It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saudis Behead, Crucify Convicted Child Molester, Murderer

page: 10
7
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goathief

Treat paedophilia as an illness (which it probably is) and the symptoms (molested, damaged children) will go away. Have you ever thought that if people weren't afraid of admitting to a sexual attraction to children due to fear of reprisals that they would come forward and seek help rather than let it get to the point whereby they can no longer control their urges and act them out upon those most fragile members of society that you hold so dear?

I think that line of thinking is the most logical solution, otherwise we will just end up treating the symptoms for all eternity.


[edit on 1-6-2009 by Goathief]


If you really look at what you are saying, you will see how illogical it is... there is a lack of reality and understanding in your statement. People don't work that way. If there were no reprisals for an action what would be the drive to seek treatment? If there are no reprisals for an action then the action is not considered wrong by society.

Your statement really sums up your lack of understanding the human condition and what drives people ...




posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

I don't have any evidence he's innocent nor do i have evidence he is guilty so i can't judge wether or not this was correct. Do you???

Oh that's right, you do not need any of those facts. A man got killed and that's all that counts.......


You miss the point, the discussion has nothing to do with whether the man in Saudi Arabia was guilty or not. If you didn't read that is OK, but the discussion is about the appropriateness of the punishment.

You and a few others have decided that we must keep bringing up the possibility that the man in Saudi Arabia was innocent. I believe that everyone here agrees that Saudi Arabia has a less then ideal government structure and very oppressive laws.



WOW, again you amaze me with the way you read posts. I said the problems "WE" (as in dutch citizens, with our soft handeling of crime) have are minor. I know americans have hugh problems with crime and prisons filled to the brim. But according to these numbers we aren't doing to bad...


I had no idea you are Dutch, congratulations on your low crime rates.



You really believe everything has a price??? You really do?? You are even futher gone than i had realised......

But i would like to buy you and make you see my point of view......what's your price???
I am saying that every life is of more value than money (especially the dollar cause that has no more value than toiletpaper in the near future) no matter what kind of life that may be.........

Peace


Yep the dollar is dropping like a rock...

Everything you decide deals with the value of things. When you make medical decisions for yourself you are choosing the value of your life vs. the cost of the treatment. If your country has socialized medicine then your country will decide the value of your life vs. the cost of treatment and they will chose the cheapest treatment possible, even if the risks to your life are higher.

When Obama authorized the navy to take out the Somali pirates holding the freighter Captain a few months ago he decided that the Captains life was worth more then the pirates, that sending a message to the pirates was worth more then the lives of the pirates, that saving face was worth more then the lives of the pirates; he could have just paid the ransom to the pirates and then let them go. His actions were hypocritical with his views of capital punishment.

I could go on and on with examples...

You really did show a bit of ignorance in that narrow response.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by clcreek
If you really look at what you are saying, you will see how illogical it is... there is a lack of reality and understanding in your statement. People don't work that way. If there were no reprisals for an action what would be the drive to seek treatment? If there are no reprisals for an action then the action is not considered wrong by society.

Your statement really sums up your lack of understanding the human condition and what drives people ...

Again, you are misunderstanding words. I don't know if English is your native tongue but looking at the dictionary definition of reprisals: retaliation for injuries received, by the infliction of equal or greater injuries. In this sense reprisals translates as stigma, vigilante justice and physical harm wished and acted out upon these people. I do not think for one minute that paedophiles should be let loose on the streets to abuse as they wish - taking my earlier posts into consideration as well, do you honestly think I was suggesting that or are you being deliberately dumb and provocative?

Jail for life for those who offend (which means LIFE, not 10, 15, 20, X years) I am perfectly fine with. Even better would be studying them scientifically while they are incarcerated to find out what causes them to commit these disgusting crimes to try and prevent the problem arising in the future. Think about screening for these traits in children before they escalate into something worse, maybe? At present it simply cannot be done because many people just want revenge, once again: it only solves the effect rather than the cause. Also, it presents it's own problems when innocents are wrongfully convicted - that in itself is the main reason why you should not seek an execution.

If you are all for the protection of innocents, children or otherwise, then revenge via murder is an unacceptable method of punishment as once a life is taken it cannot be restored. At least if the wrongfully convicted are still alive they can be compensated and investigations into the real perpetrator(s) can continue. IF (and that's a big if) the justice system was flawless then I might entertain the idea that capital punishment might be the best course of action in certain cases, but it's far from it so I cannot. It doesn't work as a deterrent or stop innocents from being harmed, so what use does it really have when we have other options that removes the guilty from society? Satisfaction of blood lust is all I can come up with right about now.



posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by shai hulud



No ACLU or SPLC to deal with there. I do admire at times Arab justice, but they can't compare to the Chinese. Kudos! Ya know we used to do things similar in my region before the Union boot got involved, but alas...got to hose the taxpayers for "humanitarian" reasons.


Perfect example of the lies people tell. Watch "Rosewood" and see what happens when you let people like this decide what justice is in their eyes. They also called them barbecues too.
Seems it never goes away does it?



posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SGTChas
Just look at Franco's Spain; he started public hangings on the instant of conviction. In 6 months, crime of any kind was rare, and violent crime had all but disappeared. Argue what you want but it works as sooner or later you run out of criminals.


It is interesting to note that 90% or so of all violent crimes are committed by 2% of the population, or there abouts. I think it is true. Once you get rid of that 2%, things are bound to be more peaceful.



posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by DragonriderGal
It is interesting to note that 90% or so of all violent crimes are committed by 2% of the population, or there abouts. I think it is true. Once you get rid of that 2%, things are bound to be more peaceful.


Yes, many dictators have thought the same thing. Problem is that people are born and end up going for crime even though their families were respectable. Also notice that during economic hardship that many people resort to crime. If you have a family to feed, no job, no prospects then crime is an attractive prospect. If you think you would never commit a crime you're living in cloud cukoo land. Everyone can when pushed commit crime. People have different barriers, some do it simply because they love it, others do it because it's easy and then some do it because they can't find a job.

So lets not start saying such silly things as it's the 2%, like those 2% are the scum of the earth. Here in the UK burglary has gone up since the economic recession. Either the existing criminals are having a field day or those who are out of work and cannot get jobs due to economic pressures are simply going to the only available option which provides them the income they require.

Are we to get rid of these people also? Hey bring in the camps huh? They must be awful peopel despite havign normal jobs before all of this economic troble, despite working hard and avoiding crime until this point. Yes kill them all, lock them up for life for a speeding offense as well. I mean a speeding offense is a crime and criminals are bad.

Etc.



posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Goathief

Again, you are misunderstanding words. I don't know if English is your native tongue but looking at the dictionary definition of reprisals: retaliation for injuries received, by the infliction of equal or greater injuries. In this sense reprisals translates as stigma, vigilante justice and physical harm wished and acted out upon these people.


I like how you use a word in one post, then you come back to narrow the definition in another as if it would refute my comment.

I didn't misunderstand anything, you just didn't like that what I said was true.


If you are all for the protection of innocents, children or otherwise, then revenge via murder is an unacceptable method of punishment as once a life is taken it cannot be restored.


The execution of criminals for crimes they have committed is not murder. Murder is defined as: "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought". I quoted Webster since I see you like to use the dictionary. In this Country it is lawful to execute criminals for certain crimes, therefor it is not murder. So go ahead and try to change the definition of murder now, pull out your dictionary and have fun...

For you to call it revenge is just narrow minded... considering that the victims who would want revenge are not allowed to have any deciding factor or take part, only watch. The people that carry out the sentence have no desire for revenge, they were never a part of the crime or situation.

Your position is based on how you feel and not on facts. All through this post I have thrown out a few facts and you have attacked my sources, tried to change the definition of words, and generally ranted about how you feel.

Its unfortunate that people lose the sight of reality when they get all touchy feely. But I would have to say that is where you are.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by clcreek

I like how you use a word in one post, then you come back to narrow the definition in another as if it would refute my comment.

I didn't misunderstand anything, you just didn't like that what I said was true.

Not at all, as explained above.


The execution of criminals for crimes they have committed is not murder. Murder is defined as: "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought". I quoted Webster since I see you like to use the dictionary. In this Country it is lawful to execute criminals for certain crimes, therefor it is not murder. So go ahead and try to change the definition of murder now, pull out your dictionary and have fun...

In mine it is illegal, therefore I can call it murder.


For you to call it revenge is just narrow minded... considering that the victims who would want revenge are not allowed to have any deciding factor or take part, only watch. The people that carry out the sentence have no desire for revenge, they were never a part of the crime or situation.

This thread is filled to the brim with examples of people wishing harm and death to them, ask yourself if you are the one who is being narrow minded by only wishing to deal with the effect in a brutal manner rather than the cause.


Your position is based on how you feel and not on facts. All through this post I have thrown out a few facts and you have attacked my sources, tried to change the definition of words, and generally ranted about how you feel.

You did not provide a source for your figures of prisoners costing in excess of $90,000 a year - I provided a source for mine which puts cost in the region of $23,000 PA, I think you are getting confused about who is speaking with facts. Many, many innocent people have been sentenced to death and subsequently exonerated - I provided links which prove this. Which neatly brings me to:


Its unfortunate that people lose the sight of reality when they get all touchy feely. But I would have to say that is where you are.

The only link you provided which takes us to www.childmolestationprevention.org... completely agrees with what I have repeatedly stated. I don't see where it says anyone should be killed anywhere, quite the opposite. Did you actually read your link in full?


[edit on 3-6-2009 by Goathief]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by clcreek
You miss the point, the discussion has nothing to do with whether the man in Saudi Arabia was guilty or not. If you didn't read that is OK, but the discussion is about the appropriateness of the punishment.


Fair enough!! Let's take it from the top then and i'll start by stating my case and the fact why i have a problem with this...

I'll drop the point about we are not able to asses wether or not he was guilty but wether or not the punishment fits the crime, Okay?


You and a few others have decided that we must keep bringing up the possibility that the man in Saudi Arabia was innocent. I believe that everyone here agrees that Saudi Arabia has a less then ideal government structure and very oppressive laws.


Than could we please stop cheering this regime on because i know most people are doing this without knowing the facts about the Saudi legal system and their idea of a fair trial....



I had no idea you are Dutch, congratulations on your low crime rates.


Thank you!!


Everything you decide deals with the value of things. When you make medical decisions for yourself you are choosing the value of your life vs. the cost of the treatment. If your country has socialized medicine then your country will decide the value of your life vs. the cost of treatment and they will chose the cheapest treatment possible, even if the risks to your life are higher.


Maybe in your world but here on plant earth docters take nice gifts and presents from manufacturers to push more expensive medication down your throat and more expensive treatment. But this validates your point about every thing seeming to have a price in current day society...
This does not mean it is right or that we have to exept it!! Over here docters are still being suspended from carrying out their profession if certain practises are discovered...

So i gladly disagree with your statement that everything has a price!! It's just that the general perception that everything has a price. It's a generation thing. Brought on by those yuppie babyboomers who only seem to want to but a pricetag on everything.

Here's a nice experiment, ask your grandmother/father or anybody else from their generation if everything has a price. The answer might surprise you!!


When Obama authorized the navy to take out the Somali pirates holding the freighter Captain a few months ago he decided that the Captains life was worth more then the pirates, that sending a message to the pirates was worth more then the lives of the pirates, that saving face was worth more then the lives of the pirates; he could have just paid the ransom to the pirates and then let them go. His actions were hypocritical with his views of capital punishment.


Handeling with a situation in which the purpetrators are not captured or unarmed i agree that making a choice like that is the correct one but you cannot compare it to killing a captured, unarmed person.
In the fist scenario you don't have much choice ,in the second you have a whole range of options from which to choose.


I could go on and on with examples...


As could i.....

U.S. soldier who raped 14-year-old Iraqi and killed her family is spared death sentence

Now how is that for a double standard!!!


several jurors saying that the stress of combat was a key mitigating factor.


So it's the "mitigating factor" that seems to be the magical word here....

And what in the world are we gonna do with this story??

Children sodomized at Abu Ghraib

Just curious if all of the people shouting justice was done in Saudi Arabia are willing to make the same strong statements about some of your own people???


You really did show a bit of ignorance in that narrow response.


Did i really?? care to explain??

I value your opinion and do like to read how you are defending this but by simply calling me ignorant you are not gonna solve this little issue we have got here....

Peace and respect

( i just now flagged your thread because of its content, i'm not gonna star your posts just yet because i still believe you are wrong...
)

[edit on 3/6/2009 by operation mindcrime]

[edit on 3/6/2009 by operation mindcrime]



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Interesting, I wonder how it would have gone down should the boy have been a girl? Saudi's arent really on the ball here, why respect them when they change the rules to suit there needs?



posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by operation mindcrime
 




You really did show a bit of ignorance in that narrow response.


Did i really?? care to explain??

Should i take it that your silence is saying enough or did you just become bored with your own thread??

Peace



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
The thought that goes through my mind is this: who are the men and what type of men are they that can behead and then crucify another man, while working for the establishment? Are these men going home to their wives and children at night after doing that horrendous act? I'm for justice, but it seems to me that would change the personality of the people inflicting the punishment to such a degree as to have a lifelong psychological damage to their minds. I could be wrong, but isn't that going a little overboard? Sounds primitive.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join