Jealous lover who blinded woman with acid will be blinded with acid

reply to post by Canadianduder


I don't live in the US. I have not had the pleasure of reading the entirety of the document. I'm sure it has great merit and is something to be proud of.

I do believe that criminals should be truly punished. Not offered a luxury. I believe that no person should have a desire to go to prison, it is there to act as a deterrent, not a get-away. People pay tax and work hard, good people. Part of that tax is going towards segmenting out the people who chose to break the law, some repeatedly.

I'm all for education. I'm all for equal treatment. I'm all for feeding people and letting them live in cleanliness and good health.

I am not wanting child-killers, and pedophiles, and rapists and more to the point, acid-weilding jealous lovers, to be treated in such a fashion as to be almost rewarded for their crimes. Televisions? In prison? Some people cannot even dream of owning a television, and we are giving them to criminals?

If you are going to break down the fabric of a society with your actions, you should be made to work off your debts. If you are not going to work by your own choice, you can be offered utterly horrendous alternatives. Motivation.

However, if you do not like my suggestion (which is all it really is), perhaps you have a better suggestion? Please share as I'd like to hear a better idea if you have one. I'm not at all shy about saying someone else's ideas have far more merit than my own.

reply to post by azurecara


The Constitution is not just for Americans.

Don't let that stop you from reading the most important document ever written.

I'm not American, but I do recognize in the Constitution and Bill of rights the 'more perfect' union between the individual and the state.

Please read it. I would be thankful if you did.

Thanks in advance.

On an alternate news story here in the states:
A Texas sheriff back in 1992 was having problems with repeat misdeanors like public intoxication,public drunk,brawling,etc. His jail supplied great breakfast, lunch and dinners mosty from local restaurants. I cannot remember the town, but it had a native population of about 10000, anyway more and more people from other towns started showing up, well you get the picture. These people had no job and money. So he piped in classical music and put up a sickly shade of pink in the habitats and cut out the catered food. People slowly got the message and stop coming to town to go to jail. Turns out one of the restaurants was owned by a nephew and another family member owned the company that designs cells in Houston. The sheriff had been taking care of his family members with state and city money by letting them provide services to the department.

Funny how things backfire when you try to oneup the system. He finally got rid of the plague of jailmates that were sent his way though after he cut ties with some family members grafting the system.

[edit on 30-11-2008 by ToMMaN]

[edit on 30-11-2008 by ToMMaN]

I don't agree with capital punishment, but I really think they should implement something like this in the UK.

Giving someone a mirror punishment or so that they can feel the pain they have caused to the other.

I once read on here (Though I cant quote as I don't know where the read is) that a pack of wolves will kill/ attack a member of their group if said wolf goes crazy and attacks another. Thus expelling the culprit.

In this country if someone kills another they spend less then 10 years in Prison where they have a good time and they they are given enough funds to start a good life after that.

Drunk drivers are a great example... I think, the next time a drunk chav runs someone over... His punishment in turn should be to get run over... See how he likes that!!

reply to post by Canadianduder


Ok the bill of rights:

1 Freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition.
2 Right to keep and bear arms in order to maintain a well regulated militia.
3 No quartering of soldiers.
4 Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures.
5 Right to due process of law, freedom from self-incrimination, double jeopardy.
6 Rights of accused persons, e.g., right to a speedy and public trial.
7 Right of trial by jury in civil cases.
8 Freedom from excessive bail, cruel and unusual punishments.
9 Other rights of the people.
10 Powers reserved to the states.

Aside from my four choices if you do not choose to work; exactly how does; Payment to his victim, the possibility of a genuine apology, and the working off of his debt to society contradict this? Or make me a monster?

Do you believe throwing acid in his face to be an appropriate punishment for his crime? I'm willing to revise my suggestion, however you haven't presented me with any other ideas aside from the American solution; stock standard locking them up in a prison with a free meal, and plenty of choices that he has denied to his victim - oh wait, in certain states he could be killed with lethal injection, or perhaps electrocuted to death. I'm sure that's a perfect arguement for how the Bill of Rights is not turning anyone into a monster.

Originally posted by kingdogol
I wonder what some of their other laws enatial? A rape for a rape!?!

Well, we do it here. Why do you think people are scared to go to prison?

Even if you break into a house, the punishment is unofficial Government authorised rape.

That's one of the main reasons why prisoners don't "rehabilitate".

reply to post by azurecara


If you had rad the Constitution you wouldn't be asking those questions

You would already have read the answers...

The Constitution is supported by Laws. Under Constitutional Laws - Restitution is covered.

Are you familiar with Common Law? I doubt it. As once again, if you had predicated yourself about Common Law - you would not be asking the questions you just asked...

*I honestly cannot believe you are trashing the one and only document on this Earth that proclaims you are a free Man and allows protects those freedoms and god-given (innate) rights....

I blame it ignorance and an unwillingness to exert any sort of intellectual rigour on your part. I also blame whatever communist propaganda you have bought into so wholeheartedly.

I Won't waste my timing trying to teach you something that is widely available on the internet. Use Google.

Edit; As for a solution. We give him a Trial by a Jury of his peers. If he is convicted; he goes on to sentencing where he will likely be sentenced to 20 years or more in a prison where he will most likely be criminally assaulted.

Trial By Jury - even he deserves one.

[edit on 30-11-2008 by Canadianduder]

Originally posted by clcreek
In one Muslum country a woman (girl) was raped by three men. She goes to the authorities and they arrest her and execute her for infidelity????

Lets not lump all "muslim countries" into one basket, shall we?

That case was Somalia, the country in Africa that hasn't had a functioning central Government since 1991, where the Islamist tribal elders passed judgement. Hardly "authorities" as in what we understand the term to be.

Other cases have come to light from the tribal area's of pakistan too, but the central government intervened and overturned the "sentence" for the raped woman.

The common theme? Poor governance, poor education and tribal courts. the same crap happens in Christian areas of Africa too, you know.

Originally posted by GRANDWORLDDRAMA
reply to post by stumason

 

its in the NEWS dude..

I'll ask again, where is the UK considering implementing Sharia Law. just saying "it's in the news, dude" doesn't cut it, as it does not demonstrate what you think the news is reporting.

reply to post by Canadianduder


In essence, you have failed to address my question, twice now. You have only supported the existing systems in America for punishment, and have failed to address my critiscisms of it.

I have not attacked the consitution, it appears I have attacked your perception of it. I would like to point out that I have made no judgement upon your character in return, and have ignored your statements that I am ignorant, unwilling to exert myself, and a communist?

I have merely offered a suggestion for punishment for a man in a country who is prepared to throw acid into his face. My suggestion, you will note, does not involve this unless he was prepared to choose it for himself. A point I will also add, is that a suggestion is merely a suggestion not a statement of fact nor a determination.

An appropriate response to this would have been that you disagree. And perhaps why. Using a logically constructed arguement. Or perhaps tell me which parts of my suggestion you would alter. Would you have disagreed with the acid lover paying his victim some kind of monetary support for her loss of income? (suggesting in her country she was working). Or for her loss of an ability to procure for herself a husband?

You have now wandered off vaguely citing restitution and common laws with no clarity on your position, only what appears to be an unheathly idolising of the American consitution. I am dearly hoping this is because you have researched all the other documents that all the other countries have based their own systems and laws of governing on, and declared to yourself American the winner. To which I would applaud your dedication.

However, suggesting that the consitution is perfect, is akin to suggesting we live in a utopic society. When clearly, as the lady with the acidicly melted face can testify, we do not.


[edit on 11/30/2008 by azurecara]

[edit on 11/30/2008 by azurecara]

reply to post by azurecara


"However, suggesting that the consitution is perfect, is akin to suggesting we live in a utopic society. When clearly, as the lady with the acidicly melted face can testify, we do not."

You are making things up again. I refernced the Consitution as a "more perfect' union. Not Perfect. The document itself states as much.

As for Trial By Jury - what don't you understand about that?

As for Restitution - I've already explained that to you.

As for your confusion about Common Law - Read about it. Please Don't live in ignorance of the most basic tenets of a free society just because you don't like americans. no one like them.

As for your Anti-Americanism - Good for you. But that is no excuse not to read the ONLY document that say you are free regardless of where you are born. The Constitution is a World document written for Humans and can be applied in any nation.

Your anti-Americanism has limited your ability to educate yourself. The men who wrote the Constitution were mostly British. You would have known that if you had bothered to read it.

Originally posted by Canadianduder
As for your Anti-Americanism - Good for you. But that is no excuse not to read the ONLY document that say you are free regardless of where you are born. The Constitution is a World document written for Humans and can be applied in any nation.

Your anti-Americanism has limited your ability to educate yourself. The men who wrote the Constitution were mostly British. You would have known that if you had bothered to read it.

Lets not get to happy about the Yanks. The Constitution and later, the Bill of Rights, were based upon pre-existing English Common law and the British Bill of Rights written in 1689.

So let's not give all the credit to them, shall we? It isn't the "only document" written, is it?

[edit on 30/11/08 by stumason]

reply to post by stumason


"The Constitution and later, the Bill of Rights, were based upon pre-existing English Common law and the British Bill of Rights written in 1689.

So let's not give all the credit to them, shall we"

Thank you for agreeing with me and summing up what I have been saying all along. Perhaps now Azurecara will understand you and read the documents now that she knows they are not purely of American Origin.

Originally posted by Canadianduder
reply to post by azurecara

 

"However, suggesting that the consitution is perfect, is akin to suggesting we live in a utopic society. When clearly, as the lady with the acidicly melted face can testify, we do not."

You are making things up again. I refernced the Consitution as a "more perfect' union. Not Perfect. The document itself states as much.

As for Trial By Jury - what don't you understand about that?

As for Restitution - I've already explained that to you.

As for your confusion about Common Law - Read about it. Please Don't live in ignorance of the most basic tenets of a free society just because you don't like americans. no one like them.

As for your Anti-Americanism - Good for you. But that is no excuse not to read the ONLY document that say you are free regardless of where you are born. The Constitution is a World document written for Humans and can be applied in any nation.

Your anti-Americanism has limited your ability to educate yourself. The men who wrote the Constitution were mostly British. You would have known that if you had bothered to read it.

I am Not anti-American. I am aganist, and I will state it Again for you - prisons being run as some luxury resort. That is over-exaggerating the problem I'm sure. My example, is access to televisions - reread my posts please. And I have not once stated American prisons. I was in Actual Fact referring to a recent prison that was built in New Zealand.

I have not expressed any confusion on common law, merely that you have not cited specific examples. I have not once stated in any post, that the man does not deserve a fair trial by a jury of his peers, I merely made a suggestion for his punishment - perhaps I should have clearly stated If he was found to be guilty, my mistake I apologise.

As for stating that the Constitution is a world document for humans?
1. Obviously it was written for humans.
2. As far as it being a world document? I'm sure it's viewable by the entire world, but how it applies in reality to a now blind-woman in Iran, I'm not entirely sure.

As far as this discussion goes, I believe I can sum up the "apparent" confusion.

I have made a suggestion for punishment for a man who has horribly disfigured and blinded a woman. You disagree with this and your position appears to be that the American Constitution offers us the "most perfect" solution for his trial and consequent punishment. And that you do not have a different suggestion to add at this time?

reply to post by Canadianduder


Or maybe she could read up on the British versions of Bill of Rights, magna Carta and other such constitutional documents if she is averse to the Yanks. All are available on Wiki for light reading.


en.wikipedia.org...

an eye for an eye just leaves everyone blind.

life in jail would be far worse. showers, meals, excersize, recreation all limited to certain times.
never getting out of that cage again, always wishing for your life to return to normal or to be able to go wherever you like and swim in the ocean or rivers etc.

being in a cage and fed slop for life would be like being in hell.

Ok I'm holding up my hand. I've reread my posts, and I can see why it looks like I'm anti-American.

I apologise to all American's who may have taken offence, I am absolutely not anti-American.

reply to post by stumason


Agreed. (Starred)

If Nations would only apply such systems, situations such as this would not have arisen. This punishment is cruel and unusual. There was no trial by jury and no acknowledgment of the innate human rights of the defendant.

The documents you reference should definitely be read by all as they form the basis for the kind of society we should strive for.

It is a shame so many people refuse to inform themselves, it is even worse to see whole nations acting in contravention of what we have been raised to believe are the most basic tenets of a free society.

I usually reference the Constitution and Bill of rights as they are, as you said, based upon earlier documents that outline these tenets. I believe they are excellence summaries of the predecessors, which are themselves required reading.

reply to post by Canadianduder


I agree, definately cruel and unusual if ever there was an example of it!

jail time and a substantial compensation pay out to the victim would have served all parties better, but apparently the punishment was requested by the victim as they are allowed retribution.

Could we really say we wouldn't do something similiar given the chance?

Originally posted by stumason
I'll ask again, where is the UK considering implementing Sharia Law.

Well its been reported in the New Scotsman that shariah law is operating (and already has legal recognition in) London,Birmingham,Bradford and Manchester and that secret talks are on the way to implement it in Scotland:

SECRET talks are under way to bring Islamic sharia law courts to Scotland, The Scotsman has learned.

Qamar Bhatti, director of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT), which runs the courts, admitted discussions were taking place with lawyers and Muslim community groups in Scotland.

The group is believed to be aiming to set up courts in Edinburgh and Glasgow.

In September it emerged that five sharia courts, ruling on civil cases from divorce to domestic violence and financial disputes, had been operating for more than a year in London, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and at MAT headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire.

The courts have legal powers, with their decisions enforceable through the county courts or high courts.

news.scotsman.com...
Existing thread
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And various people including a prominent barrister have called for it to be given legitmacy in the U.K.:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I suspect spineless politicians in the U.K. will just appease and acquiesce to this organised religion's demands without thinking to ask the question of
'Why an opinion of law based on abrahamic mythology (and having absolutely no tangible evidence whatsoever to support it) should be given legal authority and recognised as legitimate in a modern day,secular society?

If all shariah law realy does literaly beleive in the 'eye for an eye' mentality-how long before acid blinded people are wandering around the streets of London,Bradford,Birmingham and Manchester?



[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]