execution itself dosen't give us justice. sentences should be termed in such a way to make the so called criminal realise of his or her wrong doings......
2006-12-30 17:15:58 · 6 answers · asked by falash 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The legal system has never absorbed the lesson of Gilbert and Sullivan: "My object so sublime / I shall achieve in time / To make the punishment fit the crime / The punishment fit the crime."
It is designed to keep the peace, and to serve the ends of pragmatism and political convenience.
2006-12-30 17:18:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
In the case such as Saddam's - a man who couldn't understand in his own mind why he was even on trial because he had done nothing wrong - a prison term would not serve the purpose of perhaps making him realize his wrong doings.
Execution was proper - and just.
2006-12-31 01:22:30 · answer #2 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The implicit assumption there is that the criminal can in fact recognize the wrongdoing and react in an appropriate manner. But this is certainly false in at least some cases, and Saddam Hussein was a classic example.
2006-12-31 01:21:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the only way i could see Saddam paying for what he's done in life other then being hung is to be tortured every way imaginable for 23hrs a day, 6 days a week.... the sixth day he can sit in a catholic church for service
2006-12-31 01:19:50 · answer #4 · answered by TJ815 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Execution is also a form of terrorism!
2006-12-31 01:22:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
On the whole, America seems to think so
2006-12-31 01:17:50 · answer #6 · answered by Ferret 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋