right or wrong ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • gmb45
    Admin Assistant
    • Nov 2008
    • 7538

    #1

    right or wrong ?

    whats your opinion on this ?


    A 'spine-for-a spine': Saudi criminal faces having spinal cord severed after paralysing victim with meat cleaver

    A Saudi man convicted of paralysing a fellow countryman in a cleaver attack is being threatened with having his spinal cord cut in a tit-for-tat punishment.
    The ultra-conservative desert Kingdom enforces Islamic law and on rare occasions metes out punishments based on the ancient code of an ?eye-for-an-eye?.
    The case judge in the northwestern province of Tabuk has sent letters to several hospitals seeking their advice on whether it is medically possible to render the attacker?s spinal cord non-functional, local newspapers said.

    King Abdullah, the Saudi monarch, has been trying to clamp down on extremist ideology and is said to be opposed to sentences such as the deliberate crippling of Abdul-Aziz Al-Mutairi's un-named assailant

    One leading hospital said that it could not perform the operation, apparently on ethical grounds. The King Faisal Specialist Hospital ? a leading medical facility in the Saudi capital, Riyadh ? said in a letter of response to the court that 'inflicting such harm is not possible'.
    Another hospital reportedly said it is possible to cut the spinal cord but it was not clear whether it is prepared to do so.
    The punishment can be waived if the victim chooses to accept 'blood money' in reparation.

    The same also applies in capital cases, such as murder. There have been several instances over the years where a convicted murderer?s life has been spared at the 11th hour when his victim?s family has eventually decided to show mercy.

    Despite the rash of ultra-modern buildings Saudi Arabia remains a deeply traditional country. The desert Kingdom follows Islamic law and some sentences still follow the ancient code of an 'eye-for-an-eye'.

    On some occasions the executioner was poised with his sword over the
    condemned man?s neck when the reprieve came.
    But in this instance the victim, Abdul-Aziz Al-Mutairi, is insisting that his attacker ? who has not been named by Saudi media ? suffer the same crippling injury.
    Mutairi, 22, said the culprit had confessed in court to hitting him with a cleaver during a fight more than two years ago, Saudi media reports.
    His attacker has spent several months in jail.
    Such ?eye for eye? punishments are rarely carried out in Saudi Arabia, and Saudi reformists are infuriated when such sentences are passed.
    'No hospital will cut this man?s spinal cord. Any doctor who did could find himself in court,' said a senior Saudi journalist, who did not wish to be named.
    'This is part of an extremist tradition that has nothing to do with Islamic law which places a high value on mercy,' he said.
    Four years ago a Saudi court pardoned an Indian man, Abdul Lateef Noushad, whose eye was to be gouged out. He had blinded another man in a fight over money. The victim eventually pardoned the Indian after the case threatened to cause a diplomatic row. The reprieve came a day before Saudi?s King Abdullah arrived in India on a state visit.
    But ten years ago, an Egyptian worker had an eye surgically removed in a Saudi hospital as punishment for disfiguring a compatriot in an acid attack six years earlier.
    That was said to be the first time in 40 years that a Saudi court had applied literally the principle of ?an eye for an eye?, local media said at the time.
    The Egyptian?s victim had refused a blood money offer of ?87,000. In 2008, an Iranian court sentenced a man to be blinded with acid after he did the same to a woman he was stalking. It is not clear if the punishment was carried out.
    Human rights groups invariably describe such ?eye for an eye?
    punishments as 'abhorrent'. They also say that trials in Saudi Arabia fall far below international standards.Trials usually take place behind closed doors and without adequate legal representation.
    The Kingdom has one of the highest execution rates in the world after China and Iran. The most common method of execution in Saudia Arabia is beheading. The sentences are usually carried out in public.
    But King Abdullah, the Saudi monarch, has been trying to clamp down on extremist ideology and improve the country?s forbidding image. Although in his 80s, he is a reformist. He recently banned unauthorised clerics from issuing bizarre religious decrees known as fatwas.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Saudi man who paralysed countryman with cleaver faces having spinal cord severed in 'eye-for-an-eye' punishment | Mail Online
    support mountain resue

    support digital-kaos here


    forum rules

    no keygens or torrents to be posted no autodata discussions

    pish pt walkers


  • barrowmanandrew
    V.I.P. Member
    • Nov 2009
    • 3427

    #2
    well it would make you think twice about carrying a weapon.
    dunno though, doesn't sit right with me.....
    it says on the article that it has one of the highest execution rates in the world, so these horriic sentences don't seem to be deterring anyone....

    Comment

    • gmb45
      Admin Assistant
      • Nov 2008
      • 7538

      #3
      Originally posted by barrowmanandrew
      well it would make you think twice about carrying a weapon.
      dunno though, doesn't sit right with me.....
      it says on the article that it has one of the highest execution rates in the world, so these horriic sentences don't seem to be deterring anyone....
      but if you believe in religion an eye for an eye.
      ( dont turn this thread into a religious slanging match )
      punishment should fit the crime, but how would u make the punishment fit this crime ?
      Last edited by gmb45; 20 August, 2010, 09:01.
      support mountain resue

      support digital-kaos here


      forum rules

      no keygens or torrents to be posted no autodata discussions

      pish pt walkers


      Comment

      • barrowmanandrew
        V.I.P. Member
        • Nov 2009
        • 3427

        #4
        Originally posted by gmb45
        but if you believe in religion an eye for an eye.
        ( dont turn this thread into a religious slanging match )
        punishment should fit the crime, but how would u make the punishment fit this crime ?
        true, i take your point ..
        but how far do you go?
        say he had murdered someones child, does that mean his child should be murdered to even up the score?
        i just dont think cutting someones spine on purpose is a civilised thing to do.
        but then again, the guy must have known the laws in his country and they are partial to cutting off peoples heads.
        he must have known these are not empty threats...
        so he cant really complain...

        Comment

        • gmb45
          Admin Assistant
          • Nov 2008
          • 7538

          #5
          Originally posted by barrowmanandrew
          true, i take your point ..
          but how far do you go?
          say he had murdered someones child, does that mean his child should be murdered to even up the score?
          i just dont think cutting someones spine on purpose is a civilised thing to do.
          but then again, the guy must have known the laws in his country and they are partial to cutting off peoples heads.
          he must have known these are not empty threats...
          so he cant really complain...
          but what if he has mental health probs ? is their mental health diagnosis/treatment etc like ours ? if it aint then this man could be punished for something thats not his fault. im not condoning/condeming their laws, just debating the subject.
          support mountain resue

          support digital-kaos here


          forum rules

          no keygens or torrents to be posted no autodata discussions

          pish pt walkers


          Comment

          • Canker_Canison
            V.I.P. Member
            • May 2010
            • 3905

            #6
            The other side to think on is the way the justice system is run.

            Trials usually take place behind closed doors and without adequate legal representation
            What's to say this guy only used the cleaver because Mr Victim was trying to kill him. He was charged because he caused the most damage.

            As with all penelties of this type there has to be clear confirmed guilt. But I'm not sure you can get that in a closed court system. His statement may have been.. "Yes, I hit him with the cleaver. I had to otherwise he would of killed me with the gun he pulled out of his jacket"
            But I'll the courts hear is "Yes, I hit him with the cleaver". Finishing with... "He was never given the chance to use the gun. He may of just used it to scare you off"


            But if they wanna go around cutting peoples heads off, removing eyes & cutting spinal cords...let 'em get on with it. Eventually there won't be anyone else left to execute.
            Canker

            "Animal, vegetable or mineral... I'll do anything, to anything, with anything"
            - The Baby Eating Bishop of Bath & Wells
            [COLOR=Green]

            Comment

            • barrowmanandrew
              V.I.P. Member
              • Nov 2009
              • 3427

              #7
              Originally posted by gmb45
              but what if he has mental health probs ? is their mental health diagnosis/treatment etc like ours ? if it aint then this man could be punished for something thats not his fault. im not condoning/condeming their laws, just debating the subject.
              good point,
              i have no idea what there there laws on mental health are.
              i am not condemming or condoning their system either.
              there system is alien to us..
              it is an interesting debate...

              Comment

              • lesj
                Junior Member
                • Nov 2008
                • 24

                #8
                Its not for us to say wether its wrong or right its not our buisness and we should watch and realise how lucky we are and stay out of it, geting involved in other peoples buisness can cause havoc, ask Tony Blair/george bush

                Comment

                • barrowmanandrew
                  V.I.P. Member
                  • Nov 2009
                  • 3427

                  #9
                  Originally posted by lesj
                  Its not for us to say wether its wrong or right its not our buisness and we should watch and realise how lucky we are and stay out of it, geting involved in other peoples buisness can cause havoc, ask Tony Blair/george bush
                  fair enough, your quite correct.. its not our business..
                  but, should we ignore everything that doesn't concern us?
                  i.e. african famines, rwanda genocide, indian ocean tsunami?
                  Last edited by barrowmanandrew; 21 August, 2010, 02:55.

                  Comment

                  • gmb45
                    Admin Assistant
                    • Nov 2008
                    • 7538

                    #10
                    hmmmmm, some good points, i think yes we should keep out of their judicial system no matter how wrong or right we think it is, after all some states in the usa still have the death penalty and they are supposed to be a civilised country and our "cousins" yet we dont say much bout them when they put some one to death, until there is a totally united world then we should keep out of other countries affairs to some extent, as for famine etc yes we have to help as much as we can, we in this country are very lucky, we will never starve, die from a disease thats easily cured, have to drink dirty water etc etc etc,
                    no matter how much of a shambles we think this country is atm we are a lot better off than a lot of the world.
                    support mountain resue

                    support digital-kaos here


                    forum rules

                    no keygens or torrents to be posted no autodata discussions

                    pish pt walkers


                    Comment

                    • barrowmanandrew
                      V.I.P. Member
                      • Nov 2009
                      • 3427

                      #11
                      yep, that about sums it up. we stick our noses in when it suits us.
                      as mentioned, nothing gets said about our american "cousins" and the death penalty,
                      also china, look at there record on human rights, disgracefull. british government dont seem too bothered about that. maybe because we do too much business with them?? or because they are too strong for us now...
                      which makes me wonder "why are we still in Iraq?"
                      i admit i was totally fooled with Mr Blairs "weapons of mass destruction" statement
                      But should we really be in there forcing our way of life on them?
                      as before, im not condemming or condoning it... just raising some interesting points

                      Comment

                      • Meat-Head
                        V.I.P. Member
                        • Oct 2009
                        • 32000

                        #12
                        See the argument, but pointless immbolising a working perso even if they went faulty and damaged another person, Asked the bloke with the wig on yesterday, as had to go see him (bussiness not pleasure) and he suggested

                        1) Get some motor insurance, mot and road tax, stop speeding, stop
                        for officers of the law, put lights on your bicycle (think he means me)

                        2) The guilty person should be made to feed, clean, bathe etc his victim for evermore
                        (or swap victims with another person)

                        3) Injected with muscle relants once a month to make his unable to do his job

                        4) fitted with some kind of metal 'suit or armour' to slow him down.

                        5) If it was a leg, or arm, and IF it was possable to disconnect and reprogramme to
                        his victims leg, or arm, assuming the security data was available for both
                        bodies then yes.

                        sigpicWas Banned For Being Certifiably Insane and Stupid

                        Comment

                        Working...