- English -
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,263
Outlander said:how long is a piece of rope?
double the length from the middle to 1 end
Saddam gets sentenced to death by hanging
- Thread starter Thadius
- Start date
double the length from the middle to 1 end
hmm i wonder how long it will be until the saddam hanging video is all over the net, set to some music like "you just keep me hanging on" or ""blowin in the wind" or something random by david hasslehoff.
give it a few months everyone will be yelling OLD! at new variations of the saddam exicution tapes and comparing it to the star wars kid.
give it a few months everyone will be yelling OLD! at new variations of the saddam exicution tapes and comparing it to the star wars kid.
having a heated discussion about hanging
I personally am all for it for someone like Sadaam, you imagine if he is left to rot in prison. Do you think that extremists wont try to free him? or start to kidnap alot more ppl to try to have him freed?
I personally am all for it for someone like Sadaam, you imagine if he is left to rot in prison. Do you think that extremists wont try to free him? or start to kidnap alot more ppl to try to have him freed?
Dreamor
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- May 23, 2004
- Messages
- 1,464
Why does hanging him make a difference?
Yeah, Saddy was bad but is he really any worse than some of the other countrys? I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to die a painful death, but countrys all over the world will feel the backlash from his death. If this was done say right after Gulf War 1 then I would have been happier to see his ending... but just recently I think the whole Iraq / Afghan situation smells a little too much like Vietnam.
I for one think killing him after 15+ years and making a big thing about it, is only going to make it worse for our troops and that for one is not worth it.
Yeah, Saddy was bad but is he really any worse than some of the other countrys? I'm not saying he doesn't deserve to die a painful death, but countrys all over the world will feel the backlash from his death. If this was done say right after Gulf War 1 then I would have been happier to see his ending... but just recently I think the whole Iraq / Afghan situation smells a little too much like Vietnam.
I for one think killing him after 15+ years and making a big thing about it, is only going to make it worse for our troops and that for one is not worth it.
Nate
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
- Messages
- 7,454
are there any other corporal punishments that can be used by the Iraq courts? I wonder if they even have prison sentances that last as long as a lifetime, it seems most of the countries in the area would rather see the person killed then let him live in a cell.
Chronictank
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Messages
- 10,133
there is a life term, but the families/the person wronged decides the punishment.Nate said:
TheBinarySurfer
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- May 14, 2004
- Messages
- 2,041
The punishment fits the crime under the more hardcore islamic regimes - he's murdered the equivalent of 2-3 coachloads of people. And thats the just ones they can prove in that nerve-agent attack, let alone the others tortured or killed on his orders.
To digress slightly to explain my reasoning behind "punishment fits the crime.:
Its simple - i spent a few years in Saudi as a kid when my family worked out there - i fully support the death penalty as on the whole saudi internal crime levels are incredibly low - people are terrified of getting caught
is the reason. Granted their trial system is a piece of biased crap, however the punishment system works as a deterrent should - through fear. If america and russia had threatened to make the other one stand in the corner for 30+ years i doubt it'd have had quite the same effect as a nuclear deterrent.
The country we live in would be a better place if the goverment (and therefore the electorate that put them there - i.e. the public) grew a spine and realised it takes a few broken eggs to make an omlete - you can't have a civilised free country with a low crime rate without a harsh punishment system that comes after a fair trial system. You can't reoffend easily in Saudi (not saying i agree with their punishments for infidelity mind), for example they castrate convicted rapists (or behead them depending on the severity of the offender), they amputate your hand if you steal, the other hand if you steal a second time.
Not saying they have it all right but you certainly wouldn't get the random little shits running out of Dixons with a computer under their arm if they were going to lose a hand if caught. Fix their trial system and you've got it right imo. Lets take this one step further - Why would people get blind-drunk (more than once) and start fights in the town centre if you know the punishment isn't a nice comfy cell and a free legal rep in the morning complete with coffee and breakfast from the police, but rather being whipped until youre hospitalised.
Back to the topic at hand.
What can i say about the above - i have extreme views on punishment. And to those of you that say "what if the legal system makes a mistake". Its making them now and creating hardcore criminals who know they can steal a truckload of electronics worth 200,000 or more because they'll be out of prison in 5-6 years after doing that and if theyre smart with the proceeds they'll be impossible to track, and 200,000 is more than they could earn legally in 5 years for the most part. Meh, really shouldn't post when im stuck on a teleconference and bored, too long a post.
And nate/chronic - thats because it costs the state money to incarcerate someone for the rest of their life. Its a shitload chepaer to use a bullet (costs what - equivalent of 10USD for 20 bullets, cost to incarcerate someone is estimated in the US as being in excess of 80USD a month for medium security by the time you factor in food, guard salaries, grounds maintenance, lighting, heating etc.) 50 cents once, vs 80USD a month, every month.
To digress slightly to explain my reasoning behind "punishment fits the crime.:
Its simple - i spent a few years in Saudi as a kid when my family worked out there - i fully support the death penalty as on the whole saudi internal crime levels are incredibly low - people are terrified of getting caught
is the reason. Granted their trial system is a piece of biased crap, however the punishment system works as a deterrent should - through fear. If america and russia had threatened to make the other one stand in the corner for 30+ years i doubt it'd have had quite the same effect as a nuclear deterrent.
The country we live in would be a better place if the goverment (and therefore the electorate that put them there - i.e. the public) grew a spine and realised it takes a few broken eggs to make an omlete - you can't have a civilised free country with a low crime rate without a harsh punishment system that comes after a fair trial system. You can't reoffend easily in Saudi (not saying i agree with their punishments for infidelity mind), for example they castrate convicted rapists (or behead them depending on the severity of the offender), they amputate your hand if you steal, the other hand if you steal a second time.
Not saying they have it all right but you certainly wouldn't get the random little shits running out of Dixons with a computer under their arm if they were going to lose a hand if caught. Fix their trial system and you've got it right imo. Lets take this one step further - Why would people get blind-drunk (more than once) and start fights in the town centre if you know the punishment isn't a nice comfy cell and a free legal rep in the morning complete with coffee and breakfast from the police, but rather being whipped until youre hospitalised.
Back to the topic at hand.
What can i say about the above - i have extreme views on punishment. And to those of you that say "what if the legal system makes a mistake". Its making them now and creating hardcore criminals who know they can steal a truckload of electronics worth 200,000 or more because they'll be out of prison in 5-6 years after doing that and if theyre smart with the proceeds they'll be impossible to track, and 200,000 is more than they could earn legally in 5 years for the most part. Meh, really shouldn't post when im stuck on a teleconference and bored, too long a post.
And nate/chronic - thats because it costs the state money to incarcerate someone for the rest of their life. Its a shitload chepaer to use a bullet (costs what - equivalent of 10USD for 20 bullets, cost to incarcerate someone is estimated in the US as being in excess of 80USD a month for medium security by the time you factor in food, guard salaries, grounds maintenance, lighting, heating etc.) 50 cents once, vs 80USD a month, every month.
Jeremiah said:
sad but true Jer, the only reason i find myself at odds with the whole death sentance thingy is because there are bound to be times when they get the wrong person (though in saddams case i dont think he could say "it wasnt me man!") for murderers, rapists, child abusers, terrorists people who just refuse to straighten up and fly right and insist on reoffending i say fetch me my shotgun maw.
but you just know theres going to be some poor sod (possibly me tbh) who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and all the evidence points to him/her they get the death penalty and oopsy wouldnt you just know it! afterwards its discovered they were innocent and i find it a bit hard to weigh all the guilty lives with even one innocent person, im getting soft in my old age tbh.
Thorwyn
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,752
@ Binary Surfer
If deterrence is such a powerful weapon in your books, then how do you explain the difference in the crimerates of - say - the United States (death penatly and pretty tough conditions in jail) and NL, GER or SWE (no death penatly and "soft" jail)? And you can scroll back through the history of crime and culture and find, that even in the middle ages with sharp eye for an eye justice system, people were not safe from all kinds of crime.
Your formula: threat of punishment creates fear with decreases crimerate is too simple in my opinion.
For an interesting read about the topic:
http://www.soci.niu.edu/~critcrim/dp/dppapers/mike.deterence
If deterrence is such a powerful weapon in your books, then how do you explain the difference in the crimerates of - say - the United States (death penatly and pretty tough conditions in jail) and NL, GER or SWE (no death penatly and "soft" jail)? And you can scroll back through the history of crime and culture and find, that even in the middle ages with sharp eye for an eye justice system, people were not safe from all kinds of crime.
Your formula: threat of punishment creates fear with decreases crimerate is too simple in my opinion.
For an interesting read about the topic:
http://www.soci.niu.edu/~critcrim/dp/dppapers/mike.deterence
Huntingtons
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2004
- Messages
- 10,770
Thorwyn[B&Q] said:
besides, why stop there, when you can control your people by fear why not take it to the extreme?
i agree with your post in this and the thread about death sentence. 2 wrongs dont make a right.
TheBinarySurfer
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- May 14, 2004
- Messages
- 2,041
Etzqe / Thorwyn
You have to break a few eggs to make an omlette as i said earlier - you think there aren't people who've died in jail today who were innocent? Its no different, just more immediate and final and doesn't drain the taxpayers money. Unfortunately most of the bleeding heart liberals infesting todays society insist on protecting the criminals in todays society.
I'm not saying shoot a kid stealing a packet of sweets i'm saying a repeat offender or multiple murderer. Also the US rarely enforces its death penalty (less than 10% of all death row convicts are executed within 2 years of sentance being passed).
As to why the crime rate figures differ the death penalty isn't that great a deterrent because it only applies to certain serious crimes. I'm saying introduce a more draconian system i.e minus a finger/hand for stealing etc and you might see a difference. Being seriously maimed and having to live with it IS a deterrent in a civilised country. Hell in any country for that matter.
Incidentally the article, while interesting is just a rehash of several other studies really, and only looks at the effects of the death penalty on deliberate homicide, not any crimes of a lesser level.
Finally, quite right - 2 wrongs do not make a right. However the concepts of wrong and right are defined by society and personal preference and as such have no bearing on this discussion as beheading a murderer is not "revenge" and therefore not "wrong". It's simply an option the justice system has chosen to exercise. You can't make a murder "right", you can remove the murderer from society in a non-costly way. Same for rapists, pedophiles and the other dregs of society.
I'm just waiting for one of you to say "they need help". Its not societies job to fix every broken cog in someones mind, if its a minor thing, sure put it right - its worth a few pounds in tax. However by the point theyre popping people left right and centre with a handgun, or fiddling with little kids, rehab shouldn't even be being discussed - its time for a short drop and a sharp stop (for those of you not knowing the phrase its one of the phrases used to describe hanging).
It comes down to this - would you rather have a society where the majority of the guilty don't reoffend and many more don't commit a crime due to fear of being punished for it harshly, or would you rather have the liberal nightmare that we have now that clearly isnt working. Yes some innocent people would die/be punished probably, that will happen in any system practising that type of punishment system eventually regardless of the integrity of the conviction process.
You have to break a few eggs to make an omlette as i said earlier - you think there aren't people who've died in jail today who were innocent? Its no different, just more immediate and final and doesn't drain the taxpayers money. Unfortunately most of the bleeding heart liberals infesting todays society insist on protecting the criminals in todays society.
I'm not saying shoot a kid stealing a packet of sweets i'm saying a repeat offender or multiple murderer. Also the US rarely enforces its death penalty (less than 10% of all death row convicts are executed within 2 years of sentance being passed).
As to why the crime rate figures differ the death penalty isn't that great a deterrent because it only applies to certain serious crimes. I'm saying introduce a more draconian system i.e minus a finger/hand for stealing etc and you might see a difference. Being seriously maimed and having to live with it IS a deterrent in a civilised country. Hell in any country for that matter.
Incidentally the article, while interesting is just a rehash of several other studies really, and only looks at the effects of the death penalty on deliberate homicide, not any crimes of a lesser level.
Finally, quite right - 2 wrongs do not make a right. However the concepts of wrong and right are defined by society and personal preference and as such have no bearing on this discussion as beheading a murderer is not "revenge" and therefore not "wrong". It's simply an option the justice system has chosen to exercise. You can't make a murder "right", you can remove the murderer from society in a non-costly way. Same for rapists, pedophiles and the other dregs of society.
I'm just waiting for one of you to say "they need help". Its not societies job to fix every broken cog in someones mind, if its a minor thing, sure put it right - its worth a few pounds in tax. However by the point theyre popping people left right and centre with a handgun, or fiddling with little kids, rehab shouldn't even be being discussed - its time for a short drop and a sharp stop (for those of you not knowing the phrase its one of the phrases used to describe hanging).
It comes down to this - would you rather have a society where the majority of the guilty don't reoffend and many more don't commit a crime due to fear of being punished for it harshly, or would you rather have the liberal nightmare that we have now that clearly isnt working. Yes some innocent people would die/be punished probably, that will happen in any system practising that type of punishment system eventually regardless of the integrity of the conviction process.
Thorwyn
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,752
Like I said, the oh so terrible "liberal nightmare" is working pretty well in the countries that actually got it.
You´re continuing your (sorry, no pun intended) binary view of cause and effect. More punishment = less crime. But I think that´s wrong. The chance of getting your hands cut off didn´t stop thieves in the middle ages. No punishment so far managed to lower the crimerate, it´s exactly the other way round. If you´re looking at the world today, you´ll find that there´s an incredibly high crimerate in exactly the countries with the most draconic punishments.. see Russia, see the US.
I see your point of scaling down the punishment, as in some kind of flexible response. But doesn´t it look strange that the highest rates of murder are happening in countries WITH death penalty? You can scale it down both ways.
I guess we can stop this here and agree to disagree. I respect your opinion but I still think that you are fighting phantoms. Crime is made BY our society. It´s something we need to eliminate. Eliminating the symptoms won´t get us anywhere.
Chronictank
FH is my second home
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Messages
- 10,133
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Thorwyn[B&Q] again.
no rep 4 joo!
no rep 4 joo!
Binary is working in the right direction and I think your taking his examples way too seriously.
Let's face it - the UK Justice system is a disgrace. I read in the paper today about an Immigrant who blinded a school teacher in one eye after he told him to leave the classroom. The immigrant didn't get imprisoned but rather several weeks under the supervision of a social worker (or whatever they are called).
That is a fuckin disgrace. We need to move away from this shitty idea of nice, cozy prisons and sentences which are lenient and which take the offender into account. Fuck the offender. If his going to commit a crime, we should make him pay. Not give him a TV and make the prison officers knock before they go into his cell.
Although I don't agree with hanging, I feel we NEED a death penalty. I'm sickened to watch the news half of the time, knowledgable of the fact that some fucked up rapist or murderer will cause life-damaging issues and then find himself out in ~10-30 years.
Crime is going out of control in this country and I'm almost ashamed to be a part of such a fucked up justice system.
As for Saddam, the press don't help. What they would have been best of doing is trialing him in secret, killing him in secret and then no-one would be none the wiser. By keeping him alive or killing him, with press etc., you are only encouraging more trouble in Iraq.
Let's face it - the UK Justice system is a disgrace. I read in the paper today about an Immigrant who blinded a school teacher in one eye after he told him to leave the classroom. The immigrant didn't get imprisoned but rather several weeks under the supervision of a social worker (or whatever they are called).
That is a fuckin disgrace. We need to move away from this shitty idea of nice, cozy prisons and sentences which are lenient and which take the offender into account. Fuck the offender. If his going to commit a crime, we should make him pay. Not give him a TV and make the prison officers knock before they go into his cell.
Although I don't agree with hanging, I feel we NEED a death penalty. I'm sickened to watch the news half of the time, knowledgable of the fact that some fucked up rapist or murderer will cause life-damaging issues and then find himself out in ~10-30 years.
Crime is going out of control in this country and I'm almost ashamed to be a part of such a fucked up justice system.
As for Saddam, the press don't help. What they would have been best of doing is trialing him in secret, killing him in secret and then no-one would be none the wiser. By keeping him alive or killing him, with press etc., you are only encouraging more trouble in Iraq.
TheBinarySurfer
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- May 14, 2004
- Messages
- 2,041
Bugz said:
Actually, average UK jail time for a convicted first-time rapist is 5.5 years. With time off for good behaviour and other sentance-reducing measures such as time awaiting trial removed from the sentance etc the sentance for rape can be as little as 2.5 years...
The above is FACT. Its simple, the punishment currently does not deter the crime. What i particuarly like about the system the Saudis have is it prevents reoffence - you cannot stealth a TV easily with no hands, you cannot rape a girl if you have no testicles or penis. Its horrifying, but my god does it work - theyre INCAPABLE of reoffending.
Today i was walking through town on my way back from work, kid runs out of Game with an armful of X-box games. Can't tell me the kid would go back and repeat that after 30 strokes from a lash or being stoned in a stock for an hour?
Nasty as it sounds i was (just) in the very last generation that was caned in school - and it worked - i was a well behaved kid because quite simply the alternative was too painful to contemplate again after the first time.
Yes i'm aware the argument that will be put forward is youre making more crime by maiming people and making them unable to work. Really - are we? How can a man without hands fire a gun or steal, how can a murderer kill again if he's dead?
Here's a very fun and true one for you. I have a number of friends actively serving in the police in the South of the country - supposedly the more crime-free part of the UK. Supposedly.
One of them was previously (solved now - he quit in disgust over the matter) up on disciplinary charges because he put the handcuffs on tight enough to create minor tendon injuries to a young offender who was resisting, had already bit one officer and escaped from one set of handcuffs, as well as having been arrested for stabbing a teacher in the first place (you won't see this one in the papers folks - the force supressed it due to the sensitivity of the race of the child in question). Are you telling me that incarcertation and therapy is the answer here? I'm so sick of this country protecting the rights of the offender over the victim or the enforcers of the law. Those people (the police and CPS) do a horrendously difficult, challenging job with long hours and often massive (unpaid sometimes) overtime, not to mention constant abuse from the public - only to see someone they've spent 20-30 man hours putting into the justice system go free on a 2 month suspended sentance. A slight digression, but it merely underlines my point.
As for the system and society creating these people - youre damned right - however you cannot reshape a society by gentle pleas and niceties - society never changes except by a violent shock as people will do what they damn well please for the most part unless forced to do otherwise.
Don't get me wrong - i see the flaw in my arguments Thorwyn, and i respect your viewpoint as a valid one - just doesn't mean i personally agree with it - seen too much of the dark side of life to unfortunately.
