Poll: Paedophile sentenced to be beheaded then crucified

[Hurr Durr Derp]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

You're forgetting that in this particular case, the man was executed without even getting to see a lawyer. That's hardly a proper way to clear up any potential mistakes.

 

[Numb1lp]

That's really crazy stuff.

 

[Sindaine]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

You're forgetting that in this particular case, the man was executed without even getting to see a lawyer. That's hardly a proper way to clear up any potential mistakes.

People keep bringing this up. Do lawyers even exist over there?

 

[Internet Kraken]

Sorry, that was a bit difficult to understand, I'll admit. My point was that regardless of whether or not it deters other criminals, it will stop this one from committing any more crimes without a shadow of a doubt.

While I disagree with killing someone for such a purpose, I will say that if you do so at least do it in a humane way. Beheading someone and then crucifying their corpse serves no purpose.

It stops repeat offenses and provides some emotional relief for the victims.

I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If you kill and rape children, I think a punishment like this is perfectly fitting, especially considering that rape gives people mental illnesses (I know this for a fact), and pretty much screws up their whole lives.

That;s not true. Unless you can prove that rape is 100% guaranteed to have screwed up the lives of everyone that has been raped, then you can't call it a fact.

And really, does beheading someone and crucifying their corpse really provide emotion relief for the victims? I doubt that seeing a vermin infested corpse nailed to wooden planks would help them.

 

[asdasdasdasda]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

You're forgetting that in this particular case, the man was executed without even getting to see a lawyer. That's hardly a proper way to clear up any potential mistakes.

Yes, in this case, it was wrong. Everyone deserves a fair trial.

 

[Pifflestick]

I agree with the beheading, but the crucifixtion afterwards just seems like overkill. But I wish they would behead pedos in every country. It would solve a lot of problems.

 

[Internet Kraken]

I think it's a great crime deterrent and I wish that it was implemented here in the U.S. That would be swell.

Oh look

I just wonder what sort of deterant this is if they have had to decapitate 40 people this year. Something isn't working.

This person already pointed out the flaw in this logic.

40 people a year!?! Lets compare that to the amount of rapes and murders and shit that happen in the U.S. every year. If we could slim down the crime rate 1% per year by using this method then it would be considered a success in many peoples eyes. What flaw are you talking about?

You're missing the point. The point is that this does not prevent crimes. There is no evidence to suggest that. We already have a death penalty in the US and we still have higher crimes.

Secondly, this is just one method of killing people in Saudi Arabia. I vet they have other, more common forms of capital punishment. You also seem to be forgetting that this man was put on trial without a lawyer. That's another reason not to use this form of justice.

 

[Maze1125]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

Because you can never be 100% sure.
DNA is fallible, and people misunderstand just how fallible it is. (There was an article about it in last week's New Scientist even.)
Witnesses, again, are extremely fallible, it's even possible for someone to convince themselves that they committed the crime and even fabricate their own memories of doing it when, in fact, they're completely innocent.

Why are you so keen to remove a life, when life imprisonment is just as an effective protection of society and, in many ways, a worse punishment?

 

[Silva]

If you're going to frame someone, why go to all the trouble of raping five toddlers to do it? You could just say he'd forgotten to pray or looked in the direction of someone else's wife or something. That's so fucked up I don't see how it applies.

You're forgetting that framing can occur if someone else has already done the crime, and has decided to find a scapegoat to accuse instead. It's not a question of going out and raping some kids so that you can frame the accused.

And the problem with your locking-up-as-justice is, it's no justice at all. He gets locked up nice and safe, fed and cared for on the State's dime for howevermany years, meanwhile his victims--the ones that managed to survive what he did to them--continue to suffer, forgotten. At least this way they can have some measure of peace, knowing he's dead and can never come hurt them again. (Though most probably still have nightmares about that very thing.)

You're forgetting court compensation, which is given to victims of crimes very commonly. It may not be a life with food and drink, but we have to remember, a life sentence is only life if the criminal remains alive. And really, that's all they're getting. Life. You can't buy a plasma TV one day if you're convicted.

Meanwhile, if you're a victim, and you're disturbed as a result... well, the relevant benefits can be requested. The state of Saudi Arabia is also rich enough to achieve such a balance, so there is no excuse for this. Whether or not they would do it, that's another matter. But change takes time.

 

[Internet Kraken]

You're missing the point.

Maybe I am, but then again, a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye (And IMO, a poor one). Why aren't you off arguing against that?

There is a big difference between preventing someone from doing further harm and brutally killing them.

Except, most of the time, you're not preventing them from doing further harm, and furthermore, sticking them in a place full of people like them will only make them worse.

I don't see how they are doing further harm in prison.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

I think we should do this here.. Pedophiles don't have rights anymore. Of course special exceptions to those who are wrongfully sentenced, but small price to pay for it, maybe you'll start checking age better.

 

[Sindaine]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

Because you can never be 100% sure.
DNA is fallible, and people misunderstand just how fallible it is. (There was an article about it in last week's New Scientist even.)
Witnesses, again, are extremely fallible, it's even possible for someone to convince themselves that they committed the crime and even fabricate their own memories of doing it when, in fact, they're completely innocent.

Why are you so keen to remove a life, when life imprisonment is just as an effective protection of society and, in many ways, a worse punishment?

Worse in what way? He gets a safe place to live, free food and medical care for the rest of his worthless life.

 

[Woem]

You're asking two questions here:
1/ Is beheading and crucifiction humane?
2/ Does a paedophile deserve the death penalty?

 

[Sindaine]

Btw, to whom was arguing that being raped doesn't fuck a child up mentally:

A. you disgusting pedo,

and

B. Ask any child pyschiatrist. Any one. Ever. Seriously, get off the computer right now, go look it up in the phonebook and call the nearest one to ask them; they'll tell you.

 

[Maze1125]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

Because you can never be 100% sure.
DNA is fallible, and people misunderstand just how fallible it is. (There was an article about it in last week's New Scientist even.)
Witnesses, again, are extremely fallible, it's even possible for someone to convince themselves that they committed the crime and even fabricate their own memories of doing it when, in fact, they're completely innocent.

Why are you so keen to remove a life, when life imprisonment is just as an effective protection of society and, in many ways, a worse punishment?

Worse in what way? He gets a safe place to live, free food and medical care for the rest of his worthless life.

Maybe you should try living in a Saudi Arabian prison before you make claims like that.

 

[asdasdasdasda]

a prison sentence is just another form of eye for an eye

No it isn't.
The point of a prison sentence is to keep the offender off of the streets until they rehabilitated.
Or, at least, it ought to be.

See, the thing is, when you've raped 5 people, you're likely not going to rehabilitate. Not to mention, in most cases, you're getting a life sentence. Just accelerate the whole process, torture him to death over a week, cost a lot less money then feeding him for years.

And what if he's innocent? Even the fairest judicial system will sometimes make mistakes. People have been released only days from their execution.
Life imprisonment keeps the guy away from society and allows mistakes to be rectified if they are found later.

I'll agree with that to a point. But there's several cases with DNA evidence and such. Our police force is only getting better and better at this sort of thing. Yes, sometimes there's mistakes. But if you've got witnesses, dna, etc. Then why not?

Because you can never be 100% sure.
DNA is fallible, and people misunderstand just how fallible it is. (There was an article about it in last week's New Scientist even.)
Witnesses, again, are extremely fallible, it's even possible for someone to convince themselves that they committed the crime and even fabricate their own memories of doing it when, in fact, they're completely innocent.

Why are you so keen to remove a life, when life imprisonment is just as an effective protection of society and, in many ways, a worse punishment?

Yes, they're fallible, very rarely. And we're improving by leaps and bounds with every day. Also, it's not always life imprisonment. Look at it this way: Far more innocent people die because you've got a rapist, or a killer, who got sentenced for miniscule amount of time released to continue their crimes then people who were later proven innocent. But I suppose that's an entirely different subject..

 

[Ph33nix]

be heading is considered the highest way to die. and by highest I mean most noble. In olden times beheading was reserved for only Nobility as opposed to Hanging which is considered the lowest way to die (hence why they hanged Sadam in Iraq) and considered far above poison (lethal injection) and well electrocution is considered the will of god (because for a long time the only way for this to happen was horribly unlucky probability) so yeah its a high form of death.

 

[The Great JT]

Geez sods (Saudi Arabians), excessive?

Wait a minute, he raped five children!? That's too fucking nice! Behead him, crucify him and then let the throngs of fans throw rocks at his corpse!

 

[LCP]

that's all they gonna do? they should fucking torture him.

 

[cobra_ky]

also, why does this guy get killed but a crown prince doesn't even get investigated?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/03/uae-sheikh-accusation-assualt-tape

because that prince is from an entirely different country?

Anyone who says "No, it's inhumane" is a ****. It's "inhumane" to rape kids. That is literally the worst thing someone can do, apart from torturing cats.
And no, they shouldn't crucify him, that's far too dignified. I say, cut his cock off, tattoo "nonce" on his face repeatedly, and release him into society. The people will find a fitting punishment to compliment the mutilation...

i wouldn't advocate raping children as a legal punishment either. On a related note, i love it when people decry the inhumanity of sex crimes, then immediately describe their own personal elaborate castration/murder fantasy.

Just quietly though, if I had a child and someone raped him//her I would take the law into my own hands, Rorschach style.

as a liberal I have no problem with that,

as a liberal i have severe problems with that, namely vigilante "justice".