Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaccers
I'll take your avoidance of the question as a yes.
---------- Post added at 10:15 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------
I think you'll find that the proposed victims of the prevented suicide bombers and their offspring would beg to differ, as an example.
The only issue I have with the death penalty being used in general circumstances is that guilt cannot be guarenteed 100% of the time.
So as a mass punishment, I am against it.
Taking a single case in exceptional circumstances such as Saddams, I see no benefit in keeping him alive.
|
So, would you say that you are against mass killings of people who have no hand in the actions of the insurgents ?
As for the death penalty, if it can be proven beyond all doubt that person " a" murdered person(s) " b" then I say if you take a life or lives you deserve no less, however to drop bombs into massed areas to target the few imo is wrong.
I am open in the circumstances that I see execution favourable, sadly this government are not so forthcoming.
I see no benefit in keeping sadam alive either, but our government say they do not condone execution under " humanitarian " grounds, yet will order, yes that word " order " mass bombings.
They cant attempt to wipe the blood from their hands by claiming " collateral damage " but they do, which is where hypocrisy comes into the mix imo.