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.

 

Iranian Man sentenced to have acid poured on face

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   

Iranian Man sentenced to have acid poured on face


www.d ailymail.co.uk

An Iranian man who blinded his lover's husband is to suffer a similar fate in a tit-for-tat sentencing - by having acid poured into his eye.

Iran’s Islamic code allows for ‘an eye-for-an-eye, a tooth-for-a-tooth’ retribution - known as 'qisas' - in cases of violent crime.

The convict, named only as Mojtaba, threw acid in the face of his rival Alireza, a taxi driver, after an illicit affair with the victim’s wife, Mojdeh.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...[/exnews ](visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Court orders Iranian man blinded




posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:29 AM
link   
This is not the same "Iranian man to be blinded" article from the 28th of November. That one involved a man who blinded his wife.

What are your thoughts on this? I have not entirely made my mind up about this.

Law functions as a deterrent by instilling fear of the consequences. If you look at western society, rampant in rape, murder and robbery, you will see the perpetrators sometimes smile in court, and admit gladly they have done the deed. Why? Because all they get in return is free food and accomodation in a prison.

Before you get on your high horse and say that the law has no right to leave this man blinded for his deed, you must understand that by saying this, you can also say that the law has no right to take a man's freedom away for the same thing.

Law is inhumane in both manners. Law must function as a deterrent.


www.d ailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

by the way, what the hell is it with Iranians and acid?
edit on 13-12-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Somehumanbeing
 



Before you get on your high horse and say that the law has no right to leave this man blinded for his deed, you must understand that by saying this, you can also say that the law has no right to take a man's freedom away for the same thing.

Law is inhumane in both manners. Law must function as a deterrent.


It's a tough call..I really don't like the fact that violence is punished with violence but then some crimes I hear about make me feel different..
For example, I'd like to most pedophiles beaten senseless..
Maybe some asia countries have the right idea with canings.
At least that is physical punishment that isn't so permanent..



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing

Law is inhumane in both manners. Law must function as a deterrent.


Laws are often both inhumane and wrong. That is why we should simply try to ensure victims are properly compensated for damages to rather than seeking a bloody revenge. The concept of eye-for-eye is terrible. If someone is a true danger to society we can lock them up and leave it at that, then leave torture to sole domain of sick twisted freaks.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
*deleted* (double post, sorry)
edit on 13-12-2010 by civilchallenger because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   
I like it, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. especially when the guy went out of his way to blind a man as well as soiling his wife. Personally I think the wife deserves some punishment as well, without her in the factor, the two would have never meet.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:50 AM
link   
If they are a true danger to society, it would be far cheaper and efficient to euthanize them.

I'm not fan of suffering or torture. If they can't function in society, we should do what we do to disfunctional domesticated animals.

The whole idea of keeping them locked up and drugged up their entire lives to me is torture. It would be more humane to euthanize them.
edit on 13/12/10 by MikeboydUS because: !



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
I realize this isn't exactly the most popular view, but I have always favored the Hammurabi-esque punishments.

Think about it, how likely is it that a convicted killer gets paroled and kills again if we just go ahead and off him?



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Somehumanbeing
It's a tough call..I really don't like the fact that violence is punished with violence but then some crimes I hear about make me feel different..
For example, I'd like to most pedophiles beaten senseless..


It does seem that the punishments in Islamic law are often fueled by emotion. It seems to be that justice is served in a more "emotionally redeeming event" for the victim, eg eye-eye.


Originally posted by civilchallenger
Laws are often both inhumane and wrong. That is why we should simply try to ensure victims are properly compensated for damages to rather than seeking a bloody revenge. The concept of eye-for-eye is terrible. If someone is a true danger to society we can lock them up and leave it at that, then leave torture to sole domain of sick twisted freaks.


Perhaps.. "Exile" if you're deemed a danger to society. Exiled to a secure place and left to die. Reminds me of Escape from NY.
edit on 13-12-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Does the "Golden Rule" work both ways?

1)Do unto others as you'd have done to you.
2)Have done to you what you have done to others.

I don't think #2 works, because you would have to include good things as well. For example, if I give a poor person $10 to buy food, then shouldn't the government give me $10? No? Then why if I steal $10 from a poor person should I have $20 (10 I stole + 10 for punishment) taken away from me?

Like wise, if save a woman's life by rescuing her from drowning, should she owe me a baby? No.
So why if I kill someone, should I have to give my life?

It seems people are okay with the negative, but not the positive. If we don't honor the positive, then we shouldn't honor the negative.

Mind you, they should lose their freedoms always, but it's not logical to punish them with the crime they committed, because we don't do the same for positive things.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by harrytuttle
 


How bout this for honoring the positive side: you don't blind someone, so we won't blind you.

Upon further review, I will now start expecting no less than one newborn child for each life I save.
edit on 12/13/10 by TokiTheDestroyer because: This space intentionally left blank



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 01:02 AM
link   
If the guy had an affair with another mans wife then blinded him to, I think that he is lucky to get out of that alive in an Islamic country, he is getting off with far less then what he deserves.

It may seem brutal, but they do have things like extramarital affairs happening much less which is good to promote stable family life which is what they value the most.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by TokiTheDestroyer
Upon further review, I will now start expecting no less than one newborn child for each life I save.

Maybe that's why the ladies love firemen so much???



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
In order to live in a civilized socoity we need to have uncivilized punisments for those who commit crimes, such as rape murder and even antisocial behavier,



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Can't say I agree with these types of punishment.. I thought we [humanity] were meant to be trying to be better than the criminals?



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifersjester
 


I totally agree, its been proven through the revolving door prison system we have. Maybe its time we start taking these criminals for their word. Watch any prison show (Gangland) and see how the openly say they are'nt affraid of anything........Oohhh really, say we call that bluff??
We can surely do better then the "eye for a eye" rule of law, but until what we have gets reviewed or replaced, we cant expect more of this type of vengence to come through personal judge and jury and not courts.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing

Iranian Man sentenced to have acid poured on face


www.d ailymail.co.uk

An Iranian man who blinded his lover's husband is to suffer a similar fate in a tit-for-tat sentencing - by having acid poured into his eye.

Iran’s Islamic code allows for ‘an eye-for-an-eye, a tooth-for-a-tooth’ retribution - known as 'qisas' - in cases of violent crime.

The convict, named only as Mojtaba, threw acid in the face of his rival Alireza, a taxi driver, after an illicit affair with the victim’s wife, Mojdeh.

Oh welll! shoudnt of did what he did...period.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...[/exnews ](visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Court orders Iranian man blinded



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:36 AM
link   
Don't agree with the punishment, but it's Iran..they can do what they like. The woman is lucky, i thought she would have been punished also, maybe not acid to the face but she did cheat on her husband, surely some sort of punishment would be given. Anyway, i vehemently disagree with it but not enough to get worked up over or call for regime change in Iran etc etc
edit on 13-12-2010 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
Perhaps.. "Exile" if you're deemed a danger to society. Exiled to a secure place and left to die. Reminds me of Escape from NY.[


They tried that once... it's called Australia



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
Perhaps.. "Exile" if you're deemed a danger to society. Exiled to a secure place and left to die. Reminds me of Escape from NY.[


They tried that once... it's called Australia


Well that worked out fine..I'm proof

Though my family was asked to come here in the late 50's..



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join