Opinions ?
Good to see so many opinions. Thought there could be another post on this.
As Nanda says, its a primary philosphical question as to 'who decides right or wrong'. Exactly ma point! In the end we all have our conjectures.
I agree with Anadi to a large extent that its the collective wisdom of the society formulating the norms. But then - a life for a life??!
I mean think about it. If we are talking bout the Consitutional Rights and Freedoms - they are surely needed, since, some norms are indispensable for a clash-free and harmonious co-existence.
But capital punishment is taking someone's life away. When nature has not given us the right to 'create' life, how can we indulge in a process of retribution and take 'away' life?
Who decides that and why?!
The human life is ended and the executed person is deprived of any oppurtunity to change, to restore the harm done or compensate for it! Life imprisonment is enough, if punishment need be inured.
Nanda is right , that it depends entirely on societies and the long established practices.. but it is wrong.
And finally a note for my 'anonymous' friend.
"If a person is a danger to many people in the society and he cannot be rehabilitated, he must be got rid of."
One question. We humans, with an inconsequential wisdom to understand the phenomena of Life and Death - Are we prudent and far-sighted enough to say who can/cant be rehabilitated?
As Nanda says, its a primary philosphical question as to 'who decides right or wrong'. Exactly ma point! In the end we all have our conjectures.
I agree with Anadi to a large extent that its the collective wisdom of the society formulating the norms. But then - a life for a life??!
I mean think about it. If we are talking bout the Consitutional Rights and Freedoms - they are surely needed, since, some norms are indispensable for a clash-free and harmonious co-existence.
But capital punishment is taking someone's life away. When nature has not given us the right to 'create' life, how can we indulge in a process of retribution and take 'away' life?
Who decides that and why?!
The human life is ended and the executed person is deprived of any oppurtunity to change, to restore the harm done or compensate for it! Life imprisonment is enough, if punishment need be inured.
Nanda is right , that it depends entirely on societies and the long established practices.. but it is wrong.
And finally a note for my 'anonymous' friend.
"If a person is a danger to many people in the society and he cannot be rehabilitated, he must be got rid of."
One question. We humans, with an inconsequential wisdom to understand the phenomena of Life and Death - Are we prudent and far-sighted enough to say who can/cant be rehabilitated?
16 Comments:
Who decides that and why?!"
Woopsie, we are very close to creating "life" (not human beings). So that's not a valid argument. I will pass on more information on this later.
"The human life is ended and the executed person is deprived of any oppurtunity to change, to restore the harm done or compensate for it! Life imprisonment is enough, if punishment need be inured."
For an extreme example, what if that human life is an incurable schizophrenic psychopath ? He simply does not know what he is upto. Do you understand his situation ? He is going through a 24x7 nightmare. You can even compare this to euthanasia.
Do you really think that life imprisonment is better than capital punishment ? Don't you think the only point in imprisonment should be reform and rehabilitation ?
"We humans, with an inconsequential wisdom to understand the phenomena of Life and Death - Are we prudent and far-sighted enough to say who can/cant be rehabilitated?"
No, we are not. But we have got to draw the lines somewhere with limited information and intelligence. Most problems in life are like that. You don't have all the parameters. You make a best-effort solution.
I take back this statement. I am not sure.
If you would care to check out, I am trying to open a discussion here: http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=1115&tid=12226637
gud that you get some of the points.I hope you are almost 'pacified'. Regarding capital punishment,well...1st thing is, there arent too many ppl being hanged...so the law enforcers DO think a lot before 'murdering' anybody.Perhaps they think like this, "well, this guy has killed 50 people, and our interaction with him tells us that the probability of him changing is 1/1000...so lets hang him." This aint a perfect/ideal solution, but it will work 999 times out of 1000. There is a notion of acceptable risk in sciences, perhaps the society can afford to take that kind of risk(for the lack of a better system)
Also, think about the victim's family.If you give the SK(Btw, the initials match yours...are u a potential SK, SK?)another chance and ask the vicitm's family to forgive them...Is it humanly possible? Not in most cases.Is it justice to the victim(who died for no obvious fault of his own) or his family?
What if somebody from the family turns murderer to avenge the deaths? we dont live in an ideal world where everyone would behave like 'God'...how will you answer the questions raised by his act then?
The law differentiates between murders...there are cold blooded ones, there are crimes of passion, there are the SKs etc and the degree of punishment is different in each.So,rest assured that a lot of thinking has gone into it before deciding the fate of the criminal.
Dont get paranoid about somebody getting killed who may(1/1000 or less) turn over a new leaf. The very 'practical' thing to do is, knock him off...
about who decides this, its either more heads or the guy who has a sword :D(again, not perfect, but acceptable)
Dont look at these events as isolated ones, view them in a larger perspective...in terms of all the lives affected by each action.Then you'll be able to derive an 'opportunity cost' model for your dilemma.
You talk about the difference in perspectives, then say something as definitive as "but it is wrong"... i feel it is inconsistent. You may say, its not perfectly right, but not the other way.
In this issue,if you are 'rational' enough, there is no 'correct' stand or perfect solution.So,stop looking for one(ofcourse, thr is hope, but thats an improbable event, in my opinion)
SO you can choose amongst the following four options(like KBC)
A. Accept the two stands on this...and maybe appreciate the current laws on punishment
B. Crib about the current laws, waste our time as well as yours
C. Mobilize ppl to turn the rules in your favor, and then you can take out your '100 ppl i want to kill' list and do the needful and still be pardoned and given a 'chance to change'
D. Anything else besides these
So, you can pick any one you like. Personally, I agree with Nandz,Somethings cant be forgiven.My motto, "No human rights for those who dont respect them"
Catch hold of the song, "Face of Love", its my fave. Composed by Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan
lol..! Its a sign. :-)
hehe! beware.. he might kill 'u' for this!!
These people dont understand the value of life. All crimes are imposed on individuals by the society in which they live => society is the cause of all ( at least most of the ) crimes.
Cibot
True true! I totally agree with you. I've been trying to make the same point. A life for a life isnt that prudent a decision...(whoever makes it!)
We humans are not allowed to carry out the process of retribution. Simply NOT!
What is the point in giving death sentance to that individual? Nothing. It just doesnt correct the root cause of the problem.
the root cause cant be eradicated easily.. coz the society comprises of multitudinal people.. all with different perceptions. they CANT, in good heavens' name, construe the religious disparities amongst themselves!
and hence they come up with an easier solution - Knock-off the defaulter!! (defaulter in their freaking frame of reference)..!!
frankly.. you ane me.. come in the same society.. :-)
(just for the records) hehe..
"Not allowed" by whom ? :))))
Post a Comment
<< Home