Bad beat/Moaning/Venting thread - Mammy told me not to come.

[Raoul Duke III]

Ha, yeah the French have ridic noses.

But they wear them with such elan. Even ze laydeez.

[Raoul Duke III]

I mean this is the home page of the Indo GE 2020 section right now. Shameless and more than a little worrying TBH.

It is the story of the day.

It's Mary Lou's own fault. If she had handled the question properly on Primetime, we'd all be talking about something else.

This is what happens when you have a political party that simultaneously tries to be both inside our republic of laws while also reassuring those within its own ranks that consider themselves firmly outside the law.
Dump the masked men and SF could actually become the no 1 party on this island. Except they're not going to do that, are they?

[Raoul Duke III]

And to conclude matters political, Trump has fired Lt Col Vindman (and his brother).

Clearly feels the leash is off. Expect even more demented levels of nuttiness over the next 9 months.

[The Situation]

Fairly stormy looking in both Dublin and Edinburgh tomorrow, two dour low scoring matches prob likely.

[Opr]

Opr

[pokerhand]

What Murdrum said. No civilised state should execute people, it is morally reprehensible and no amount of 'what about?' (Hitler, Pol Pot, insert villain of your own choice) changes that.

So why is France, which I think is one of your more popular example of a civilised state, were still doing public executions as recently as 1977, and the most recent available poll from 2013 (as per Wikipedia) shows that 50% of French people were in favour of reintroducing capital punishment?

What is so morally reprehensible about it?

I say the damage we are doing to our planet is more morally reprehensible than capital punishment.

[ArmaniJeans]

So why is France, which I think is one of your more popular example of a civilised state, were still doing public executions as recently as 1977, and the most recent available poll from 2013 (as per Wikipedia) shows that 50% of French people were in favour of reintroducing capital punishment?

What is so morally reprehensible about it?

I say the damage we are doing to our planet is more morally reprehensible than capital punishment.

I'm going to go out on a limb (), and say this is not true.
Public executions might be 1877? Or possibly during WW2. But not 1977.

[pokerhand]

I'm going to go out on a limb (), and say this is not true.
Public executions might be 1877? Or possibly during WW2. But not 1977.

Quote: Convicted murderer Hamida Djandoubi became the last person to meet his end by the “National Razor” after he was executed by the guillotine in 1977 .


Edit: Hmm... seem it was a private execution... But it still is capital punishment.... So let not split hairs here.

[ArmaniJeans]

Quote: Convicted murderer Hamida Djandoubi became the last person to meet his end by the “National Razor” after he was executed by the guillotine in 1977 .


Edit: Hmm... seem it was a private execution... But it still is capital punishment.... So let not split hairs here.

Hardly splitting hairs. You said 'public executions', and all that entails.
Obviously it's not particularly unknown that the UK still executed people in the 60s and France in the 70s. And indeed Ireland still sentenced people to death into the early 1980s without ultimately carrying it out.

[Mellor]

... as we require both a guilty act AND a guilty mind for almost any crime for which capital punishment could conceivably be used.

We cannot ever be 100% sure. In the absence of that, how can we ever risk being wrong?

The risk of executing an innocent person is absolutely valid grounds in itself to oppose capital punishment. The fact innocent people have been executed is conclusive evidence that it doesn't work.

But I also think the above prove ignores the other massive reason against it. If killing people is morally wrong, that should include revenge killing. It's human nature to not care when the person is a sadistic animal. But there are very little grounds to support it other than revenge.


[QUOTE=pokerhand;1117642]I never said I was in favour of it. I simply asked were there no circumstances under which capital punishment is justified. I don't really see much different between the individual carrying out the deed v the state.We can all think of situations where reacting by killing somebody is understandable. There are situations where I know I would probably do it, and many would understand.
Understandable isn't the same as justifiable. That reaction is still manslaughter.
The action is driven by anger and revenge. It's an emotional reaction and again, understandable.


The state can't have emotional reactions. They need to a justification.
It doesn't reform people, it's not a disincentive, it doesn't save the state money (it costs money). What benefit does capital punishment achieve?

I asked myself, how do I feel about capital punishment for Hitler, pedophiles, serial killers, etc... and I would struggle to find a reason not to be in favour of capital punishment under certain circumstances. Sometimes you just have to kill the rabid dog...

I find it ironic that you are suggesting certain people as lesser humans.
And using Hitler as an example.

Edit: Hmm... seem it was a private execution... But it still is capital punishment.... So let not split hairs here.

How is it splitting hairs? He was referign to the public part.
I don't think anyone dispute executions happen. Somebody was executed in the US last Thursday.

[Guest]

An article in the IT about the use of WhatsApp in the GAA. Not exactly what I expected, I thought it was going down the type of talk that occurs in the group chats but it was actually GDPR, I thought the quote they used was quite good

Saying you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.

SPOILER

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/w...65494?mode=amp

[Raoul Duke III]

Four 11-year old boys in the house for a sleepover party. Mrs Duke wisely gone to the pub. They are busy calling each other 'gay' every time I stick my head in.
Where is Comrade Collie when you need him?

One of them up since 3 complaining of a sore tummy. Hardly surprising when you consume your own bodyweight in sweets.

Deposited back to his own gaff with relief. Too early to start drinking?

[ComradeCollie]

Four 11-year old boys in the house for a sleepover party. Mrs Duke wisely gone to the pub. They are busy calling each other 'gay' every time I stick my head in.
Where is Comrade Collie when you need him?

Lol, those high pitched voices are a nightmare for me. Had to go to a grand nephews 1st birthday party last week. 3 or 4 babies under 2 years old whinging; I'm not over it yet.

[Dice75]

Up since 6.10am. Lot to be said for Boarding Schools imo.

[ComradeCollie]

Anyone have a link for the candidates in each constituency?

[balfejohn]

Up since 6.10am. Lot to be said for Boarding Schools imo.

You getting dressed up to vote early

Remember Crowe no 1 Murphy no 2

2 great card players

[shrapnel]

Looks like South Africa are heading for the 6 nations to now become 7 nations

Could be as early as 2024

[ComradeCollie]

What a depressing depth of options

Candidates: Josepha Madigan (FG), Catherine Martin (GP), Shane Ross (Ind), Neale Richmond (FG), Lettie McCarthy (Lab), Shay Brennan (FF), Deirdre Conroy (FF), Liam Coughlan (Aontú), Sorcha Nic Cormaic (SF), Eoghan Ó Ceannabháin (S-PBP), Patrick Noonan (Ind)

[ComradeCollie]

Quietest polling station I've ever seen. Though I guess a lot of people have a lie in on a Saturday.

[Raoul Duke III]

Lol, those high pitched voices are a nightmare for me. Had to go to a grand nephews 1st birthday party last week. 3 or 4 babies under 2 years old whinging; I'm not over it yet.

Boys of that age are squeakiest. 9-12

[Kayroo]

In all seriousness though, the risk of being wrong is not the point, the point is why would you care if the person live or dies, if it can be proven that they committed the crime to the highest standard that you deem necessary to ensure a mistake is not made.

There’s no standard possible to ensure a mistake is not made. It cannot be done. Even confessions aren’t reliable. So the risk of getting it wrong is clearly relevant.

And I care that the State should not be given the power of life and death over its citizens as an act of vengeance. There’s no other reason for execution as a punishment except a bloodlust vengeance. Which is pathetic as a reason, not least of all because it doesn’t work. And when you get it wrong, the State becomes a murderer. That is pure barbarism.

And yet again, you fail to make a single argument in favor of it other than you want to see people die. Frankly, that’s not good enough.

[Keane]

Went for the Greens in the end, as we were talking about a while back hopefully they'll get enough of a vote to give the traditional parties a kick in the hole if nothing else.

[pokerhand]

There’s no standard possible to ensure a mistake is not made. It cannot be done. Even confessions aren’t reliable. So the risk of getting it wrong is clearly relevant.

And I care that the State should not be given the power of life and death over its citizens as an act of vengeance. There’s no other reason for execution as a punishment except a bloodlust vengeance. Which is pathetic as a reason, not least of all because it doesn’t work. And when you get it wrong, the State becomes a murderer. That is pure barbarism.

And yet again, you fail to make a single argument in favor of it other than you want to see people die. Frankly, that’s not good enough.

Ok, one obvious single argument in its favour. It elemiates any possible risk of the guilty party to reoffend.

[Guest]

Ok, one obvious single argument in its favour. It elemiates any possible risk of the guilty party to reoffend.

Its only an argument in its favour if you can prove unequivocally that the crime was committed in both mind and act. Theoretically, that is impossible, there is always an error term. That seems to the crux of that.

Some of us though are simply in the camp that if a crime was theoretically shown to be 100% certain to have taken place(both mind and act) then it still isn't justifiable.*

*Just to say, that doesn't mean I wouldn't be equally as filled with rage as any other if a crime many view as worthy of capital punishment was acted upon against someone I cared for but I still objectively can't see past it being an act of revenge.

[shrapnel]

son number 2 (12 years old) has been in Dubai all week for the AEFE football world cup (French schools of the world). Pretty gruelling few days with 3 pool games on wednesday, 4 on thursday, QF and SF yesterday and the final today, and they went and won the fucking thing on penalties this morning against the host team!!! A lot of parents were up very early this morning as it was being broadcast live on facebook. Great craic, and phenomenal achievement tbh. would've loved to have been there!

[Emmet]

...
But I also think the above prove ignores the other massive reason against it. If killing people is morally wrong, that should include revenge killing. It's human nature to not care when the person is a sadistic animal. But there are very little grounds to support it other than revenge.

...

(apologies for reducing the quote)

Would like to poke into this a bit more as I actually think that this doesn't ring true.

I think that there is an important difference between;

• A state executing someone because of a crime they commited
• A state deffering / reducing sentence against someone who executes another because of a crime that they have commited (revenge killing / heat of the moment / etc in this scenario)

In the first situation, we the state are taking the life of someone. Not the 'executioner', nor 'The Government', nor any 'Other'. We. We are all complict in the commission of the act of ending that person's life. We define through the creation of laws a set of crimes which we deem sufficiently heinous that we oblige the destruction of the life of the criminal upon conviction. We agree that the route to justice is through the removal of that criminal's rights to the ultimate extent.

In the second situation, we the state are accepting that there can be mitigating circumstances in which a single person, acting on their own and importantly not under the orders of the state, could commit an act which otherwise could be deemed unconcsiousable. We allow the entrance of this defence into our laws as a way to add nuance to the description of the ultimate outcome (the intentional death of another). We do not proscribe it as justice, nor do we offer sanctuary to all claimants of this defence. We create no laws suggesting that vigilantism is legal and just. Instead there is an acceptance (rightfully or wrongfully) that the perpetrator of 'vigilantism' may be entitled to enter a defence against their act on grounds which may reduce the potential punishment that they ought to receive.

Perhaps a bit jesuitical, but I think there is an important difference here that removes the equivalence between the two.

[Emmet]

...
But I also think the above prove ignores the other massive reason against it. If killing people is morally wrong, that should include revenge killing. It's human nature to not care when the person is a sadistic animal. But there are very little grounds to support it other than revenge.

...

(apologies for reducing the quote)

Would like to poke into this a bit more as I actually think that this doesn't ring true.

I think that there is an important difference between;

• A state executing someone because of a crime they commited
• A state deffering / reducing sentence against someone who executes another because of a crime that they have commited (revenge killing / heat of the moment / etc in this scenario)

In the first situation, we the state are taking the life of someone. Not the 'executioner', nor 'The Government', nor any 'Other'. We. We are all complict in the commission of the act of ending that person's life. We define through the creation of laws a set of crimes which we deem sufficiently heinous that we oblige the destruction of the life of the criminal upon conviction. We agree that the route to justice is through the removal of that criminal's rights to the ultimate extent.

In the second situation, we the state are accepting that there can be mitigating circumstances in which a single person, acting on their own and importantly not under the orders of the state, could commit an act which otherwise could be deemed unconcsiousable. We allow the entrance of this defence into our laws as a way to add nuance to the description of the ultimate outcome (the intentional death of another). We do not proscribe it as justice, nor do we offer sanctuary to all claimants of this defence. We create no laws suggesting that vigilantism is legal and just. Instead there is an acceptance (rightfully or wrongfully) that the perpetrator of 'vigilantism' may be entitled to enter a defence against their act on grounds which may reduce the potential punishment that they ought to receive.

Perhaps a bit jesuitical, but I think there is an important difference here that removes the equivalence between the two.

[Dice75]

son number 2 (12 years old) has been in Dubai all week for the AEFE football world cup (French schools of the world). Pretty gruelling few days with 3 pool games on wednesday, 4 on thursday, QF and SF yesterday and the final today, and they went and won the fucking thing on penalties this morning against the host team!!! A lot of parents were up very early this morning as it was being broadcast live on facebook. Great craic, and phenomenal achievement tbh. would've loved to have been there!

Any Irish grannies?

[Kayroo]

Ok, one obvious single argument in its favour. It elemiates any possible risk of the guilty party to reoffend.

If they offended in the first place. Why, though, is that preferable to life in prison?

[shrapnel]

Any Irish grannies?

you lost me there

Dublin French school was there funnily enough

[dobby]

you lost me there

Dublin French school was there funnily enough

If hes that good at football he might qualify to play for us with an Irish granny. I'm sure it was fully tongue in cheek by dice

[shrapnel]

If hes that good at football he might qualify to play for us with an Irish granny. I'm sure it was fully tongue in cheek by dice

Wow, went straight over my head lol. Funnily enough, currently sorting out Irish passports for both my boys. Easier than settled status!

[dobby]

Wow, went straight over my head lol. Funnily enough, currently sorting out Irish passports for both my boys. Easier than settled status!

Sign him up so

[Raoul Duke III]

Let's bate these trolls back to the valleys.

[The Situation]

Under 37 points under 3.5 tries please🤞

[Raoul Duke III]

Big Dev shaking hands with Mickey D is always a great moment.

[shrapnel]

Josh Adams fts 10/1

[Raoul Duke III]

Under 37 points under 3.5 tries please🤞

Still bright and dry, despite the wind.

Backed the draw and Healy FTS.

[ArmaniJeans]

Greens Number 1. Been my number 1 for the last two elections so no point deserting now that he has a chance.
Leo 2, Soc Dem 3, Joan Burton 4, Ruth 5 as she is a voice for the planet. Stopped there.

Good chance none of my transfers will matter this time anyway, think the Green will get 70% of a quota and either be last elected on others' transfers or last eliminated without need for a further count. Kind of a flaw in the system, a Eurovision or F1 style '12 points for your number 1, 10 points for your number 2 etc, tot them all up' would be fairer.
Busy as I've ever seen it in Mulhuddart, every booth had someone filling in their racecard, and a queue of 1 or 2 at each counter. Probably good news for the SF candidate.

[Raoul Duke III]

Very enjoyable game so far

[rounders123]

Big let off the no try there. We need a bit if Gur

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JZozNRfYNA

[Raoul Duke III]

Delighted for Conway there, well deserved.

Scoreline reflects our dominance.

[Strewelpeter]

Very determined performance against a strong Wales. Just what the Doctor ordered.

Was thinking Scotland might have a chance against England and was expecting them to be 5/1 plus... they aren't even 3/1 !

[DeadParrot]

Missed this match due to family commitments.
Who is that big lanky number 19?
He seems fucking useless

[Guest]

thats It lads get the hype train bubbling nicely again, lovely stuff

[Solksjaer!]

Any Gogarty fans here . His little Fuck you face was staying at me from the polling slip.

Not telling if he got my vote but he is a legend all the same.

[Raoul Duke III]

Come on Scotland to make it a very good day

[ComradeCollie]

Lol at Eir charging for using their email address https://www.irishtimes.com/news/cons...o-do-1.4165439

[Guest]

Lol at Eir charging for using their email address https://www.irishtimes.com/news/cons...o-do-1.4165439

If they use it towards finally getting me broadband I'm all for it.

The first month where we haven't used the full monthly allowance.

If Aontu were pushing for broadband in the area they'd have my vote.

FWIW it's 18 months post purchase in a new estate

[Raoul Duke III]

Looks revolting at Murrayfield

[shrapnel]

Looks revolting at Murrayfield

Weather looks shit as well

[Raoul Duke III]

Weather looks shit as well

In fairness to both teams, what can ya do

[Raoul Duke III]

You can smell the inevitable Scottish heartbreak coming here

[ComradeCollie]

Looks like the weather is going to take down most of the election posters in a timely fashion.

[ArmaniJeans]

Respect for the couple of thousand Dublin fans on the Hill.
Utter insanity, but respect.
Dubs 7 points down, this year could be the end of the miracle run.

[dobby]

Lol. Its February with a pile of young lads in the team. People need to calm down with talk of Dublin demise. Monaghan beat them regularly in the league, they take it more seriously than most as it's their only realistic attempt at national silverware.

Dublin will win the all Ireland again this year and probably next.

[Dice75]

Out for a few couples dinner with SICKPUPPY part of the frame. Still ccang believe some madwoman took him on. Leicester City odds at least...

[Solksjaer!]

I'm disappointed with the draw there .

[dobby]

Small after time. after my reply to AJ above I stuck a fiver on the draw at 16/1. Will pay for the trip to Omagh tomorrow anyway.

[Raoul Duke III]

Duly voted, very quiet in the polling station.

R Bruton FG
Green lad
Labour lad
SD lad
Mad FG wan who called Leo autistic

Thought about giving Ben Gilroy a scratch for the craic.