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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marek_wojna who wrote (22949)	8/21/2002 7:15:47 PM
From: AC Flyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

>>Do you really see the difference between lethal injection and stoning?<< Yes. The woman who is to be stoned to death in Nigeria received this sentence for committing the heinous crime of having sex, or more specifically for getting pregnant, which is prima facie evidence of the former. In the US we execute criminals convicted of capital crimes which typically involve murder, kidnapping or both. Most reasonable folks can see the difference, imo.

To: marek_wojna who wrote (22949)	8/21/2002 10:28:52 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Marek, I can understand stoning for certain criminal acts. <Do you really see the difference between lethal injection and stoning? > I would add that after stoning, the criminal shall be ground into mince and canned, for pet food, with their photo on the front and crimes on the back so people could select criminals they prefer. Profits to the relatives of the victims of their crimes. I suspect that would act as disincentive to murderers, child rapists and the like and even if it didn't dissuade others, which it would, it would certainly stop them doing it again and cut the cost of keeping them in a cage for the rest of their lives. However, it would be necessary to avoid people seeking glory by getting on a dogfood can by committing a crime [martyrs do odd things] so it might be wise to leave it to judges whether they make it to the can or just the crematorium. My point was not that stoning is barbaric, but that the planned murder of the woman with a baby is the barbaric act. However the method does also convey barbarism. I'm not convinced that pain and suffering of the guilty is necessarily a good idea. I generally expect it is not. The only reason to inflict pain and suffering is to prevent other people doing such crimes as the guilty committed by creating fear in them. I suspect it would work, which is why Moslems do it, not simply to provide an entertaining outlet for the cruel malevolent types. But maybe the victims of the relatives of the criminals can benefit from being allowed to wreak vengeance against the criminal and stoning in revenge helps their grief. Maybe. I would not judge a person too badly who reacted like that to the torture and murder of their 10 year old child. I don't think it would be my cup of tea. Sorrowful despatch of the guilty would be my preference. Usually, such people have had a pretty bleak life and adding to their suffering in revenge wouldn't make me feel much better - it would be like torturing a crocodile which ate my child - pointless because that's just what they do. Hmmm, this is off topic and a waste of time! Sorry. Mqurice