Five men facing death penalty after bus rape(523 Posts)
BBC news link here
I'm feeling conflicted about this. Obviously what these men did was horrific, vile and unforgivable. But I just cannot agree with the death penalty.
I feel like I am somehow excusing what they did by not wanting them to be killed, and I can't emphasise enough how despicable I find their actions.
Does the fact that they violated the poor woman's human rights so violently and abhorrently mean they should have their right to life taken away too? Am i being too soft?
I suppose I am asking how you all feel about this, how do you think they should be punished? Also have you ever had your feminist views conflict with other principles, and how have you dealt with this?
<Really hoping I don't get flamed>
I hope they die a slow, torturous death, and rot in hellfire for all of eternity.
Sick bastard animals.
murderofgoths - it happened in a country that has a death penalty because as someone has already pointed out, India has a history if not recording and charging rapists.
So in countries with a death penalty where they do
sometimes prosecute rapists that's stopped rape happening has it?
So upset by this story. I would murder anyone very slowly if they hurt my children and hope this is what happens to the sick evil bastards who did this.
I'm sure I read somewhere that in places where there is a death penalty for rape, the rapists are more likely to go on to kill their victims. Partly because it means the victim definitely can't identify them (more to lose), and partly because the sentence would be the same whether the victim lived or not, so nothing to lose if they do kill them.
The discussion about we can never, ever be 100% sure of anything can go on forever.
Why punish anyone at all then? It isn't very nice to send an innocent person to jail for 20 years either is it?
Since everything and anything can be a conspiracy, why should anyone be sentenced at all?
Murder is wrong, yes. But some people deserve to die. And the men who did this fall in that category. Obviously, anyone is welcome to disagree.
I just find it strange that "feminists" want to go easy on the men who committed such a heinous crime.
I am also not convinced by the distinction between justice and vengeance that is being made in this thread. Justice involves punishing the criminal in a way that is commensurate with the crime committed. This was a heinous crime of epic proportions- 7 or 14 years in jail would NOT be justice.
For those who are saying that death penalty didn't deter the rapists- India doesn't have the death penalty for rape. It has death penalty for the rarest murder cases only and that is almost never executed.
Moreover, this isn't just about deterring the rapists- it's about punishing them in accordance with the crime committed.
It's very easy to be anti-death penalty when you or your family aren't the ones being brutalised or killed. Had this happened to your daughters/mothers/sisters, you'd be baying for blood. Imagine the frustration her parents will feel if they have to live with the knowledge that their daughters' brutalisers were let off after some 7-10 years in jail.
"Murder is wrong, yes. But some people deserve to die."
Can you see how little sense that makes? You can't have both. Either murder is wrong or it isn't. Not murder is wrong, except when you agree with the murderer.
I keep saying this over and over again- India is not going to make death penalty a standard punishment for rape. The concern about every girl who is raped being killed as well is a very valid one, but in this case the death penalty is justified due to two reasons. One, the nature of the crime and two the fact that Indian law does have the death penalty for rare murder cases.
Suggesting that these particular men should be hanged doesn't mean we want every rapist to be hanged or that we want to allow the government to murder people.
The death penalty exists in India for murder under special circumstances. It did not act as a detterant for the 6 men who raped and killed her. In any country that has the death penalty it does not act as a detterant.
Killing murderers is still murder. Even if sanctioned by the state.
What they did was horrific, beyond horrific. Killing them IMO is not punishment for their crimes. It is release from culpability and having to live with what they did. Whether they are remorseful or not, death is too easy a punishment.
You don't understand. Murder of innocents is wrong. The killing of sick, perverted, dangerous rapists and murderers is IMO not wrong.
Do you think Osama Bin Laden should not have been killed? Was that murder also wrong?
What if someone killed your child? Would you still want him/her to live because murder is wrong? I apologise if that was harsh, but put yourself in the victim's shoes and see it from that POV.
Then what do you think would be an appropriate punishment for these men? A simple 14 years in jail?
"Killing murderers is still murder. Even if sanctioned by the state. "
Just because it is rare doesn't change that fact.
Just because you don't want it applied to all rapists doesn't change it.
Also I find it interesting that you don't want all rapists killed, just these. Why is that? Do the other victim's not suffer as much? Do you think there are levels of rape and murder? Is it possible to be "less raped" or "less murdered"? Because if not then why would you want others to be "less punished"?
By the way, the six men did not realise they were killing her (as incredible as that sounds).
The death penalty didn't act as a deterrent because 1)They weren't (according to them) committing a crime that was punishable by death and 2) The death penalty is almost never executed in India. It doesn't deter people because it never happens.
If someone killed my child then yes, I'd want them dead. But that is because I would want revenge, not justice. Justice cannot and should not be based on emotional reactions.
"Do you think Osama Bin Laden should not have been killed? Was that murder also wrong? "
Honestly, yes. I'd rather he stood trial.
Absolutely not WantsToBeFree. I think the rest of their lives. I don't believe that they should ever be allowed to be a part of society again. I think they should be given no privileges whatsoever and be make to work on things that would serve Indian society, whatever that may be.
I don't believe rapists can be rehabilitated. I just think death is too easy an out for them.
And again I ask, in places where they know the crime is punishable by the death sentence does it stop said crime occurring?
Yes, there can be levels of crime. Do you think all it happens every day that women are disemboweled by iron rods and left unable to eat, have sex or reproduce? This is a crime that reached the highest level of brutality.
It isn't about trivialising someone else's trauma (because every rape is horrific), but very few rapes are accompanied by this level of violence. The doctors treating Jyoti admitted that they had never seen this level of brutality.
And I agree with you MurderOfGoths, you cannot be less raped or murdered. Surely if that is your standard then all rapists and murderers should be killed by the state?
I don't like the argument "if it was your child ..." - because this was still someone's child.
Yes, I'd want revenge. So that's a large part of why I'm against he death penalty, because I know that rationally, what is needed is justice. And I think the death penalty is state-sanctioned murder. Also, it doesn't act as a deterrent. Life should mean life, and it should not be easy.
But I hope that morally as a society (if not as individuals) we have gone beyond "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life".
WantsToBeFree are you really arguing that there are you"levels" of raped?
I can see things from that POV. Thank you for explaining.
I guess you didn't lose relatives in 9/11 then. The people who did were happy to hear of Osama's death and would be outraged by your suggestion that someone as monstrous as him should have stood trial.
The perception of justice here is curious. It's about punishing the criminal in accordance with the crime committed. It isn't about revenge and nobody said it was.
Anyway, you and I will never agree on this.
I am not saying that. Please read my entire post.
I am merely saying that this crime was especially horrific, and we can all admit that. Not everyday that a person is brutalised and mutilated with iron rods in this manner. This crime was the most cruel that I have ever heard of.
I am certainly not trivialising rape or trying to classify it.
What is wrong with an eye for an eye? If people can't face the consequences, they shouldn't commit the crime.
If they don't want to die themselves, they shouldn't kill someone.
I did read your entire post WantsToBeFree. It was terribly brutal what was done to that poor woman. Beyond horrific as I said. But I disagree with your argument that there can be levels in regards to rape. How would one even start to define them?
It is IMO brutal no matter what.
Ideally, yes IMO all rapists and murderers should be hanged. But that isn't feasible or possible in any country. Nor would I consider it advisable for various reasons which have already been discussed here.
Join the discussion
Please login first.