Five men facing death penalty after bus rape

[allthegoodnamesweretaken]

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?

Hmm, I agree fairy Jen, the alternative to death penalty in this case, would be spending thousands of pounds spent on keeping 6 men alive for say 60 more years. Is that where you want to spend your limited resources?

The Indian women leader I have seen speaking wanted death penalties for murderers, but not for rapists - because if it were the same penalty, then the rapists might as well murder too. :(

"And sorry but my view is that unfortunately it may be on the very rare occasion an innocent person may be killed, but you have to weigh it up. "

Sorry, I'm losing track, is murder of innocents wrong or right?

That's a fantastic post Murder.

"Zombie - It wont turn the tide of how women are viewed. There needs to be far more work done than simply killing these men. That will be quickly forgotten. "

That's a fair point.

Not only will it not make much difference, it may even make it worse. As then people can say, "well they were evil, they were subhuman, that's why they died, that's why they did what they did". And people wont be forced to examine the culture that allowed these men to feel entitled to violate this poor woman in such a horrific way.

Thank you Trills It's something I've thought long and hard about, especially as my gut reaction in these kinds of cases is, "kill them". I'm aware though that there is no logic behind my gut reaction, just emotion.

(totally OT, but every time someone writes "murder" I think they are talking to me )

I don't post on this forum as a general rule but reading the posts so far, I have a great many thoughts about it and can't put them eloquently or succinctly enough to be truly representative of my POV.

Some thoughts are glib; 2 wrongs don't make a right. Treat others as you would wish to be treated. Murder is murder regardless etc.

I also think this crime is totally abhorrent and the men that commited it truly evil. However, I don't believe that the death penalty was a deterrent in this, or any other case, that the reason these men commited such a vicious brutal attack is more to do with their attitude to women than the justice system (or lack thereof).

I am against the death penalty. It doesn't work. It only rids the planet of 1 criminal (or possibly innocent person) and does nothing to prevent others committing the crime. You've only got to look at the nuclear 'deterrent' to see that things spiral out of control.

Finally, I wonder who we get to commit such acts of "justice" on our behalf? Surely a truly innocent un-evil person would not be willing or unaffected by such actions. Do they not then get debased by the act of murder, even if state sanctioned? If the person is happy to do it, what does that say about them? Surely it opens to question whether, by quirk of fate, such an sociopathic personality would not have been committing such acts, but without state sanction?

I don't think you can be against the death penalty except... without being hypocritical. Where do you draw the line? You can't undo such an act if it turns out the crime wasn't commited by them or if society changes and no longer deems the action a crime. Clearly rape and murder are evil acts and unjustified, BUT people were once locked up & treated inhumanely for being gay or mentally ill. We now have a greater understanding of certain aspects of human behaviour. Please note, I am NOT suggesting this crime is or will ever be viewed in a different light (I.e. justified or tolerated) in any way but that the classification of an evil or abhorrent acts can and does change. Sodomy was illegal and called evil & abhorrent despite it between consensual and between 2 adults, but is viewed differently now.

Having said all that, I would find it very hard to be rational and apply my own logic if it were my child, relative or friend. I too would want revenge.

I've probably been repeating a number of views and cross-posted with others as I type, and whilst I don't claim to have an expertise in this area or even on feminism, I don't believe this is a feminist issue. Preventing anti-women crimes, changing society to ensure men and women are treated equally and hopefully fairly, educating people and ensuring justice is applied equally towards sexes is a feminist issue. This crime was against a woman, true, and the circumstances of it, and the repetition of such crimes, are mysogonistic and therefore a feminist issue, but the application of the death penalty is, imo, a "humanist" issue and nothing to do with individual crimes/criminals - that is revenge. As humans and feminists, surely we should rise above such baser instincts and respond to crimes & apply justice with our heads, not our hearts?

i amm utterly against the death penalty in all cases, but this crime is as serious as it gets - they raped her so violently and visciously it caused her to die so whether they were charged with murder or not they did kill her as well as rape her - so the perpetrators need to get the harshest penalty that exists in that country.

India has the death penalty so it has to be applied.

I would prefer india didn't have the death penalty but that's seperate from the argument about whether these criminals should face the harshest penalty a country can apply.

I haven't thought about it enough really, and I can't express a lot of the things that I'd like to say.

I want to use the words "rape culture".

I want to say that there are people out there who use "these monsters were not human" to draw a line between bad-murdery-rape (which they would never do) and too-drunk-to-consent-rape or she-didn't-really-say-no-rape (which they would do but wouldn't call "rape"). The feeling of "I'm nowhere near as bad as them, therefore I'm fine".

1 I too am appalled by the crimes committed by these men.

2 I too am completely against the death penalty (though I am open to persuasion that Crimes Against Humanity such as Genocide, which for some reason is now called ethnic cleansing, should attract a death penalty). For all of the reasons stated here. It is not a deterrent, It does not give justice to anyone, and there will always be mistakes. It is state sanctioned Murder.

1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive.

Churchill said that a society's attitude to its prisoners, its "criminals", is the measure of "the stored up strength of a nation?. I think that the state killing people is a particularly weak response.

There is also part of me that feels that society SHOULD pay to house these people in prison for the rest of their lives. They were created by the society that they grew up in, and so society must pay the price of creating them. To have the death penalty just puts them conveniently out of mind, rather than a living breathing reminder of what happened to that poor woman. I don?t know if that makes any sense?

Totally appropriate! Kill them. All rapists deserve the death penalty when no question of doubt like this. Might make people think about raping anoher.

You soft imagine it was your daughter.

Those that are making the argument about limited resources for life imprisonment need to be aware that (in the US at least, and I'm assuming that if you are in favour of the death penalty as part of a justice system you want it to be subject to checks and balances rather than the whims of a kangaroo court), putting a criminal on Death Row is more expensive overall than imprisoning them for life, due to the cost of appeals etc. If you then argue that the appeals etc should be done away with, then basically you're condoning the execution of even more innocent people than at the moment, purely on cost grounds.

"Finally, I wonder who we get to commit such acts of "justice" on our behalf? Surely a truly innocent un-evil person would not be willing or unaffected by such actions. Do they not then get debased by the act of murder, even if state sanctioned? If the person is happy to do it, what does that say about them? Surely it opens to question whether, by quirk of fate, such an sociopathic personality would not have been committing such acts, but without state sanction?"

That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered.

"I want to say that there are people out there who use "these monsters were not human" to draw a line between bad-murdery-rape (which they would never do) and too-drunk-to-consent-rape or she-didn't-really-say-no-rape (which they would do but wouldn't call "rape"). The feeling of "I'm nowhere near as bad as them, therefore I'm fine"."

I think I was trying to put that across in a clumsy way, but you've expressed it better than I could have.

"There is also part of me that feels that society SHOULD pay to house these people in prison for the rest of their lives. They were created by the society that they grew up in, and so society must pay the price of creating them. To have the death penalty just puts them conveniently out of mind, rather than a living breathing reminder of what happened to that poor woman. I don?t know if that makes any sense?"

Makes perfect sense. It's almost brushing it under the carpet isn't it?

"Might make people think about raping anoher."

In the countries with a death penalty for murder has it stopped people murdering others?

I think bad has an interesting point. India does have the death penalty so if the question is doe these men deserve this punishment under the laws of their country then yes I think they do.

It is shown that death doesn't work as a deterrent but neither does prison so what is the answer?

What goth and trills have said, what these men have done is abhorrent but I don't agree with the death penalty. That doesn't make me asny less of a feminist.

And yes if this happened to my daughter I would want to kill them in a slow painful way, but the justice system doesn't work that way. Victims and their families don't get to seek revenge thank goodness.

As they are in India they face the death penalty as that is the law in that country, that doesn't mean we have to agree with it.

Yes they need to be punished, no I don't think these particular men cans be rehabilitated so life imprisonment, meaning life would be reasonable.

The death penalty isn't. Not to say their aren't times when I feel I would like it for some criminals, bug in then long run I don't think its the answer.

Murder, the number would be a whole lot higher i'm sure!

I agree that those talking about 'evil' subhuman people who do bad things are making them other to themselves so they can wash their hands of them.

A child abuser is likely to have been abused themselves as a child. Can anyone honestly say that in different circumstances, and with a different upbringing they definitely wouldn't go down the criminal path because they're not 'evil'? Look at those poor child soldiers in places like Africa. Do they need executing because they're evil, or do they need care and support, and action to be taken so that children aren't raised that way in the future? Are they to blame for their actions?

I imagine the herd affect makes people commit far more brutal crimes than they would otherwise. I suppose that there is some similarly between the rapists and the murderous rioters in August 2011.

I feel that India should choose what to do with these men. I doult that the death penalty will prevent a similar tragety. I don't know how planned the attroitous murder and rape of Jyoti. I suspect that these men acted on the spur of the moment.

I would hope that these men have proper trial with access to a good legal team. If they are to do be executed then I hope it is done quickly and humanely as possible.

India is a poor country. If its considered that these men are not fit for society then executing them is reasonable. It is not practical to have someone in jail for 60 years in a third world country. India has more deserving people to spend their money on.

And as for how to stop rape? I think its about education and ensuring our sons are brought up to respect women (and men) and that no means no.

If society as a whole stands up against this kind of behavior we might get somewhere but whilst we have rape apologists and people that excuse it as drunken antics etc there will always be men that think its OK.

Its a power issue.

"Murder, the number would be a whole lot higher i'm sure!"

Are you? Are there any figures to support that? Because I don't imagine there are unfortunately.

Actually, this makes interesting reading. Apparently, in the US, states without the death penalty actually have lower murder rates.

I will carry on googling though as that website might be biased.

And yes noble we need to look at why people commit crime, its easy to just say they are evil, 'not like us' etc but that doesn't address the issue.

The victim deserved to live her life without being raped and tortured! The evil bastard scumbags deserve to die a very slow and painful death imo and perhaps it would deter other shitheads from carrying out similar crimes. Let the fuckers die!

"perhaps it would deter other shitheads from carrying out similar crimes"

Unlikely