if a person A murder person B, should A be sentenced to death? tats means death = death is it?
2006-11-15 19:41:30 · 15 answers · asked by zorro_4040 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
He is guilty of mass murders. He has lived the life of 10 rich men. He is an arrogant *** hole, he should be put down for the crimes against the Iraqi people.
2006-11-15 20:21:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
To the likes of Saddam, Hitler, Stalin and the rest the only sentence proper for them would be Athenian Draconian Law.
So you don't have to go History searching, the Athenians (once they convicted someone of similar crimes "beyond reasonable doubt", the will lead the individual to a place out side Athens where a public execution took place. They had two Pine trees grown approx. 15ft apart. They would bend their tops, tie the convicts legs on each, and then "let go". Cruel, inhumane, and down right horrible.
One draw back to this type of execution though....You see after a few of these public executions, there were no more rapists, Armed Robbers, Hijackers, Highway Robbers, thugs praying on the weal, or mass murderers, including convicted traitors.....
funny how the Ancients worked out some things isn't' it.
History reports, that you could walk/travel safely, camp outdoors,
or never had to worry if the door is locked, anywhere within the Athenians territories.
2006-11-15 19:57:32 · answer #2 · answered by dorianalways 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He should not be sentenced to death. One, because he is no more guilty of murder than Bush is. Think of the reported 100,000+ people that have been killed (iraqi citizens) under Bush's watch...would anyone be willing to say that Bush was guilty of their murder? I hardly think so. Would anyone even be willing to accuse the military of their murder? Of course not. They were killed because this is war, and in war people are killed, apparently this is ok to some. So if it's ok for us, then it's ok for everyone. Besides, Hussein was apparently only battling against (far less number of)people who were trying to overthrow him. Let a group in america attempt to overthrow Bush, or anyone else, and see how fast they are wiped off the face of the earth. I say if you are going to kill hussein then you should seriously consider at the very least prosecuting those in our government who have been responsible for no less horrible(and in some cases far worse) actions.
2006-11-15 20:58:57 · answer #3 · answered by fortwynt 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He has already been sentenced to death, now he is just appealing it to try to overturn the verdict. But I doubt he'll succeed in his appeal.
I think your question should have been "Do yall believe in the death penalty?" And leave Sadam out of it, cause he's already been prosecuted.
2006-11-15 19:58:02 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, what happened to the American solders who raped that little girl in front of her family in Iraq?
what happened to the American solders who tortured, raped, and killed innocent people in Cuba?
what happened to the American "fly boy" who dropped bombs on a Canadian armed forces base (miles from any actual combat), the madding thing was his defence was that he "was high"
answer = nothing, slap in the wrist, American administration is in no place to decide what to do with war criminals. half of the white house is full of men that have prov-en without a doubt that they can not tell right from wrong!
2006-11-15 21:30:42 · answer #5 · answered by bubbles 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question should be....why was he taken alive in the first place?? We blow the country apart to find him, killing thousands of innocent victims and then take his butt alive. More money, legal fees and now an appeal to keep the enemy alive on our tab! Makes no sense to me.
2006-11-15 20:30:42 · answer #6 · answered by Cub6265 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As people said here "He has already been sentenced to death"
I suggest hanging him off his nuts!!!
2006-11-15 20:11:26 · answer #7 · answered by Pishisauraus 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't understand underneath you're question but yes do think he should be sentenced to death, he's in-human.
2006-11-15 19:44:33 · answer #8 · answered by Melissa 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Short answer, no. As heinous as Saddam's crimes were, killing him in a reprehensible manner (no form of killing is ever actually not-reprehensible) makes the new population look bloodthirsty and automatically stoops them to his level. Saddam was an evil, evil man. But killing him would not wash him of his sin, nor would it have any long term stabilizing effect on Iraq.
2006-11-15 19:44:59 · answer #9 · answered by Owen 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Saddam Hussien was already sentenced to die by hanging.
2006-11-15 19:44:43 · answer #10 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋