Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: haqihana who wrote (39747)	9/26/2000 10:15:24 AM
From: microhoogle!	Respond to of 769667

Murali, There is no burden placed on the court to convince "the country" of anything. The law states that only 12 people need to be convinced that no stone has been unturned. Where do you get off coming here from another country, whose laws and consideration of human life are so vastly different from ours, and try to tell us how to run our affairs. At least, in this country, an angry husband is not allowed to douse his wife with gasoline, and set her on fire, with impunity. ~H~ Haqi, I am not here to tell you how run affairs of your state. I am just proposing what I feel is just. Any killing is shameful and I have already said Indian laws adequately address such situations. It is law enforcement, corruption and our huge population that is proving to be a hindrance. All of which are fought vigorously by various governments. You use your frustration to bring out the fact that a husband douses his wife with impunity. I will pull out worst case scenario statistics from India and best case scenario stats for US and will show you that the crime rate is higher in US as far as husband killing wives is concerned. Court does not have to convince "the country" of anything. But if laws are antiquated, then it has to convince itself of something, -- change some laws.