English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I've been thinkin a lot about this since saddam was sentenced. Is it wrong or is it right? And is it justice? Is it actually a worse punishment than life in prison? Your thoughts!

2006-11-17 22:25:05 · 16 answers · asked by Alicia D 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

16 answers

Your question is complex... I see 3 parts:

1. In the event someone gets the death penalty for committing an atrocity, is life in prison worse than the death penatly.
2. Is the death penalty moral?
3. Does Saddam deserve the death penalty?

Answers:
1.
A. Is murder as a punishment considered 'cruel and unusual' when it is done in a humane way that causes no pain?

B. Why is it acceptable to murder a criminal when murder, the taking of a life, is considered a crime by society.

C. If you are religious, 'thou shalt not kill' is one of the 10 commandments.

Now with all that said, the question was what do I think...

My mind says:
I think that only God has the right to take a life... that is the bottom line.

My heart says:
If someone harmed someone I love, I would rip their head off with my bare hands after first torturing them.

2. See #1.

3. Concerning Saddam
I'm not saying that Saddam doesn't deserve to live but I do have a problem with the means (methods and reasons) he is being sentenced to death. (Btw I hate this argument because I sound like a Saddam sympathizer. I'm not but I have to be true to myself in fairness to ALL people)
A. Saddam gased the Kurds... approximately 10,000 Kurds including women and children died. That number is accurate but if you listen to the media they make it out to be 100,000+. Not that 10,000 is ok but rather to clarify. Now, you have to look at the reasoning... Iraq was at war with Iran and the Kurdish state is next to the Iran border. The Kurds were attempting a revolution against their Iraqi nation so they conspired with the Iranians. Basically making a deal to help them get into the country in exchange for independence in the event that Iran won. Saddam got wind of this. His forces were weak and from what I've read, malnourished, etc... meaning not a lot of means to conduct a civil war on top of the Iranian war. So, Saddam then decided to wipe them out.

Now with that said, it sounds horrific... women and children, etc... BUT I ask you, say we were at war with Canada and say Maine was found to be treasonist and helping Canada... then when you add to that the fact that say one particular race resided in Maine, it makes target easier.

My point is: the Kurds, being part of the Iraqi nation, were committing treason. I'm not saying that killing 10,000 of them was ok. I am saying with a weakened military, I can at least see where it came from.

Did we not do the same with Naga. and Hiroshima when we were weakened and saw the only way to win as nuking them? Btw, we killed 2 million including women and children. We sit today and say 'we had to or we would have lost'.

B. For some reason, our American public calls Saddam a dictator... maybe we need to believe that or whatever. Saddam was actually an elected president. Now some say that he manipuluated the elections. I ask you, "How many countries throughout our entire world manipulate elections in order to stay in power yet be called democracies?" My point is: that is not enough reason for me... Not while we sit by and watch other nations do the same.

C. Saddam condoned torture
We, the USA, have been using torture methods throughout this entire war through rendition. In case you don't know what rendition is, it is where we capture a prisoner then we ship that prisoner to a country that allows torture (most commonly Egypt) then after they have completed torture, they give us the info they acquired.

D. Based on the fact that we, the USA, had no right whatsoever to invade, occupy and overturn the Iraqi government, I actually hold truth in Saddam's argument that the courts that have put him on trial have no validity.

2006-11-17 22:58:55 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 2 1

Its a question I myself have often thought about.

And I can see both sides of the arguement. But when you consider the ridiculously leniant sentences given to rapists and murders- the death penalty seems justified.

After all- if you perform such a heinous act- you must be prepared to loose your own life.

Also consider this. The victims families left behind are the ones given the REAL sentence.

They have to live with their loved one having met a violent and senseless death. Imagine then knowing that sooner or later that same person who took away your son (daughter whatever), may be eligable to be released back into the world.

So to answer your question- yes! Capital punishment is a great idea in my opinion. Its also a brilliant solution to the over crowding in jails.

The Iceman.

2006-11-17 22:33:04 · answer #2 · answered by The Iceman 3 · 0 0

I think this is a debate that will never be solved. I believe in the death penalty but our system is slow about it and many that are sentanced to death die waiting for there sentance to be carried out. Life in prison is a good idea also but we have limited space and in the long run you end up with a convict that is old and sick. Costing the people lots of money to take care of. I am excited to read all the answers you get on this one. GOOD QUESTION

2006-11-17 23:03:22 · answer #3 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 0 0

I would fully support the death penalty if it were reinstated in the UK. I'm sure more people would think more carefully about their actions before they carried them out. In fact, I would be prepared to give up my job and become a hangman if the penatly was reinstated.

In the case of Saddam Hussein, he has been sentenced in his own country, by an Iraqi court, under their own laws. So yes, I think it is right. But I guess it will give someone something to protest about.

2006-11-17 22:34:59 · answer #4 · answered by Tom 2 · 0 0

May I reccomend a film to you?

It is called "A Short film about Killing" and is by the Polish director Kieslowski. It is about a murderer and the death penalty.

Like many, I hate criminals and feelthat society is too lax. But I always wonder what happens if the wrong man is killed? And surely the death penalty makes it possible for the state to dispose of people who are political prisoners, for instance?

It can so easily be abused.

2006-11-18 07:22:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I myself think that Saddam be set free. Not that he wasn't responsible for alot of brutal murders. But because of the way our government brought the whole thing about. Our president went into his country on false pretenses just so good ol G.W. could get his greedy hands on more oil. Sure Saddam was a murderer. But he was against terrorism. He hated them bast ards. And he kept them all in check. Just take a good look at whats happened since he was brought down. Turn Saddam loose and let him have another shot at it.

2006-11-17 22:37:25 · answer #6 · answered by Justa_Honay_Guy 3 · 0 0

Twenty different people have 20 different opinions... but..

For some prisoners, they say that life-in-prison is worse than a death penalty. For others, - they say the death penalty is worse.

Right-and-wrong are moral type questions, that relate directly to who you consider your God is,- or maybe you yourself think that you're the ultimate authority?

But from what the Bible infers, the death penalty is a legitimate alternative for a governed society. I'm particularly for it.

2006-11-17 22:32:25 · answer #7 · answered by MK6 7 · 1 0

The death penalty is deserving for mass murderers, serial killers and people who murder while committing another crime such as raping and then killing someone or robbing a store and then killing the owner or a customer.

These are not good people and don't care at all about your life. And people shouldn't be taxed by supporting them in prison all their life.
They made their choice in life and have to deal with the consequences.

2006-11-18 00:00:01 · answer #8 · answered by sister_godzilla 6 · 0 0

I support the death penalty for certain murders and sex offenses. I don't believe Saddam should be executed because his crimes are no worse than crimes by other dictators like him who are left to continue their corruption and destruction, and because his death would be a disaster for the security situation in Iraq.

2006-11-17 22:29:29 · answer #9 · answered by Aaron Zachariah 2 · 0 0

as we say to err is human and to forgive is divine or a man learns from his mistakes.but,saddam hussain is a sadistic dictator who has killed thousands of innocent people.he deserves the death penalty.it will serve as a deterrent to others.george w.bush has done the right thing by getting him prosecuted.my support for execution of saddam stands firm.rest is destiny.

2006-11-17 22:30:36 · answer #10 · answered by brain007 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers