Do you think his execution should've been public? And perhaps if America brought back public executions the death penalty would actually MEAN something. Trial----------Appeal-----------Execution
All within six months........THAT'S how you ease overpopulation in the prison system.
2007-01-01 23:58:15 · 7 answers · asked by texrad 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Get over it, this is so last year.
2007-01-02 01:12:11 · answer #1 · answered by Angelz 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
At least Saddam is gone and any hope his supporters had finally died with him. Now the problem is in killing off all the hundreds of thousands of "religious" thugs who are car-bombing marketplaces to kill civilians. All the Sunni and Shiite mosques should be demolished and the religious militias carpet bombed. To get peace in Iraq you'd have to eliminate 3-4 million of these so-called "religious" killers. Kill off enough of them and eventually you would achleve peace by default if for no other reason (dead people cannot drive car bombs into crowds of civilians).
And yes, death penalty should mean death, not 20-30 years on death row with free cable TV and hot dinners, free medical care, and all the perks of hotel life. Convict them and then fry them the next day.
It's not the prison population that has to be reduced as much as it is population in general. There are just too many people crawling all over the place, traffic is at a standstill, air pollution is going full speed, everything is jammed up in the supermarkets, gas stations, parking lots; you've got to find a way to eliminate 40-50% of the entire general population to free up space and resources. In places like China and India more like 60% of the population would have to go. This is the best way to solve the problems in the world.
2007-01-02 00:05:32 · answer #2 · answered by Kokopelli 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, executions should be public.
Yes, the appeals process should be drastically shortened.
No, that won't affect prison population significantly, less than a fraction of 1% of prisoners are on death row. Most are in on possession of some pot or other trivial charges.
2007-01-02 00:05:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion, Saddam was a criminal, he had all those people killed, and an entire people to suffer. But I think executing Saddam made his judges no better than he was.
2007-01-02 00:22:14 · answer #4 · answered by Mihai P 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No justice, untill the persons that set him up are identified, and brought up to conviction, at least he went in dignity, but then he probably ceased to be human.
2007-01-02 00:05:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
i am confused with Saddam and the other guy.. Osama? Whats the difference between them? Or are they the same person? What did Saddam do and what did Osama do? And what religion are they??
2007-01-02 00:01:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It wouldn't make any difference. People's concience and sense of right and wrong (or lack thereof) are what cause them to make good or bad decisions.
2007-01-02 00:03:40 · answer #7 · answered by moose on the loose 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋