The only rational way to deal with killers, rapists, and career felons is to bring back the idea of a penal colony. Ship them off to a remote island with one rule: don't leave. We're wasting too much money in the US keeping criminals in prison. If they refuse to live by the rules of our society, then so be it -- go live in your own.
I am against the death penalty only because innocents have and will be there victims all too often.
If not for that I would execute, most murderers, all child molesters, and in reality anyone that looks at society as something to prey upon. Never contributing anything positive to the world only taking and hurting. They would all go!
Well, a life for a life. People are informed nowadays but yet they murder. Why should we waste tax payers money for supervision, expensive prison facilities, food and electricity to keep murderers alife ?
The jail system has to be changed altogether. We foolishly think that by subjecting criminals to sub-human conditions, they will stop. I believe that will only make them angrier. We should just try to give them psychological treatment, brainwashing if you will, to make sure they stop.
I agree. Life is indeed sacred. But if you willingly take a human life, you show that you have no respect for the sanctity of life. You are a menace and you must be stopped. If you kill a man, get a few years in jail, then get out and start killing again, the the blood of those innocents is one the hands of those to cowardly to make the right decision. If you kill, you should be killed in order to save people. Simple as that. Better one person die than many.
The death penalty is so immoral, people kill, rape, steal, because that is what humans do, there careless greedy and sick, but for a government to kill people is fucking wrong because there saying we own you, you disobey we'll destroy u instead of keeping them out of harms way.
Look at countries which have the death penalty such as Japan Singapore and Saudi Arabia and look at how low their crime rates are and look at how low their murder rates are and compare them to most other countries which no longer have the death penalty and most of those countries have got higher murder rates and higher crime rates, also if a person takes another persons life that person deserves to have their life taken, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
I fully support the death penalty, Jeremy Irons is an idiot and who gives a fuck about what he thinks, im tired of these idiots celebrities who think they know it all and who use their celebraity status to force their narrow minded beliefs upon everyone else, he and the others who are against the death penalty also claims that it doesn't act as a deterent and that it doesn't reduce crime, thats fuckin bullshit ( continued )
In a country where there is death penalty for a murder (not an accidental killing) a murderer knows that for a murder he/she will be killed, just as a person commiting a suicide knows that jumping under the train will kill him/her. It's not the state that kills the murderer, he kills himself with his own decision of committing a murder.
@whopper652 | Sorry, it's still the STATE or the 12 jurors that makes the FINAL decision. I can't imagine having wrongfully condemned a person to death!
@swedanica No, the state just ACCEPTS his decision to be killed (the decision he made planning and commiting a murder). Actually there is always a chance of wrongfully condemning a person to death, but it's the price we have to pay if we want to have a good penal system (it's just less evil than letting murderers live).
@whopper652 No, it isn't. If you wrongfully condemn someone to death for a murder they didn't commit, then you've let the murder get away and killed an innocent person. If you don't execute the person, then the murderer gets away and, while you've wrongfully incarcerated an innocent, at least you haven't killed him. How could that possibly be more evil than letting murders live? Evil isn't nullified by other evil acts, only increased.
Jeremy Irons is an idiot, we are not interested in his views and the other stars who think they can shove their opinion down our throats.
Of course it reduces crimes, so he means to say if we not execute a serial killer and let the bastard out again he will be cured. .yeah right Jeremy - fuck off
So what the twat is saying is that poor people kill. .he is an idiot. .he needs to fuck off and go and try to act, asshole
Statistics have too many variables such as the availability of guns or the decreased sentence length. The world changes, and yes statistics can be mistaken/ lie. Don't jump to conclusions over a single propaganda video and check your sources in an objective way.
I've never understood how people justify killing in general. It's wrong, morally, physically, in many many ways. I can see how someone can want to kill, but still why would you want to? "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" Killing is killing, no matter what. I just hope some day people can realize killing is wrong no matter what. There are alterenatives, and honestly killing someone is actually more expensive than holding them in prison. So some day people may realize kiling is wrong.
I wonder if Jeremy Irons would fell the same if some maniac raped his daughters and chopped his wife into little pieces. What if some killer cut his sisters pregnant belly open and threw the fetus against the wall...
Actors should just SHUT THE FUCK UP!
You are nothing but a fucking actor... no different than a fucking cashier.
Your Fucking ego is outrageous thinking your thoughts matter to anyone.
One of the truly beautiful speeches...one which isn't about personal gaining or built upon the human weaknesses of fear or insecurity. That need to protect the frail human ego - which seems to dominate most the world these days. There's not a single enlightened argument for the death penalty...this speech reflects the most positive aspects of human nature and defines a boundary between humanity and self.
What about it being used as punishment that fits the crime? The death penalty targets the people who have commited terrible crimes not the economically disadvantaged. Did Arthur Gary Bishop deserve a voice? A lot of bad fucked up people like him get the death penalty. Some people like child molesters and serial killers don't deserve basic human rights because they are not human. They should also be tortured. Bishop wasn't a human being.Neither was Bundy.
@bresophil Excuse me they were not human beings. Yeah come back to me if one of your family is raped and killed by a stranger and then see how you feel about their human rights. It's easy to say when your not the victim of one of these animals!
Yes they are, they were born by humans, that is all that is needed to be considered human.
You might be right, maybe i would think differently if something happened to my family. But revenge is not the purpose of a punishment.
An issue like that cannot be decided over emotions, but rationality and international law. And death penalty is definitely a breach of the human right to live.
@bresophil The punishment is justice for their crimes committed. It's not about revenge. Born humans yes but they become something else along the way, their victim had the right to live. If you want to classify these people as human they should not be entitled to that right for certain crimes.
If they should or not, that is not yours or mine to decide. The right to live is a human right and applied to ALL humans, thats why it is written in the constitution.
@bresophil I think it is up to us to decide what sort of example we set. I disagree completely I would not apply it to all humans but like I said I don't consider someone who has raped and killed children many times human.
I can't sit here and say that if someone were to kill my family member or torture them I wouldn't want them dead, who wouldn't it. eye for an eye. But an eye for eye leaves the world blind.
I don't agree with the death penalty, but when someone kills a child or a baby thats when I believe that then and there that those people deserve to die! It is in Inhumane to kill anyone no matter who, how or why! A child and a baby are defenceless and if any body is is stupid enough to kill a kid that show they have absolutely no heart! I have no feeling for those sort of people. THOSE ARE THE SORT OF PEOPLE THAT EVEN I WOLD BE WILL TO PULL THE SWITCH!!!!!!!
@esawko "a bullet is a lot cheaper than housing and feeding..." contrary to popular belief, that is actually not true. Because of all the appeals people on death row have to go through, it ends up costing a LOT more to sentence someone to death then it does to put them in jail for a life sentence. I'm talking about $90,000 more per person on death row. And about $57.5 million annually. Look it up.
It has got to be embarrassing for you americans that you are one of the few countries in world together with IRAN, CHINA and LIBYA that practices the death penalty.
once again i have listened to this argument:' the right to life, we are all human beings etc etc'. as before i state the same- it is for the highest good. he mentions innocents, young offenders deaths etc etc, and finale 'do we want to cross the line and be like them?' no, we want to be free of them, once for all, so death it is, a life for a life.
@revv12 if you are going to cite the old testament as support for capital punishment, then atleast expect the same requirements for condemning, In the old testament, atealst 2 or 3 witnesses were required for a conviction. Today, people can get convicted of things they never did and found "guilty" with no proof or even any witnesses. In fact, the requirements were so just, that very few capital punishments were recorded.
People are so annoyed and worried about murderers and want to have empathy for them but if only we are talking of taking a life here, then let's extend the conversation to mean more than just humans. Then why even kill animals? Why eat them? I mean, even that is a life that you are killing, aren't they? What about this moral problem? Penalize eating of non-veg then. I mean you'd HAVE to stand up for that too.
@williamblevin well the prisons in europe are nothing like in the u.s. they're almost like hotels compared to the states. where i live they get to have few days "vacation" from prison now and then (not ofcourse if you're murderer etc) they have tv's and everything but strangely, it's a place nobody wants to go ;)
i've heard enough thanks jeremy, but the bottom line is this, 'the highest moral good of society'. let all the do gooders pontificate on! but someone;s daughter was raped and murdered, a child abused, etc etc, where thay not human beings who only asked for the right to live too? before it was snuffed out that is by someone else's warped sense of their right to trample on the victims rights and impose there's! need i go on? when proven guilty, beyond doubt, death it is and must be! life a joke !
Wow, then you missed the point of his sign off. Which is, do we really want to join them? Do we want to be just as low as them? Or do we lead by a better example? Rehabilitation or institutionalising people is far more appropriate. You can judge a society by simply looking at how they treat their prisoners.
this is bull shit you should not keep the right to live if you take it away from some one else just think if a man kill your entire family would you want him to live or want him to have a 7 year sentence so you can be buddy's with him
Have a think about what you've said. Would I feel anger, hatred towards someone who killed my family? Yes, of course. But no decent society should base its decisions on such feelings. We need to look at facts.
What if it was proved that the death penalty led to far more murders - would you want people to be murdered simply because of the way you felt? Are your feelings worth the loss of human life? I hope not.
Yes, that is one definition. This, however, is what others say:
Murder is both a legal and a moral term, that are not always coincident. It may be legal to kill, but still murder in the moral sense. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it is simply murder by the state. Opponents of abortion argue that it is legalized murder.
As for someone 'deserving it' this is an opinion as to what you think is best. Pity the facts don't agree with that.
There are times killing the criminal is the safest option. The most clear-cut example is violent criminals with a history of escapes; rather than risk their causing more damage and death, it is simply safer to kill them.
If you listen to what he says rather than focus on what you think, you'll find that the second sentence states that it doesn't work. 'Countries which have the death penalty don't have lower crime rates than those who do.' So to say that people might escape, or that they might do this or that.... 'Countries which have the death penalty don't have lower crime rates than those who do.'
Get the point? If you don't get lower crime rates then you don't get lower crime rates.
It is not about overall lower crime rates. But take the couple who escaped from the Wyoming prison this summer, and immediately resumed killing.
They were obviously intelligent and driven enough to escape. And it could well happen again. Are you going to jeopardize the lives of what are likely several people to protect the rights of one person?
What else could you do? Make them a quadriplegic? That would be even more unpleasant.
But the life of one is less valuable with the life of multiple people, obviously. And I only advocate the death penalty for would-be re-offenders.
And other crimes - rape, for instance, or some kinds of abuse, leave victims even worse off than dead.
And what of extreme things like genocide, terrorism, or even terricide? Would you give someone who tried to kill hundreds - eg Times Square bomber - a chance to succeed? Or millions, as some try (think nuclear)?
No matter what the crime - we have to be above the people we condemn. We also have to use whatever works best - even if our emotions make us want to hurt those who hurt us.
It is not about what you want, and revenge. That is a lie, or at least a misconception, that is spread, sometimes intentionally, sometimes intentionally.
It is about stopping them. And there are people intelligent and driven enough that they cannot be retained. But you HAVE to stop them. Unless you want to handicap them or something like that - a sentence worse than death for many - then you are forced to destroy them.
And this is from a liberal, in case there was misconception about that.
Yes, it is about stopping this happening. We all agree on that. The question is: 'Does killing these people reduce the murder rate?'
Listen again to what Jeremy Irons says and you'll know: The answer is 'No'.
Why? Surely this is a massive deterrent? In fact, it creates a society that is as brutal as the people that it says it opposes. This results in a violent society.
No, it is not about deterrent. Another argument that is either a misconception or in some cases a lie.
Let me turn the question to you, with two scenarios.
1) You are faced with sentencing a serial killer of high intelligence, with multiple escapes on their record, and they always resumed killing.
What do you do to stop their actions?
2) Someone is plotting a bombing in some public place. It is found they continually get released or escape when jailed, or that they spread their cause.
There are very few prisoners who keep escaping. There are prisons that are 'high security' which have a virtually spotless record. Again, though, no system is perfect, but why choose the one that doesn't work?
If someone is continually released when they pose a threat then the system has broken down and a public enquiry needs to be held to stop such insanity (of which I've never heard anyway). Again, why choose capital punishment when it leads to more deaths???
There are few, yes, which is why you do not see a significant net reduction in crime from the implementation of execution. But they do exist, and something must be done about them.
And I am still waiting on an alternative solution. Currently, we have only three main options:
1) Put them in some institution and leave everything up to chance
2) Kill them, thus preventing all future crime from them
3) Disable them while leaving them alive (how to do this without implementing something worse?)
@1RadicalOne there already is such a handicap, its called prison. Its called, physically preventing them from causing more harm, by not letting them have physical access to humans.
But what about those who achieve parole, or escape? Or the small number who have powerful political backers - some of the abortion doctor killers, for example - who lobby them out of jail in short order?
@1RadicalOne are you stupid? how often does someone on death row escape or get "early release" ? Also, someone that has never committed a crime is more likely to commit a crime than someone escaping from jail and committing another crime.I can use that same faulty logic to argue that everyone should be in prison even if they havent committed any crimes, because of the "what if" . Responses like yours comfort me that i am correct,as i have yet to hear a support argument that isnt stupid
1) Avoid insults - they weaken your arguments, not strengthen them.
2) Not escape or get released from death row - if they were on death row then they are not a problem. The problem is those put in average prisons, simply to be released, intentionally or not.
3) Yes, re-offense is rare, but it happens. Such as that pair who escaped in Wyoming last July.
4) "What if"? You do not simply arrest someone if they might commit a crime, but is it moral to let a likely offender hurt someone else first?
@1RadicalOne facts cannot be weakened by use of insults. Thats the beauty of them. If you have a free person that has never committed a crime, and you have a guy in prison for life for murder, the free guy with that has never commited a crime is more likely to commit a crime in the future than the guy in prison for life. So your logic is stupid and flawed since if the "what if" was a valid reason, then it would be more logical to arrest every human on earth than to implement capital punishent
Facts cannot, but when you use insults as an added element, it DOES damage the argument.
And you are strawman-ing my argument. Stop those who are LIKELY or, with some people, GUARANTEED to (re)offend. It is immoral to wait until the would-be criminal has a chance to destroy more lives until stopping him again.
Oh, and having plans and full intention of doing something - eg a murderer planning his attack, having already made the decision to kill - is also an equal crime.
@1RadicalOne im glad you tossed out the cliche use of the "straw-man". This is always a sure sign of losing a debate. Another fail in your post is that you have implied that people that have life in prison are "guaranteed" to all escape and commit more crimes, for you see, the second man in the analogy i gave , is in prison for life, yet you said he was "guaranteed" to re offend.
So my pointing out a logical fallacy somehow discredits my argument?
So that means when I am debating a moronic fool who claims evolution means a dog gives birth to a cat, and I point out that that is a strawman, I have validated creationism?
PLEASE.
"you have implied that people that have life in prison are "guaranteed" to all escape and commit more crimes"
More BS. Where did I say and/or imply that? Give me an exact quote.
yep far better to let them out after having served half their lenient sentence so they can re-offend because life was better on the inside - more drugs, more tv channels, better computer, free food, more rights, etc. For the small number in the UK detained indefinetely maybe Jeremy could volunteer to look after them for the rest of their life rather than give them a small injection and save a lot of money. Maybe when they release Peter Sutcliffe they could re-house him next to Jeremy.
I also find it amusing that many criminals do not mind going to prison in the United States of America. Compared to Russian gulags and German concentration camps, our prisons are 5-star hotels with some violent neighbors. Illegal aliens don't even mind going to prison. So, we should make conditions in such prisons so deplorable, that people are truly afraid of going to them. I'd cut around 50% of prison funding, while ensuring that no more than 5% of those cuts are job cuts. No more cable.
I also have to agree with a certain degree with "Victims families should choose". Instead, I'd rather simply clothe and feed criminals with the money made from FORCED labor. I'm not talking about death camps or working people to death, Im talking about giving them an honest salary...except half goes to restitution to the family/victim, and the other half goes to pay for their living expenses.
*shakes his head a bit* So, aside from the moral dilemma, it's fair to say that the man in this video supports the idea that the good, tax-paying citizens of a country must pay to house, clothe, feed, and educate those who have, indeed, committed crimes. In America, we spend about 40K/yr keeping a gentleman behind bars. Death row? I'd wipe it clean in 1 fell, swift move. Innocents face the death penalty? Yeah, but things happen for a reason. The wages of sin is death.
Catch him in the act and shoot him in the face, I would! However, this legal system is a piece of manipulative shit and you could find yourself on death row too, dont think you are immune. I know of atleast 8 innocent people who have been executed in the U.S. in the last 20 years, later evidence has proven it beyond all doubt. A guy was just released from death row for a rape/murder on DNA evidence, they had gotten him based on one eyewitness, the rest was circumstantial. This system is a fail
HEADHUNTER-NOPE-THERE IS ACTUALLY NO PROOF IN THE LAST FEW DECADES OF ANYONE BEING EXECUTED THAT WAS INNCOENT-NOT ONE...
Heres the facts, kids-no one knows if we get anything beyond this life-most "facts" say we don't. If you take this one life, this one chance to enjoy this beautiful world of ours away form someone, the only justice is that it gets taken from you.
Execution is a 100% deterrent-not one person executed has ever committed another crime
As heinous as their crime was, which happened based on a dare they had between each other, it would not have occurred to me to kill them. I do not have a murdering nature. I do not look to death as a way to even a score, solve a problem or right a wrong. I cannot say the same about my beloved country and probably never will.
If you saw the movie about Leopold and Loeb, the thrill-seeking upper class boys who killed a young boy and stuffed him in a sewer you would have an example of how the upper class gets away with muder. This was capital murder and they were up for the death penalty. Their defense lawyer, Clarence Darrow, played excellently by Orson Welles, gave a closing argument that brought tears to the judge's eyes and their lives were spared.
wen u kill someone u lose those human rights...u hav no mor rights than a piece of shit...F u acted of sound mind wen u killed someone.u deserve nofin but shit ur entire life.Our legal system is a joke anyway.Lets fix that before we evr consider the death penalty
Well, if you consider the fact that 123 innocent people have been killed because of the death penalty (DNA evidence later came up which proved that they were innocent AFTER they had been executed), no, it is not acceptable.
Also, the death penalty does NOT deter murder. Texas, the state with the most executions to date (239) also has the highest murder rate in the US, coincidence?
i do not agree with Jeremy,he is one of my favorite actors but i do not agree with him.who kills should be killed.this God law in all of his religions on earth.
god law? you don't need the holy bible, you need your mind which says what wrong and what right. why should god give you a mind if you shouldn't use it? if you should only believe what a religion tells you? in what century we live? how many wars there were, how much suffer because of religion? because of fanatics who seems not to use their mind. typical stupid americans!
To the genius Yakuzagen,if you witnessed your son or mother get killed by some one with no reason but to get robed? would you be ok with only 15 years in jail for the criminal ?! i know i will not be happy with this B.S. there are some people do not value other peoples live,why should we value theirs? why do we use the manual when we buy a new camera to know how to make it works,but when it comes to us we refuse to use the human manual which is made by our creator 'God' who said 'eye for eye" .
..."the human manual which is made by our creator 'God' who said 'eye for eye" . " you want kidding me right?
"would you be ok with only 15 years in jail for the criminal ?!"
the question is: does it change sth.? will the victim get alive, if the murderer is executed? are you better than this criminal, if you want someone's death because you're angry at him? i think the criminal was also angry at environment because get no job, he's a looser, had a bad childhood whatever.
Again in all religions God said who kills on purpose should be killed.who ever has a fucked up childhood or he is poor or his environment is bad, he still has a choice?do not give excuse for any one to commit a crime specially murder. if everyone steal and commit a fraud in your work place,would you do it because everyone around you do it and it is normal in the environment around you??? come on man, is this an excuse for you to be like them? you have a choice.
there is no justify for murder and other crime. i never say that, but a murderer is also a human. do you know what a human like this feel? how can you judge him? i can't believe that commiting crime is pleasure. no it isn't pleasure. instead of help this people to live a normal life, to delete the causes for this, you kill him. execution is also murder and a executioner is a murderer, is cursed with his job for nothing. nothing will change with death penalty.
And so a life for a life. Then ppl will think twice about hurting another individual. Its got nothing to do with good legal counsel. This just means you dont have a shifty enough lawyer to get you off a punishment you deserve. The number of executions when compared to accidental deaths is miniscule.
Your "life for a life" logic fails, not to mention you start off agreeing that it is no deterent, then try to say it is. In fact, the entirety of your comments are filled with self-contradiction. So much so that I'm left to wonder if english is your native toungue. If you kill a murderer, you are a murderer. The death penalty is premeditated murder.
I start off saying that the death penalty in the US is not a deterrant and then i explain why - saying that putting someone on death row for 30 years then giving them a cocktail of sedatves is no deterrent. If once the person is convicted and immediately executed (preferably in public) then YES it would be a deterrent and a bloody good one. A life for a life. You say the death penalty is premeditated murder, no it is justice. Because most ppl cant stomach it dosent mean it is wrong.
Unfortunately, even your public murder is no deterent, as the evidence has shown through history. My argument wasn't that it is wrong because most people won't stomach it, I say it is wrong to premeditately take a human's life (murder).
The Death Penalty is not a deterrent because in the US it is dragged out for so long that nobody is scared about it, you spend 30 years on death row then get a nice sedative cocktail. If you wrongfully kill/murder a person then you forfeit your own life, if you kill somebody in self defense then clearly you are not guilty. Jeremy Irons says no matter the crime, i disagree. If i steal £100000 from you, then what do i owe you? I owe you the money and punishment for the crime. A double Whammy.
xxxbxxxbrokenxxxheart cont.... years and there is very deep anger at our disproportionatately lenient system. Its a similiar case elsewhere in western and northern Europe. I believe the DP is deeply flawed. I believe in a tough system that forces proven offenders to think twice before terrorising people again. But this system must be humane, effective and act as a significant deterrent.
xXBrokenXxXHeartxXX- Thankyou for asking but I should let you know im British; we don't have thanksgiving here.
Like I said im also against the DP. It makes me very uncomfortable. But im equally uncomfortable with disproportionate punishment and thats a problem we have in western and northern Europe which makes a lot of people angry. I support Tony Blair's doctrine of 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'- but it got lost somewhere along the line.
The Death Penalty is a class weapon of terror excersized by the American Empire's ruling Imperialist Capitalist class. Free Troy Davis. Seven witness's have recanted their testimomy against Troy. The last two are one who is an alternative suspect. The other couldn't identify initially but could identify him two years later. Troy is a victum of a racist police 'get me a nigger' American justice.
Stupid comments from Mr jeremy.The ones who get the death penalty are, the murderers,the psychopaths,the Sexual Predators of Children not the economic disadvantage.Yes it would be accepted.
@edmatuk You didn't understand. What he's saying is that the poor are more likely to be given the death penalty. That is sick. Isn't it? Killed because you are poor. Some justice.
CULAVE,Thankyou.Emotion and the hate of the criminal is where we as decent humans need to change our "mindsets",and yes I strongly beleive that we SHOULD be able to act out of anger towards anyone who breaks our laws.
A tough prison regime yes to that, but with the death penalty at the end of the sentence which should be made as unpleasant as possible,25 years should be enough time for them to prove their innocence.Oh..we've all heard Tory promises before-that's all they are,disregard them.
cont... I believe proportionate punishment is very important but punishment must be effective. In the US the DP has simply not reduced crime. I share your anger at those who cannot bring themselves to criticise criminals directly and seem to be allergic to the word 'punishment'- these people are quite rare though. Im optimistic about Tory minister Nick Herbert. Frankly, I found his recent Birmingham speech inspiring. I genuinely think the Tories will reverse the offender before victim situation.
ahandbookonhanging; by alternative punishment I mean a whole life tariff with a tough prison regime for the worst crimes; the public is protected and the criminal is certainly paying for choosing to commit the crime. If vital evidence emerges to prove the convicts potential innocence they can be realeased; with the DP they can't. Believe me I understand what its like to suffer serious crime. Yobs forced me to leave my home. The effect has lasted to this day, six years later continued...
FuroraCeltica- Well in the Britain of the 1960S, the public (mostly) wanted it banned. In the Britain of 2008 the public (mostly) want it back. This could be explained by the fact violent crime levels have soared since then and our penal system is notoriously soft.
also- its a waiste of money and it is quit costly then just putting the person in jail for life. and so many people ACCUSED (meaning they didnt do it) get put on death penalty so ur taking an inisence persons life away . the government really needs to get their shit together im 14 and dont know much and dont say much but when i say something i feel strongly about it and mean it too.
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX- The majority of those on death row are most likely guilty- although there are also some innocents. I am also against the death penalty but im not against punishment. I also have strong views about this. Do you think if someone is PROVEN to have commited a serious crime they should be punished alternatively or are you completely against punishment?
xXBrOkEnXxXHeARTXXX- Thankyou for your reply. The thing you said about second chances caught my attention and made me wonder if you really think people should escape any punishment simply because its their first offence. The problem is in my the UK, criminals are allowed to commit hundreds (and im not exageratting) of offences before they are even incarcerated!
I really don't want to see a return of the DP but I can understand why people here do. Violent crime has shot up in recent cont...
this is my opinion about the death penalty- i am strongly!! against it!! lets say some one killed another and is put on a death penalty well all ur doing is what he did - causing another death- the fact ur actually taking another life away is what i hate im aboout second chances this country really needs to think twice about it because its just stupid .
To give a 'second chance' to a proven offender in a very serious crime, increases the suffering of the victim by denying them justice. If someone has had a spotless record but then goes out and commits a hideous crime, why should their victim have justice stolen? Its no good saying that because it is only a first offence its ok! That first offence may be a heinous offence.
ahandbookonhanging- well said. As you will see from my other comments I oppose the DP but I think proven convicted criminals should face much tougher sentences. The problem with a lot of these anti-DP videos is they suggest no alternative punishment. Mr Irons appears to be overtly sympathetic to people who have been found guilty of some sickening crimes. The DP has some truly serious flaws but too many campaigners are far too sympathetic to criminals. The victims are once again forgotten.
Thankyou CULAVE for your reply,though you do seem a bit vague as to just what tougher sentences should be.
There can only be ONE punishment for murder,The Death Penalty,no ifs or buts.We need to change ourselves and the way we view the criminal and it seems to me that most of the anti-DP supporters have no knowledge of loosing a loved one to a murderer.Make the punishment fit the crime-this should be made as gory as possible and carried out in public.Digusting?-Yes,but then so is murder.
i dont agree with him, but his voice makes me want to agree with him
positronicum97 1 month ago
The only rational way to deal with killers, rapists, and career felons is to bring back the idea of a penal colony. Ship them off to a remote island with one rule: don't leave. We're wasting too much money in the US keeping criminals in prison. If they refuse to live by the rules of our society, then so be it -- go live in your own.
KIFulgore 1 month ago
I am against the death penalty only because innocents have and will be there victims all too often.
If not for that I would execute, most murderers, all child molesters, and in reality anyone that looks at society as something to prey upon. Never contributing anything positive to the world only taking and hurting. They would all go!
rickcard 2 months ago
I always loved Jeremy Irons..now I know why! :D
paulslefthand 3 months ago
I've always loved Jeremy Irons...now I know why!! :D
paulslefthand 3 months ago
Well, a life for a life. People are informed nowadays but yet they murder. Why should we waste tax payers money for supervision, expensive prison facilities, food and electricity to keep murderers alife ?
spaghetti3331 3 months ago
man he sounds like scar
2devmoran 3 months ago
Norway stopped this by law in 1902, and the military desth penalty in 1979. Join us!
ingareinar007 4 months ago
I just came here for the audible chocolate.
NocturnalNorwegian 4 months ago
The jail system has to be changed altogether. We foolishly think that by subjecting criminals to sub-human conditions, they will stop. I believe that will only make them angrier. We should just try to give them psychological treatment, brainwashing if you will, to make sure they stop.
Horatio786 5 months ago
I agree. Life is indeed sacred. But if you willingly take a human life, you show that you have no respect for the sanctity of life. You are a menace and you must be stopped. If you kill a man, get a few years in jail, then get out and start killing again, the the blood of those innocents is one the hands of those to cowardly to make the right decision. If you kill, you should be killed in order to save people. Simple as that. Better one person die than many.
Draevan13 5 months ago
@Draevan13 Should the same apply to drunk drivers whom also kill innocent people?
swedanica 3 days ago
@MrJohnBoy1984 Did you even watch the video, or did you just rage comment without even hearing what he had to say?
DrManhattan1781 5 months ago
The death penalty is so immoral, people kill, rape, steal, because that is what humans do, there careless greedy and sick, but for a government to kill people is fucking wrong because there saying we own you, you disobey we'll destroy u instead of keeping them out of harms way.
sirbestnameever 6 months ago
Look at countries which have the death penalty such as Japan Singapore and Saudi Arabia and look at how low their crime rates are and look at how low their murder rates are and compare them to most other countries which no longer have the death penalty and most of those countries have got higher murder rates and higher crime rates, also if a person takes another persons life that person deserves to have their life taken, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
MrJohnboy1984 7 months ago
I fully support the death penalty, Jeremy Irons is an idiot and who gives a fuck about what he thinks, im tired of these idiots celebrities who think they know it all and who use their celebraity status to force their narrow minded beliefs upon everyone else, he and the others who are against the death penalty also claims that it doesn't act as a deterent and that it doesn't reduce crime, thats fuckin bullshit ( continued )
MrJohnboy1984 7 months ago
In a country where there is death penalty for a murder (not an accidental killing) a murderer knows that for a murder he/she will be killed, just as a person commiting a suicide knows that jumping under the train will kill him/her. It's not the state that kills the murderer, he kills himself with his own decision of committing a murder.
whopper652 7 months ago
@whopper652 | Sorry, it's still the STATE or the 12 jurors that makes the FINAL decision. I can't imagine having wrongfully condemned a person to death!
swedanica 7 months ago
@swedanica No, the state just ACCEPTS his decision to be killed (the decision he made planning and commiting a murder). Actually there is always a chance of wrongfully condemning a person to death, but it's the price we have to pay if we want to have a good penal system (it's just less evil than letting murderers live).
whopper652 7 months ago
@whopper652 No, it isn't. If you wrongfully condemn someone to death for a murder they didn't commit, then you've let the murder get away and killed an innocent person. If you don't execute the person, then the murderer gets away and, while you've wrongfully incarcerated an innocent, at least you haven't killed him. How could that possibly be more evil than letting murders live? Evil isn't nullified by other evil acts, only increased.
vivthefree 6 months ago
@whopper652 While that sounds good on paper, its really naive in real life.
HighFlyActionGuy 4 weeks ago
Jeremy Irons has a good voice and his voice is intresting and he is a good speeker and I also like how he explanes this stuff
fishhand360 8 months ago 2
There is no death penalty. Just more cardboard...
ScabbyCrabs 8 months ago
Jeremy Irons is an idiot, we are not interested in his views and the other stars who think they can shove their opinion down our throats.
Of course it reduces crimes, so he means to say if we not execute a serial killer and let the bastard out again he will be cured. .yeah right Jeremy - fuck off
So what the twat is saying is that poor people kill. .he is an idiot. .he needs to fuck off and go and try to act, asshole
suckcucker 10 months ago
@suckcucker Crime rates don't get reduced with the introduction of the death penalty. The statistics don't lie.
"let the bastard out again he will be cured"
How many serial killers do you know have been released from prison?
vivthefree 6 months ago
@vivthefree
Statistics have too many variables such as the availability of guns or the decreased sentence length. The world changes, and yes statistics can be mistaken/ lie. Don't jump to conclusions over a single propaganda video and check your sources in an objective way.
u3190 6 months ago
If you cant beat them... Join them.
DeadHandRed 10 months ago
Don't want to get involved.
Long story short, I think everyone has the right to live.
I just wanna see Jeremy Irons talking.
For him I do anything ~<3 Hnggg
*Dont kill me for presenting an opinion
GothicCurls9 10 months ago
@GothicCurls9 jeremy irons hnggg indeed!
iamkatiehearmerawrrr 8 months ago
I've never understood how people justify killing in general. It's wrong, morally, physically, in many many ways. I can see how someone can want to kill, but still why would you want to? "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" Killing is killing, no matter what. I just hope some day people can realize killing is wrong no matter what. There are alterenatives, and honestly killing someone is actually more expensive than holding them in prison. So some day people may realize kiling is wrong.
TheDMVproduction 11 months ago
I wonder if Jeremy Irons would fell the same if some maniac raped his daughters and chopped his wife into little pieces. What if some killer cut his sisters pregnant belly open and threw the fetus against the wall...
Actors should just SHUT THE FUCK UP!
You are nothing but a fucking actor... no different than a fucking cashier.
Your Fucking ego is outrageous thinking your thoughts matter to anyone.
Jeremy Irons FUCK YOU!
ThinkReal 11 months ago
@ThinkReal Step away from the large pile of cocaine, man. Slowly...
3starbadman 11 months ago
I love his voice! I could listen to him talk all day and night long!
elm495f3 11 months ago
One of the truly beautiful speeches...one which isn't about personal gaining or built upon the human weaknesses of fear or insecurity. That need to protect the frail human ego - which seems to dominate most the world these days. There's not a single enlightened argument for the death penalty...this speech reflects the most positive aspects of human nature and defines a boundary between humanity and self.
cliftonhooper 1 year ago
What about it being used as punishment that fits the crime? The death penalty targets the people who have commited terrible crimes not the economically disadvantaged. Did Arthur Gary Bishop deserve a voice? A lot of bad fucked up people like him get the death penalty. Some people like child molesters and serial killers don't deserve basic human rights because they are not human. They should also be tortured. Bishop wasn't a human being.Neither was Bundy.
alanred101 1 year ago
@alanred101
Yes they were human beings acting inhumane. And being human is the only thing you need to get granted the human rights.
bresophil 11 months ago
@bresophil Excuse me they were not human beings. Yeah come back to me if one of your family is raped and killed by a stranger and then see how you feel about their human rights. It's easy to say when your not the victim of one of these animals!
alanred101 11 months ago
@alanred101
Yes they are, they were born by humans, that is all that is needed to be considered human.
You might be right, maybe i would think differently if something happened to my family. But revenge is not the purpose of a punishment.
An issue like that cannot be decided over emotions, but rationality and international law. And death penalty is definitely a breach of the human right to live.
bresophil 11 months ago
@bresophil The punishment is justice for their crimes committed. It's not about revenge. Born humans yes but they become something else along the way, their victim had the right to live. If you want to classify these people as human they should not be entitled to that right for certain crimes.
alanred101 11 months ago
@alanred101
If they should or not, that is not yours or mine to decide. The right to live is a human right and applied to ALL humans, thats why it is written in the constitution.
bresophil 11 months ago
@bresophil I think it is up to us to decide what sort of example we set. I disagree completely I would not apply it to all humans but like I said I don't consider someone who has raped and killed children many times human.
alanred101 11 months ago
Comments section may as well be re-named "Daily mail readers"
Caael 1 year ago
I can't sit here and say that if someone were to kill my family member or torture them I wouldn't want them dead, who wouldn't it. eye for an eye. But an eye for eye leaves the world blind.
lovelylilbear 1 year ago 2
@lovelylilbear
I couldn't agree more.
bresophil 11 months ago
I don't agree with the death penalty, but when someone kills a child or a baby thats when I believe that then and there that those people deserve to die! It is in Inhumane to kill anyone no matter who, how or why! A child and a baby are defenceless and if any body is is stupid enough to kill a kid that show they have absolutely no heart! I have no feeling for those sort of people. THOSE ARE THE SORT OF PEOPLE THAT EVEN I WOLD BE WILL TO PULL THE SWITCH!!!!!!!
Grissom2010 1 year ago
NOT ALL HUMANS DESERVE TO LIVE! 2 WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT!
A bullet is a lot cheaper than housing and feeding these people who "kill and torture"
esawko 1 year ago
@esawko: Want revenge, become a cartoonist!
swedanica 1 year ago 5
@esawko "a bullet is a lot cheaper than housing and feeding..." contrary to popular belief, that is actually not true. Because of all the appeals people on death row have to go through, it ends up costing a LOT more to sentence someone to death then it does to put them in jail for a life sentence. I'm talking about $90,000 more per person on death row. And about $57.5 million annually. Look it up.
MeggieandAl 9 months ago
@esawko Sorry bud, but that's not how the saying goes.
Iteachu2beninja 9 months ago
It has got to be embarrassing for you americans that you are one of the few countries in world together with IRAN, CHINA and LIBYA that practices the death penalty.
fbruvik 1 year ago
Comment removed
fbruvik 1 year ago
once again i have listened to this argument:' the right to life, we are all human beings etc etc'. as before i state the same- it is for the highest good. he mentions innocents, young offenders deaths etc etc, and finale 'do we want to cross the line and be like them?' no, we want to be free of them, once for all, so death it is, a life for a life.
revv12 1 year ago
@revv12 if you are going to cite the old testament as support for capital punishment, then atleast expect the same requirements for condemning, In the old testament, atealst 2 or 3 witnesses were required for a conviction. Today, people can get convicted of things they never did and found "guilty" with no proof or even any witnesses. In fact, the requirements were so just, that very few capital punishments were recorded.
pianokid100 1 year ago
People are so annoyed and worried about murderers and want to have empathy for them but if only we are talking of taking a life here, then let's extend the conversation to mean more than just humans. Then why even kill animals? Why eat them? I mean, even that is a life that you are killing, aren't they? What about this moral problem? Penalize eating of non-veg then. I mean you'd HAVE to stand up for that too.
ravi00090 1 year ago
@williamblevin well the prisons in europe are nothing like in the u.s. they're almost like hotels compared to the states. where i live they get to have few days "vacation" from prison now and then (not ofcourse if you're murderer etc) they have tv's and everything but strangely, it's a place nobody wants to go ;)
Darusdei 1 year ago
So... YouTube needs a 'love' button :]
Chloe76767 1 year ago
i've heard enough thanks jeremy, but the bottom line is this, 'the highest moral good of society'. let all the do gooders pontificate on! but someone;s daughter was raped and murdered, a child abused, etc etc, where thay not human beings who only asked for the right to live too? before it was snuffed out that is by someone else's warped sense of their right to trample on the victims rights and impose there's! need i go on? when proven guilty, beyond doubt, death it is and must be! life a joke !
revv12 1 year ago
@revv12
Wow, then you missed the point of his sign off. Which is, do we really want to join them? Do we want to be just as low as them? Or do we lead by a better example? Rehabilitation or institutionalising people is far more appropriate. You can judge a society by simply looking at how they treat their prisoners.
Totaltwist 1 year ago
@revv12 You didn't listen to what he said. Every point you make/imply is invalidated by what he said. Please listen to it again.
alan111best 1 year ago 8
if thare is murdere most be judged in fare full fation
mhmdnouh 1 year ago
this is bull shit you should not keep the right to live if you take it away from some one else just think if a man kill your entire family would you want him to live or want him to have a 7 year sentence so you can be buddy's with him
ZackAttack261 1 year ago
@ZackAttack261
Have a think about what you've said. Would I feel anger, hatred towards someone who killed my family? Yes, of course. But no decent society should base its decisions on such feelings. We need to look at facts.
What if it was proved that the death penalty led to far more murders - would you want people to be murdered simply because of the way you felt? Are your feelings worth the loss of human life? I hope not.
alan111best 1 year ago 12
@alan111best BUT IS IT MORALLY CORRECT TO LET HIM LIVE....logically NO
so thus it is not civilized or just
ZackAttack261 1 year ago
@ZackAttack261 When the State kills it is murder. How can murder be moral?
alan111best 1 year ago 2
@alan111best ....Wow
Here is a definition for you
Murder. is the UNLAWFUL killing of another human being with "malice aforethought",
so its not murder if he deserves it.
ZackAttack261 1 year ago
@ZackAttack261
Yes, that is one definition. This, however, is what others say:
Murder is both a legal and a moral term, that are not always coincident. It may be legal to kill, but still murder in the moral sense. Opponents of the death penalty argue that it is simply murder by the state. Opponents of abortion argue that it is legalized murder.
As for someone 'deserving it' this is an opinion as to what you think is best. Pity the facts don't agree with that.
alan111best 1 year ago 2
@alan111best that was in Websters dictionary Their is a diffrence between killing and murder
And abortion is MURDER because that baby has done nothing to anyone
ZackAttack261 1 year ago
a fabulous actor, an intelligent man which talk about an evident cause/
verobin1 1 year ago
Awesome! He lays on the reasons against the death penalty like a barrage from a machine gun! I love Irons already and this only added to my love.
GuerrillaAtheism 1 year ago
There are times killing the criminal is the safest option. The most clear-cut example is violent criminals with a history of escapes; rather than risk their causing more damage and death, it is simply safer to kill them.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne
If you listen to what he says rather than focus on what you think, you'll find that the second sentence states that it doesn't work. 'Countries which have the death penalty don't have lower crime rates than those who do.' So to say that people might escape, or that they might do this or that.... 'Countries which have the death penalty don't have lower crime rates than those who do.'
Get the point? If you don't get lower crime rates then you don't get lower crime rates.
alan111best 1 year ago 4
It is not about overall lower crime rates. But take the couple who escaped from the Wyoming prison this summer, and immediately resumed killing.
They were obviously intelligent and driven enough to escape. And it could well happen again. Are you going to jeopardize the lives of what are likely several people to protect the rights of one person?
What else could you do? Make them a quadriplegic? That would be even more unpleasant.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne There are drawbacks to both approaches. There is no perfect system.
But what is your objective? To save lives? If so, capital punishment does not work - it leads to more deaths.
There is no perfect system - but to advocate the one that works worse... why?
alan111best 1 year ago 2
Correct, there is no perfect system.
But the life of one is less valuable with the life of multiple people, obviously. And I only advocate the death penalty for would-be re-offenders.
And other crimes - rape, for instance, or some kinds of abuse, leave victims even worse off than dead.
And what of extreme things like genocide, terrorism, or even terricide? Would you give someone who tried to kill hundreds - eg Times Square bomber - a chance to succeed? Or millions, as some try (think nuclear)?
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne
No matter what the crime - we have to be above the people we condemn. We also have to use whatever works best - even if our emotions make us want to hurt those who hurt us.
alan111best 1 year ago
It is not about what you want, and revenge. That is a lie, or at least a misconception, that is spread, sometimes intentionally, sometimes intentionally.
It is about stopping them. And there are people intelligent and driven enough that they cannot be retained. But you HAVE to stop them. Unless you want to handicap them or something like that - a sentence worse than death for many - then you are forced to destroy them.
And this is from a liberal, in case there was misconception about that.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne
Yes, it is about stopping this happening. We all agree on that. The question is: 'Does killing these people reduce the murder rate?'
Listen again to what Jeremy Irons says and you'll know: The answer is 'No'.
Why? Surely this is a massive deterrent? In fact, it creates a society that is as brutal as the people that it says it opposes. This results in a violent society.
If something doesn't work, why would you want it?
alan111best 1 year ago 2
No, it is not about deterrent. Another argument that is either a misconception or in some cases a lie.
Let me turn the question to you, with two scenarios.
1) You are faced with sentencing a serial killer of high intelligence, with multiple escapes on their record, and they always resumed killing.
What do you do to stop their actions?
2) Someone is plotting a bombing in some public place. It is found they continually get released or escape when jailed, or that they spread their cause.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne
There are very few prisoners who keep escaping. There are prisons that are 'high security' which have a virtually spotless record. Again, though, no system is perfect, but why choose the one that doesn't work?
If someone is continually released when they pose a threat then the system has broken down and a public enquiry needs to be held to stop such insanity (of which I've never heard anyway). Again, why choose capital punishment when it leads to more deaths???
alan111best 1 year ago
There are few, yes, which is why you do not see a significant net reduction in crime from the implementation of execution. But they do exist, and something must be done about them.
And I am still waiting on an alternative solution. Currently, we have only three main options:
1) Put them in some institution and leave everything up to chance
2) Kill them, thus preventing all future crime from them
3) Disable them while leaving them alive (how to do this without implementing something worse?)
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne there already is such a handicap, its called prison. Its called, physically preventing them from causing more harm, by not letting them have physical access to humans.
pianokid100 1 year ago
But what about those who achieve parole, or escape? Or the small number who have powerful political backers - some of the abortion doctor killers, for example - who lobby them out of jail in short order?
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne are you stupid? how often does someone on death row escape or get "early release" ? Also, someone that has never committed a crime is more likely to commit a crime than someone escaping from jail and committing another crime.I can use that same faulty logic to argue that everyone should be in prison even if they havent committed any crimes, because of the "what if" . Responses like yours comfort me that i am correct,as i have yet to hear a support argument that isnt stupid
pianokid100 1 year ago
1) Avoid insults - they weaken your arguments, not strengthen them.
2) Not escape or get released from death row - if they were on death row then they are not a problem. The problem is those put in average prisons, simply to be released, intentionally or not.
3) Yes, re-offense is rare, but it happens. Such as that pair who escaped in Wyoming last July.
4) "What if"? You do not simply arrest someone if they might commit a crime, but is it moral to let a likely offender hurt someone else first?
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne facts cannot be weakened by use of insults. Thats the beauty of them. If you have a free person that has never committed a crime, and you have a guy in prison for life for murder, the free guy with that has never commited a crime is more likely to commit a crime in the future than the guy in prison for life. So your logic is stupid and flawed since if the "what if" was a valid reason, then it would be more logical to arrest every human on earth than to implement capital punishent
pianokid100 1 year ago
Facts cannot, but when you use insults as an added element, it DOES damage the argument.
And you are strawman-ing my argument. Stop those who are LIKELY or, with some people, GUARANTEED to (re)offend. It is immoral to wait until the would-be criminal has a chance to destroy more lives until stopping him again.
Oh, and having plans and full intention of doing something - eg a murderer planning his attack, having already made the decision to kill - is also an equal crime.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
@1RadicalOne im glad you tossed out the cliche use of the "straw-man". This is always a sure sign of losing a debate. Another fail in your post is that you have implied that people that have life in prison are "guaranteed" to all escape and commit more crimes, for you see, the second man in the analogy i gave , is in prison for life, yet you said he was "guaranteed" to re offend.
pianokid100 1 year ago
So my pointing out a logical fallacy somehow discredits my argument?
So that means when I am debating a moronic fool who claims evolution means a dog gives birth to a cat, and I point out that that is a strawman, I have validated creationism?
PLEASE.
"you have implied that people that have life in prison are "guaranteed" to all escape and commit more crimes"
More BS. Where did I say and/or imply that? Give me an exact quote.
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
Wow, very moving and persuasive.
ChuckyJesus666 1 year ago
yep far better to let them out after having served half their lenient sentence so they can re-offend because life was better on the inside - more drugs, more tv channels, better computer, free food, more rights, etc. For the small number in the UK detained indefinetely maybe Jeremy could volunteer to look after them for the rest of their life rather than give them a small injection and save a lot of money. Maybe when they release Peter Sutcliffe they could re-house him next to Jeremy.
innit27 1 year ago
It always amazes me how knowledgeable people - on the outside - are about prison life!
swedanica 1 year ago 4
@innit27 are you sure it's cheaper to execute someone than to lock them up? Do some research, you may be surprised...
Breadfan01 1 year ago
I also find it amusing that many criminals do not mind going to prison in the United States of America. Compared to Russian gulags and German concentration camps, our prisons are 5-star hotels with some violent neighbors. Illegal aliens don't even mind going to prison. So, we should make conditions in such prisons so deplorable, that people are truly afraid of going to them. I'd cut around 50% of prison funding, while ensuring that no more than 5% of those cuts are job cuts. No more cable.
BobbyBlueBubbles 2 years ago
Just wondering if you speak from personal experience?
swedanica 2 years ago
I also have to agree with a certain degree with "Victims families should choose". Instead, I'd rather simply clothe and feed criminals with the money made from FORCED labor. I'm not talking about death camps or working people to death, Im talking about giving them an honest salary...except half goes to restitution to the family/victim, and the other half goes to pay for their living expenses.
BobbyBlueBubbles 2 years ago
*shakes his head a bit* So, aside from the moral dilemma, it's fair to say that the man in this video supports the idea that the good, tax-paying citizens of a country must pay to house, clothe, feed, and educate those who have, indeed, committed crimes. In America, we spend about 40K/yr keeping a gentleman behind bars. Death row? I'd wipe it clean in 1 fell, swift move. Innocents face the death penalty? Yeah, but things happen for a reason. The wages of sin is death.
BobbyBlueBubbles 2 years ago
couldnt agree more; its totally barbaric, killing to satisfy a need for revenge, one big violent circle
PidgeonSprout 2 years ago
murder is murder, if done by an individual or the state. and anyone who can even contemplate killing another person has a mental defect.
thuggie1 2 years ago 3
so the ft hood murderer should just go to prison?
NormanJoey2004 2 years ago
Catch him in the act and shoot him in the face, I would! However, this legal system is a piece of manipulative shit and you could find yourself on death row too, dont think you are immune. I know of atleast 8 innocent people who have been executed in the U.S. in the last 20 years, later evidence has proven it beyond all doubt. A guy was just released from death row for a rape/murder on DNA evidence, they had gotten him based on one eyewitness, the rest was circumstantial. This system is a fail
guitarplayer4real 2 years ago
Yes, for the rest of his life.
swedanica 2 years ago
@swedanica why would you give him the chance to escape by sending him to prison
ZackAttack261 1 year ago
Fine Jeremy, if somebody kills your loved one the state can send them to prison. If somebody kills mine I want them turned into plant food.
Victims families should choose!
anyfekinnamewilldo 2 years ago
i agree with jeremy
sm0k3s4v3 2 years ago 2
thanks 4 uploading this video. i love jeremy irons. i listened 2 what he said, and i aggree. genna
GennaMGL 2 years ago 2
By the by, who cares what Scar has to say about the death penalty?
He's an ACTOR....
NormanJoey2004 2 years ago
Chances are people would pay more attention to him and listen to what he has to say. Now, who cares what you say???
sweetboy81 2 years ago
HEADHUNTER-NOPE-THERE IS ACTUALLY NO PROOF IN THE LAST FEW DECADES OF ANYONE BEING EXECUTED THAT WAS INNCOENT-NOT ONE...
Heres the facts, kids-no one knows if we get anything beyond this life-most "facts" say we don't. If you take this one life, this one chance to enjoy this beautiful world of ours away form someone, the only justice is that it gets taken from you.
Execution is a 100% deterrent-not one person executed has ever committed another crime
NormanJoey2004 2 years ago
According to your words pal, Texas MUST be the safest place on the planet... yeah right.
sweetboy81 2 years ago
Well that is a lie. Troy Anthony Davis for one. There're more.
starrynightuk 2 years ago
i love jeremy lrons
samora18muslima 2 years ago 2
thax i love this veduio
samora18muslima 2 years ago
As heinous as their crime was, which happened based on a dare they had between each other, it would not have occurred to me to kill them. I do not have a murdering nature. I do not look to death as a way to even a score, solve a problem or right a wrong. I cannot say the same about my beloved country and probably never will.
aftereight01 2 years ago
If you saw the movie about Leopold and Loeb, the thrill-seeking upper class boys who killed a young boy and stuffed him in a sewer you would have an example of how the upper class gets away with muder. This was capital murder and they were up for the death penalty. Their defense lawyer, Clarence Darrow, played excellently by Orson Welles, gave a closing argument that brought tears to the judge's eyes and their lives were spared.
aftereight01 2 years ago
wen u kill someone u lose those human rights...u hav no mor rights than a piece of shit...F u acted of sound mind wen u killed someone.u deserve nofin but shit ur entire life.Our legal system is a joke anyway.Lets fix that before we evr consider the death penalty
ck27891 2 years ago
You're 61 years old Mr irons...
you're planning to live a 61 years again...
if someone come and kill u and takes your future, what do u think abt him?
if smone take your children's life?
if an evil soul drops your wife's blood?
is it acceptable?
it is unacceptable.
But although someone is avare of this penatly and kill someone. Death penalty is definetely acceptle.
drinkIrun 2 years ago
Well, if you consider the fact that 123 innocent people have been killed because of the death penalty (DNA evidence later came up which proved that they were innocent AFTER they had been executed), no, it is not acceptable.
Also, the death penalty does NOT deter murder. Texas, the state with the most executions to date (239) also has the highest murder rate in the US, coincidence?
Headhunter004 2 years ago
Nice speech. It makes me think about my old conceptions of death penalty...
paroquiadoabcd 2 years ago
Which was?
swedanica 2 years ago
best video ive seen in youtube so far
tulio84z 2 years ago
i do not agree with Jeremy,he is one of my favorite actors but i do not agree with him.who kills should be killed.this God law in all of his religions on earth.
drvirus13 2 years ago
god law? you don't need the holy bible, you need your mind which says what wrong and what right. why should god give you a mind if you shouldn't use it? if you should only believe what a religion tells you? in what century we live? how many wars there were, how much suffer because of religion? because of fanatics who seems not to use their mind. typical stupid americans!
yakuzagen 2 years ago
@drvirus13
yakuzagen 2 years ago
To the genius Yakuzagen,if you witnessed your son or mother get killed by some one with no reason but to get robed? would you be ok with only 15 years in jail for the criminal ?! i know i will not be happy with this B.S. there are some people do not value other peoples live,why should we value theirs? why do we use the manual when we buy a new camera to know how to make it works,but when it comes to us we refuse to use the human manual which is made by our creator 'God' who said 'eye for eye" .
drvirus13 2 years ago
..."the human manual which is made by our creator 'God' who said 'eye for eye" . " you want kidding me right?
"would you be ok with only 15 years in jail for the criminal ?!"
the question is: does it change sth.? will the victim get alive, if the murderer is executed? are you better than this criminal, if you want someone's death because you're angry at him? i think the criminal was also angry at environment because get no job, he's a looser, had a bad childhood whatever.
yakuzagen 2 years ago
like i know the bible says also something like love your enemy or maybe forgiveness, doesn't it? but i'm not religious like you perhaps note!
yakuzagen 2 years ago
dear yakuzagen..
Again in all religions God said who kills on purpose should be killed.who ever has a fucked up childhood or he is poor or his environment is bad, he still has a choice?do not give excuse for any one to commit a crime specially murder. if everyone steal and commit a fraud in your work place,would you do it because everyone around you do it and it is normal in the environment around you??? come on man, is this an excuse for you to be like them? you have a choice.
God bless you
drvirus13 2 years ago
there is no justify for murder and other crime. i never say that, but a murderer is also a human. do you know what a human like this feel? how can you judge him? i can't believe that commiting crime is pleasure. no it isn't pleasure. instead of help this people to live a normal life, to delete the causes for this, you kill him. execution is also murder and a executioner is a murderer, is cursed with his job for nothing. nothing will change with death penalty.
yakuzagen 2 years ago
well most religions give you the authority to give the death penalty for people who wwaste there life.
albokiller23 2 years ago
Bravo!
s4stem 2 years ago
This is powerful!
Thank you for posting this.
nathanforst1 2 years ago
And so a life for a life. Then ppl will think twice about hurting another individual. Its got nothing to do with good legal counsel. This just means you dont have a shifty enough lawyer to get you off a punishment you deserve. The number of executions when compared to accidental deaths is miniscule.
takewhole 2 years ago
Your "life for a life" logic fails, not to mention you start off agreeing that it is no deterent, then try to say it is. In fact, the entirety of your comments are filled with self-contradiction. So much so that I'm left to wonder if english is your native toungue. If you kill a murderer, you are a murderer. The death penalty is premeditated murder.
VonSchnutze 2 years ago
I start off saying that the death penalty in the US is not a deterrant and then i explain why - saying that putting someone on death row for 30 years then giving them a cocktail of sedatves is no deterrent. If once the person is convicted and immediately executed (preferably in public) then YES it would be a deterrent and a bloody good one. A life for a life. You say the death penalty is premeditated murder, no it is justice. Because most ppl cant stomach it dosent mean it is wrong.
takewhole 2 years ago
Unfortunately, even your public murder is no deterent, as the evidence has shown through history. My argument wasn't that it is wrong because most people won't stomach it, I say it is wrong to premeditately take a human's life (murder).
VonSchnutze 2 years ago
The Death Penalty is not a deterrent because in the US it is dragged out for so long that nobody is scared about it, you spend 30 years on death row then get a nice sedative cocktail. If you wrongfully kill/murder a person then you forfeit your own life, if you kill somebody in self defense then clearly you are not guilty. Jeremy Irons says no matter the crime, i disagree. If i steal £100000 from you, then what do i owe you? I owe you the money and punishment for the crime. A double Whammy.
takewhole 2 years ago
"...do we really want to join them?"
Wow! Strong sign off.
PseudoVoodoo 2 years ago 4
Post-natal abortions get a trial by a jury.
Pre-natal death penalties get no trial.
Excuse me if I don't give a fuck if some asshole who poisons, rapes or stabs some kid to death gets the electric chair...
SirWinstonChurchill 2 years ago
Pos-natal abortion...
Jeremy plays many roles of characters who deserve to die...
SirWinstonChurchill 2 years ago
Charley manson case?
staradamj 2 years ago
death is a release not a punishment
and you have no right to life
MarcusTheReverent 2 years ago
An eye for an eye thats all i got to say
talall2000 3 years ago
xxxbxxxbrokenxxxheart cont.... years and there is very deep anger at our disproportionatately lenient system. Its a similiar case elsewhere in western and northern Europe. I believe the DP is deeply flawed. I believe in a tough system that forces proven offenders to think twice before terrorising people again. But this system must be humane, effective and act as a significant deterrent.
Thankyou for your reply and kind comment
Have a nice thanksgiving
CULAVE 3 years ago
=] how was yer thanksgiving? mins was.. ookkaayyz XD lolz
and well we all have our opinions i just hate to see a life taken away thats all =[
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX 3 years ago
xXBrokenXxXHeartxXX- Thankyou for asking but I should let you know im British; we don't have thanksgiving here.
Like I said im also against the DP. It makes me very uncomfortable. But im equally uncomfortable with disproportionate punishment and thats a problem we have in western and northern Europe which makes a lot of people angry. I support Tony Blair's doctrine of 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'- but it got lost somewhere along the line.
Thanks again.
Regards
CULAVE 3 years ago
hi again!
xXXxkatyaxXXx 3 years ago
its xxxbxxxbrokenxxxheart on my main account
xXXxkatyaxXXx 3 years ago
xXXXxkatyaxXXx- hello; how are you?
CULAVE 3 years ago
It's rather amusing that people feel the need to swear, in order to drive their point across. Once the swearing start -- no one listens.
swedanica 3 years ago
The Death Penalty is a class weapon of terror excersized by the American Empire's ruling Imperialist Capitalist class. Free Troy Davis. Seven witness's have recanted their testimomy against Troy. The last two are one who is an alternative suspect. The other couldn't identify initially but could identify him two years later. Troy is a victum of a racist police 'get me a nigger' American justice.
obrienkims 3 years ago
If anyone care to help, please go to troyanthonydavis(dot)org
Best of luck to him and his family!
swedanica 3 years ago
Stupid comments from Mr jeremy.The ones who get the death penalty are, the murderers,the psychopaths,the Sexual Predators of Children not the economic disadvantage.Yes it would be accepted.
edmatuk 3 years ago
Not always true.
swedanica 3 years ago
@edmatuk You didn't understand. What he's saying is that the poor are more likely to be given the death penalty. That is sick. Isn't it? Killed because you are poor. Some justice.
alan111best 1 year ago
CULAVE,Thankyou.Emotion and the hate of the criminal is where we as decent humans need to change our "mindsets",and yes I strongly beleive that we SHOULD be able to act out of anger towards anyone who breaks our laws.
A tough prison regime yes to that, but with the death penalty at the end of the sentence which should be made as unpleasant as possible,25 years should be enough time for them to prove their innocence.Oh..we've all heard Tory promises before-that's all they are,disregard them.
ahandbookonhanging 3 years ago
cont... I believe proportionate punishment is very important but punishment must be effective. In the US the DP has simply not reduced crime. I share your anger at those who cannot bring themselves to criticise criminals directly and seem to be allergic to the word 'punishment'- these people are quite rare though. Im optimistic about Tory minister Nick Herbert. Frankly, I found his recent Birmingham speech inspiring. I genuinely think the Tories will reverse the offender before victim situation.
CULAVE 3 years ago
ahandbookonhanging; by alternative punishment I mean a whole life tariff with a tough prison regime for the worst crimes; the public is protected and the criminal is certainly paying for choosing to commit the crime. If vital evidence emerges to prove the convicts potential innocence they can be realeased; with the DP they can't. Believe me I understand what its like to suffer serious crime. Yobs forced me to leave my home. The effect has lasted to this day, six years later continued...
CULAVE 3 years ago
i say we replace capital punishment with slavery! it'd be way more cost efficient!
...i did intend that to be a joke, but now it doesn't sound so bad..
MrJud 3 years ago
Why should anyone take a rich celebrity seriously? Also, the death penalty was abolished in European countries against public opinion.
FuroraCeltica 3 years ago
So monetary and social status is a good telltale, eh?
Watch out RICH & FAMOUS! :)
swedanica 3 years ago
FuroraCeltica- Well in the Britain of the 1960S, the public (mostly) wanted it banned. In the Britain of 2008 the public (mostly) want it back. This could be explained by the fact violent crime levels have soared since then and our penal system is notoriously soft.
CULAVE 3 years ago
also- its a waiste of money and it is quit costly then just putting the person in jail for life. and so many people ACCUSED (meaning they didnt do it) get put on death penalty so ur taking an inisence persons life away . the government really needs to get their shit together im 14 and dont know much and dont say much but when i say something i feel strongly about it and mean it too.
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX 3 years ago
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX- The majority of those on death row are most likely guilty- although there are also some innocents. I am also against the death penalty but im not against punishment. I also have strong views about this. Do you think if someone is PROVEN to have commited a serious crime they should be punished alternatively or are you completely against punishment?
CULAVE 3 years ago
well
im for punishment but not for taking a life away
so im 100% against the death penalty
there are so many other ways u can handle certain situations
like this.
-sorry for the late reply
lolz
and happy early thanks giving!
-katya
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX 3 years ago
xXBrOkEnXxXHeARTXXX- Thankyou for your reply. The thing you said about second chances caught my attention and made me wonder if you really think people should escape any punishment simply because its their first offence. The problem is in my the UK, criminals are allowed to commit hundreds (and im not exageratting) of offences before they are even incarcerated!
I really don't want to see a return of the DP but I can understand why people here do. Violent crime has shot up in recent cont...
CULAVE 3 years ago
xXBrokenxxxheartzxx- my reply is in two parts. please scroll down to read both. Thankyou
CULAVE 3 years ago
this is my opinion about the death penalty- i am strongly!! against it!! lets say some one killed another and is put on a death penalty well all ur doing is what he did - causing another death- the fact ur actually taking another life away is what i hate im aboout second chances this country really needs to think twice about it because its just stupid .
xXBr0kEnXxXHeArtzxX 3 years ago
To give a 'second chance' to a proven offender in a very serious crime, increases the suffering of the victim by denying them justice. If someone has had a spotless record but then goes out and commits a hideous crime, why should their victim have justice stolen? Its no good saying that because it is only a first offence its ok! That first offence may be a heinous offence.
CULAVE 3 years ago
The death penalty IS irreversable.
So is murder.
Everyone has the right to live-but what about murder victims Jeremy?- you don't mention them.
ahandbookonhanging 3 years ago
ahandbookonhanging- well said. As you will see from my other comments I oppose the DP but I think proven convicted criminals should face much tougher sentences. The problem with a lot of these anti-DP videos is they suggest no alternative punishment. Mr Irons appears to be overtly sympathetic to people who have been found guilty of some sickening crimes. The DP has some truly serious flaws but too many campaigners are far too sympathetic to criminals. The victims are once again forgotten.
CULAVE 3 years ago
my 'other comments' must be on a different video
CULAVE 3 years ago
Thankyou CULAVE for your reply,though you do seem a bit vague as to just what tougher sentences should be.
There can only be ONE punishment for murder,The Death Penalty,no ifs or buts.We need to change ourselves and the way we view the criminal and it seems to me that most of the anti-DP supporters have no knowledge of loosing a loved one to a murderer.Make the punishment fit the crime-this should be made as gory as possible and carried out in public.Digusting?-Yes,but then so is murder.
ahandbookonhanging 3 years ago