok, calling you a sociopath wasn’t very nice or constructive to the discussion (although neither is stating that you would like to murder every person involved in the sale of narcotics in this country. Or stating that you would like to murder anyone, in general).

“It is my right to live in a drug free society”
Is it? Thats news to me. Does this include alcohol and nicotine? Caffeine? All of these are substances, all of these are addictive, and the first one causes serious problems when abused. The second one just causes cancer for no discernable narcotic gain. These are all perfectly legal. I’m genuinely interested to hear if you think these should also be illegal, and if not, how/why would you justify your position?

“it is not your right to use or sell drugs and society has told you so by making it illegal”
Laws are not static. Laws are repealed and added frequently. Just because something is written into law does not mean it is ethically right, fair or has scientific merit. Uganda has been bandying around a bill to make being gay punishable by the death penalty. Slavery was completely legal for centuries. Your logic of “it is the law therefore you must behave this way” is nonsensical.

Also, in the specific instance of drug prohibition, we have historically taken our cue from the USA, whose drug laws are largely based on its politicians not wishing to be seen as weak,
as opposed to actual scientific fact. As a result they have the spectacular failure known as the “war on drugs”, which has not stopped the increase of drug use. Contrast this with Portugal, where the decriminalization of drugs has led to a *decrease* in overall drug use.

“Surely you must realise just how wrong the above sentence is (and I don’t just mean your reference to young goats a.k.a. kids)”
Thats some terrible wordplay, even for a comment on the journal O_o

Wrong? I made a statement about knowing a group of people who use, but do not abuse, substances. Since we’re being pedantic here, I’m the only person in the position to know how right or wrong that statement is.

“I do not accept the nonsensical approach adopted by the purveyors of psycho-babble that being young somehow diminishes responsibility”
Neither do I, personal responsibility is something I believe in very strongly, and this was not the point I was trying to make. I can include as many people in their mid-to-late 20s, thirties and fourties in the groups of drug users I know.
The point I was making was that “drug dealers” comprise a huge and varied group of people, not just scary looking scobies with love/hate tattoos on their knuckles and lengthy prison records selling kilos of heroin in the flats.

I also stand by my statement. Over the last 15 years I have been exposed to hundreds, if not thousands of drug-users from around the country.
And you know what? The vast, vast majority of them are normal people with degrees and jobs who just want to relax at the end of day.
The fact that you include these people in a group that you would feel no remorse about *hanging* indicates to me that you are either a sociopath or a genuinely bad person.

Terming and wording are two different things entirely. However, my bone of contention with your first paragraph is that you say I ‘expressed a desire to murder’. I did no such thing. I’ve no desire to murder anyone. If you wish to be pedantic then I would point out that an executioner is not a murderer – not legally.

I made reference previously to what I meant by the term ‘drug’. I’m talking about illegal, hard-core drugs. I’m not going into the debate on legal every-day drugs such as alcohol and nicotine because they don’t fall into the same category. It’s not the same thing for a variety of reasons, most of which you are well aware of and don’t need me to point out.

I am the first to admit that the law is an ass. But it is necessary and it’s all we have to keep society coherent. The only alternative is to have anarchy.

Perhaps you miss my point. The problem I have with drugs, primarily, is the human cost involved. I’ve seen lives destroyed by drugs and I’ve seen the effect on families. The only people to gain are the dealers – those at the very top. Perhaps legalising the drugs is the solution but then how is it possible to control the amount people use? For example, by legalising heroin do we cause a person to use more and more because it’s legally available? Should it be legalised with a view to getting people off drugs? Your friends take narcotics to chill out but what happens when they get caught in the trap?

Despite what you think, I’m very much concerned for my fellow man. I’ve seen the devastating effects of drug abuse and wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. Perhaps we are looking at the same problem but from opposite sides and what you see as harmless I see as potentially lethal.

Apologies for any offense.

Thank you for clarifying those points in your reply. I’m sorry I flew off the handle at you, it doesn’t contribute anything to the discussion and was uncalled for. I think we got our wires crossed because you are talking about a specific, very nasty group of dealers, which I took to mean “everyone involved in drugs”.

“I made reference previously to what I meant by the term ‘drug’. I’m talking about illegal, hard-core drugs. I’m not going into the debate on legal every-day drugs such as alcohol and nicotine because they don’t fall into the same category. It’s not the same thing for a variety of reasons, most of which you are well aware of and don’t need me to point out.”

I think its a debate thats worth having. While I do not defend heroin use, I strongly contend that weed should be legalized, and that it is extremely hypocritical of goverments to have alcohol be legal and taxable but not weed. Medical Marijuana is available in the US, one of the most conservative western countries (and the one that instigated the aforementioned “war on drugs” policy) because western medicine is evidence-based, and the evidence for the usefulness of weed is abundant. Society has not broken down in the several thousand years we have had alcohol, and alchol is far more dangerous and addictive than many illegal drugs.

“The problem I have with drugs, primarily, is the human cost involved. I’ve seen lives destroyed by drugs and I’ve seen the effect on families. The only people to gain are the dealers”

I have also seen this, primarily with alcohol. I think the problem here is that a minority of people will *always* abuse substances, just like they will abuse anything addictive (gambling, sex, food, there are many other examples).
Unfortunately, the reason that the dealers you are talking about have so much money and influence is because drugs are illegal in the first place – It creates a black market that vastly inflates prices, making the profit margin far more lucrative than say, smuggling cigarettes.

“Perhaps legalising the drugs is the solution but then how is it possible to control the amount people use?”
Trying to control the amount of any substance people use is an exercise in futility. It has not worked with this governments attempts to control binge drinking. Its a case of trying to treat the symptom, not the underlying cause.
I think the way forward is to provide better education and rehabilitation, not prohibition. It seems to be working in several european countries.

“Perhaps we are looking at the same problem but from opposite sides and what you see as harmless I see as potentially lethal.”
While I am (obviously) very pro drugs legalization, I would not categorize any of them as harmless. I firmly believe, as you do, that everyone has a level of personal responsibility. You were right to say earlier that someone should have sufficient intelligence to understand the implications of using/selling drugs. I think where we differ is that I also believe its possible for someone to make an informed choice about using a narcotic in a responsible manner?

Oh, they are off the hook so.
Let’s party on like everything is ok and order another container load of flat panel TVs…..