Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 yep Do u understand what will the costs be for keeping for life imprisonment. More important, if he is in imprisonment, there is a very good chance that someone he will go away like the hijack where we had to give them the jailed terroists or more likely he will used politically to get muslim votes, there are many muslims prisoners who go out of jail by our politicians just to get vote. The thing is he will never change, he will still be anti india so just hang him to finish it once for all We don't know if he will change or not. There is no chance given to him for remorse....for which I don't care much.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 So what do we do with criminals then? Set them free? And what do you mean he will be punished one way or another? What rewards or punishment one gets - we get on this earth....not any heaven or hell. That's just imagination. Mehhh, I never said anything about after life and all that bollocks. My point was between the alternatives of life imprisonment and death penalty both are equally damning. There is no need to kill someone, that is just pure mob mentality.
Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 Mehhh' date=' I never said anything about after life and all that bollocks. My point was between the alternatives of life imprisonment and death penalty both are equally damning. There is no need to kill someone, that is just pure mob mentality.[/quote'] Well yes..that's done with. So what is the third alternative if both options are barbaric?
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 Well yes..that's done with. So what is the third alternative if both options are barbaric? I am saying that life sentence is a perfectly valid punishment. The point is he has taken away the free will of all the souls he killed on that day to lead their lives. It is fair that he learns the loss of that free will. State sponsored murder is not the answer, it makes us a regressive society.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 yep Do u understand what will the costs be for keeping for life imprisonment. More important, if he is in imprisonment, there is a very good chance that someone he will go away like the hijack where we had to give them the jailed terroists or more likely he will used politically to get muslim votes, there are many muslims prisoners who go out of jail by our politicians just to get vote. The thing is he will never change, he will still be anti india so just hang him to finish it once for all This is a problem with your political setup, why are you trying to solve that by having jurisprudence sanction murder? And economic cost of imprisonment is a very poor argument in favour of the death penalty.
punjabiplaya Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 ^^ gunner what do you suggest,god forbid it was a friend or a family member of yours... would you still have the same point of view? sorry if thats sounds offensive but i would like to know what you would do if you as the judge and had the power?
Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 I am saying that life sentence is a perfectly valid punishment. The point is he has taken away the free will of all the souls he killed on that day to lead their lives. It is fair that he learns the loss of that free will. State sponsored murder is not the answer' date=' it makes us a regressive society.[/quote'] That is what I tried to say in my first post about remorse. Although I am fine with death sentence...it is a fair punishment and saves us some money too.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 ^^ gunner what do you suggest' date='god forbid it was a friend or a family member of yours... would you still have the same point of view? sorry if thats sounds offensive but i would like to know what you would do if you as the judge and had the power?[/quote'] I am not offended, its a fair question which people tend to ask. Yes, I would still not cry out for the blood of another human as it would never fulfill my loss. If I was the judge in this case, I would give him consecutive life terms for each person he has killed with no chance of parole.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 That is what I tried to say in my first post about remorse. Although I am fine with death sentence...it is a fair punishment and saves us some money too. This is really not a good argument to buy into. If hypothetically tomorrow, we run out of resources to support human life on this planet adequately and governments around the world decide to execute everyone over the age of 60 to restore balance on the basis of this economic argument, would you then buy into that too?
Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 This is a problem with your political setup' date=' why are you trying to solve that by having jurisprudence sanction murder? And economic cost of imprisonment is a very poor argument in favour of the death penalty.[/quote'] You are stretching the definition of murder here. We are offering punishment for a person who has done something terribly wrong. Death sentence is reserved for the rarest of rare cases in India and this is such a case.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 You are stretching the definition of murder here. We are offering punishment for a person who has done something terribly wrong. Death sentence is reserved for the rarest of rare cases in India and this is such a case. Wilfully taking the life of another is murder. Legal sanction does not take away the nature of the act. Yes, we need to offer him punishment but clearly the death penalty is not the answer. I am aware that India is not a violent country offering death penalty at the drop of a hat. I respect that, I would just like this punishment to be done away for good. Punishment has two objectives reformation where possible and the second should be isolation and not termination. In cases of extreme crimes we should isolate the person from general society for the safety of society and not terminated on the basis of economic arguments.
Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 This is really not a good argument to buy into. If hypothetically tomorrow' date=' we run out of resources to support human life on this planet adequately and governments around the world decide to execute everyone over the age of 60 to restore balance on the basis of this economic argument, would you then buy into that too?[/quote'] Obviously not but that's such a poor analogy. The argument is between a criminal who has the option of life long imprisonment or death sentence. The former drains the resources and leads to the same end result. What is then wrong in doing it quick and saving resources at the same time?
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 Obviously not but that's such a poor analogy. The argument is between a criminal who has the option of life long imprisonment or death sentence. The former drains the resources and leads to the same end result. What is then wrong in doing it quick and saving resources at the same time? Not quite, the analogy is for the purpose of building economic arguments into death of another human. We can't say that in order to save resources we will terminate the life of a human, whatever be his actions. That is just plain wrong.
Nova Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 Wilfully taking the life of another is murder. Legal sanction does not take away the nature of the act. I disagree. Legal sanction of taking another life is a fair punishment. Punishment has two objectives reformation where possible and the second should be isolation and not termination. In cases of extreme crimes we should isolate the person from general society for the safety of society and not terminated on the basis of economic arguments. Economic argument is not a primary defense at all...it's a leftover benefit of the process. A mass murderer loses the right of reformation in the sense that there is no parole. It's more about remorse but solitary confinement is more barbaric...although it is done in rare cases.
DomainK Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 A death penalty is not just a punishment. It's either a revenge or elimination of the person because he has become too dangerous for the society and there is no hope of any correction in his way of life. Death penalty is an extreme punishment and should be used rarely in extreme cases. However, there could be some good arguments in favor of the death sentence in kasab's case: 1. The nature of his crime is very ugly and deserves an extreme punishment. 2. This is a very key case and the punishment will set examples for many who may contemplate such crimes in future. It's a statement the Indian government will make to those who intend to raise war against India. This is the right time to show the zero tolerance for terrorism and terrorists. We can not show any mercy whatsoever. 3. A living Kasab will become an inspiration to many more brainwashed young terrorists. The masterminds will use that to show India's weak mentality and he will become a symbol of victory of terrorists over India. 4. A living Kasab will mean a constant threat of another Kandahar. Some lunatic/fanatic at some point of time will attempt something crazy to free him. A living Kasab will be a constant threat to Indian citizens all the time. And another Kandahar and we will become the new laughing stock of the world. 5. He can not be corrected anymore. He is way past that. I am generally against death penalties. But this is one case where I think that is the only way.
The Outsider Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 The fact that death penalty still exists in our society is a manifestation of the fact that we are still trying to evolve away from animals into humans. The day it's done away with will be another step in that evolution process.
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 The fact that death penalty still exists in our society is a manifestation of the fact that we are still trying to evolve away from animals into humans. The day it's done away with will be another step in that evolution process. Thank you. :hatsoff:
Guest Gunner Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 [Domaink;1060851]A death penalty is not just a punishment. It's either a revenge or elimination of the person because he has become too dangerous for the society and there is no hope of any correction in his way of life. Death penalty is an extreme punishment and should be used rarely in extreme cases. However, there could be some good arguments in favor of the death sentence in kasab's case: 1. The nature of his crime is very ugly and deserves an extreme punishment. - Life sentence is an extreme punishment. 2. This is a very key case and the punishment will set examples for many who may contemplate such crimes in future. It's a statement the Indian government will make to those who intend to raise war against India. This is the right time to show the zero tolerance for terrorism and terrorists. We can not show any mercy whatsoever. - How can you equate capital punishment with strength and zero tolerance of terrorism? This is the American argument and is very poor. 3. A living Kasab will become an inspiration to many more brainwashed young terrorists. The masterminds will use that to show India's weak mentality and he will become a symbol of victory of terrorists over India. - LOL!! He will become no such thing. But by killing him you will most certainly make a martyr of him. 4. A living Kasab will mean a constant threat of another Kandahar. Some lunatic/fanatic at some point of time will attempt something crazy to free him. A living Kasab will be a constant threat to Indian citizens all the time. And another Kandahar and we will become the new laughing stock of the world. - Strengthen your security apparatus. Basically your confidence on the Indian government is so low that you believe killing this one man makes you safer. 5. He can not be corrected anymore. He is way past that. - One, you or me cannot know that as he is only 20 years old or so and two, even if I accept this argument isolation from society is punishment enough. I am generally against death penalties. But this is one case where I think that is the only way.
mhr123 Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 A death penalty is not just a punishment. It's either a revenge or elimination of the person because he has become too dangerous for the society and there is no hope of any correction in his way of life. Death penalty is an extreme punishment and should be used rarely in extreme cases. However, there could be some good arguments in favor of the death sentence in kasab's case: 1. The nature of his crime is very ugly and deserves an extreme punishment. 2. This is a very key case and the punishment will set examples for many who may contemplate such crimes in future. It's a statement the Indian government will make to those who intend to raise war against India. This is the right time to show the zero tolerance for terrorism and terrorists. We can not show any mercy whatsoever. 3. A living Kasab will become an inspiration to many more brainwashed young terrorists. The masterminds will use that to show India's weak mentality and he will become a symbol of victory of terrorists over India. 4. A living Kasab will mean a constant threat of another Kandahar. Some lunatic/fanatic at some point of time will attempt something crazy to free him. A living Kasab will be a constant threat to Indian citizens all the time. And another Kandahar and we will become the new laughing stock of the world. 5. He can not be corrected anymore. He is way past that. I am generally against death penalties. But this is one case where I think that is the only way. +1
Anonymous Posted May 6, 2010 Posted May 6, 2010 But guys dont you think being on the death row itself is as extreme as it can get. He is not going to be hanged tomorrow, there are 29 other convicts on death row before him. It will atleast take an other 2 to 3 years to actually hang him and I personally think that is the harshest punishment imaginable, sitting in a dark cell awaiting your death....
Recommended Posts