When they see their self in every one else.

That will be when One that knows One's Self gazes into the camera and speaks to the nation and audience and transmits the self realization with words, knowing, and presence of consciousness.

As the photons stream from the TVs in the living rooms and connect with the minds, transforming them.

Of course as always people will slide back into forgetting as they encounter the world of things but perhaps their essence will have changed.

Hi Dave - I think you nailed it. We may enumerate all sorts of reasons for or against but in the final analyis the death penalty just doesn't seem fair and that's what's wrong with it.

Your article is an eye opener. As it reads it is " essentially a moral conflict" and it is.

I am not in favor of capital punishments.

On the other hand I am also scared that some one can kill 100 or 1000 or 10000 people and still serve his lifetime in prison.

Just imagine that one of the terrorists in the world trade center bombing is given life imprisonment for killing roughly about 3000 lives and shattering the whole of New York. (Probably the whole of United States).

These people are ready to die and why we need to keep them alive??? Just Because of our moral conflict. What is the message that we are sending to those who are ready to do these kinds of acts??

Many countries succeeded in abolishing capital punishments. I am more interested to see is there any change in the no of cases in those countries.

Lessoning punishment to life imprisonment did really improve the society is the big question.???

50 years back there was world war and millions died. Today the world is much more peaceful.

Who knows from 50 years from now we may not even have any courts and the legal system.

Yogi

The other thing I forgot to write is that the American prison is so damn good.You get to watch TV, Play american football and eat all you can all day.

Great!!!!!

Perhaps we need to answer the greater question. Can you really kill someone or is just their body and their role?

Is it like kicking someone off the stage?

Can someone change their character while still on stage? Can they play a new role?

Are people forced into a role?

Should we not give them a chance as we ourselves would like to have?

Would it not be greater to have a killer transform into a saint?

Perhaps capital punishment is easier than asking questions about ourselves and society, and facing the truth.

Is it not both society and the killer that have failed in Self realization?

Is it really about killing or is it a question of an act of love or hate?

http://www.nealedonaldwalsch.com/blog.cfm

Dave,

In your study and research about Capital Punishment, would you say that their are any compelling arguments for cp, or do you dismiss it out of hand?

Also have you studied the roots of CP found in the Old Testament?

Do you feel that society has misinterpreted the teachings from the OT? How do you reconcile many of the founding fathers' moral values which have roots in the OT? Some of these values can even be found on our US minted coins, we are all familar with.

Just curious where you personally have developed your morals and values if not from the OT. I guess the word is Progressive. Let me know if I'm off base here.

Sincerely,

Steve

Just imagine that one of the terrorists in the world trade center bombing is given life imprisonment for killing roughly about 3000 lives and shattering the whole of New York. (Probably the whole of United States).

These people are ready to die and why we need to keep them alive???
Posted by: yogi selliah

Dear Yogi,
I would like to reply on that one, with:
No, you've done a hell of job!!, with (secret)
prisons, all over the world, CIA plane flying,
torture, international law, ah heck, let's just
do it over 'the border', than it's ok!

secret 'police'
secret 'emprisonment'
secret 'interrogation'

makes me think of communists and Siberia,

Cold world was that..

Love, Passion, no sigar!

If the prison system treated the convicted like criminals, life in prison would be a fate worse than death.

I am against capital punishment. Not to say that someone who killed 4 people and founded an organization that has, in turn, killed who knows how many more doesn't deserve to die. I'm sure anyone who has lost a family member to a Crip would like to pull the switch themselves.

I, however, do not have the personal connection. For our government to act as my representitive and kill in my name and on my behalf is not something that I can agree with.

Yogi, have you ever been in prison, my experience is that even in a minimum security prison, one not only has to 'watch their ass' (har har har, yet not really funny), one has to watch everybody, inmates, guards, parole board, etc. When I got out of prison six years ago, the thought of being, literally, scared to death of teenagers who never had a chance in life and were in prison by the time they reached the age of eighteen. . .

I mean I was in the non-violent and least likely to cause trouble 'category,' but there is some tough ass people in there, and when one is playing basketball with 'the brothers' one pretty much knows 'his' Aryan brothers are not going to help. I was scared, still am to this day

Prison is no Sunday picnic. . .

I neglected to include a link to Professor Bedau's seminal paper. It is available here: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:-2hyll3SBSAJ:www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html+%22The+Case+Against+the+Death+Penalty%22+aclu&hl=en

Steve, my research did not include arguments based on religious texts, so I cannot speak to your questions regarding the Old Testament.

With respect to how I concluded that capital punishment is unjust, I wrote in part that punishment for crime is generally of two sorts: 1) removing an individual from society (e.g., prison, exile), and 2) affirmatively punishing the person (e.g., torture, caning, stockades). While the latter form is generally considered inconsistent with acceptable punishment in America, capital punishment still remains as generally the only regular form of punishment in the second group that American society still imposes on its own citizens (Gitmo may be another story).

Some argue (and I don't find this argument "compelling," but I understand it's intuitive appeal), that certain crimes differ in their quality and severity (e.g., murder) and that a punishment that also differs in its quality and severity should similarly exist (e.g., the death penalty). These pro-capital punishment advocates further state that even if capital punishment is done away with, the abolitionists have not offered any alternative form of punishment that would be commensurate with the quality and severity of, say, murder.

I find capital punishment morally problematic in part because the first form of punishment (e.g, prison) involves the denial of some aspect of liberty (i.e., living in society), whereas capital punishment is the denial of ALL liberty (i.e., death). To end the life of a person denies a person this future liberty, any chance of rehabilitation, and his dignity and common humanity. In that respect, capital punishment is an offensive practice on its own - and such a practice should not continue in the absence of some other form of punishment that is equal in quality and severity with murder.

Dear Dave,

Thanks for your thoughtful post, I enjoyed it immensely. I think you will have a brilliant career in law and beyond.

Since you mentioned that you didnt' base your arguments on religious texts, I have a suggestion and I think it will be a great career move as well. Let me explain.

Many on have a similar worldview as yourself do not take the time to study these texts such as the Old Testament or writings from the founding fathers that relate to their JudeoChristian beliefs. As you know the "religious right" study the writings and teachings of their "opponents" and present strong arguments. One doesn't have to search far to find this in blogs, talk radio,and other New Media.

I do find that the more liberal do not take the time to study the basis for the conservative arguments and simply pooh pooh the lot by personal put downs or really simplistic caricatures.

However what I suggest is to get more aquainted with the proof texts, which I think will simply make you a stronger person, and perhaps more respected.

The material is pretty deep, it's not simplistic, the old testament talmudic commentaries may surprise you, and perhaps sound familiar.

Anyway just a thought, I'm sure you will do great, just thought I'd share an observation.

Cheers,

Steve

Another thing I wanted to share to make a point, I apologize if it's off topic, sort of.

The current president of Iran has recently denounced the Holocaust as a hoax, and has publicly stated that he would like to see Israel wiped off the face of the planet or at least moved to Europe or perhaps Alaska.

Now many of us would just think the guy is a kook, a crazed leader that just needs to keep his mouth shut.

If you look closer in context of the ancient writings, one sees a completely different picture of his motives.

Same thing for Hitler calling for every Jew be he/she an adult or baby to be murdered. In context to what is said in the Old Testament and what he knew of moral conscience of the Jews or potential thereof, he didn't want any of it to interfere with his grand plans.

It becomes a great tool for understanding, not to impose religous values, just a context.

Cheers,

Steve

Amba,

So what are you saying? Are you saying that Mahmoud is justified in calling for the destruciton of the Israelites because God himself testifies to the genocidal warfare the Judaists unleashed upon the middle east in ages past.

Is Mahmoud's rhetoric justified because Israel possesses WMDs.

Seems to me the Iranians are scared to death they are on the United States' 'hit list,' and being that they have the third most oil reserves in the world, after Arabia and Iraq, they shoulod be scared.

After all, 'we' do have them completely surrounded. . .

Amba, I was expecting this one day from a conservative christian. I used to tell my wife that the only reason evangelical christians are supporting Israel in the Middle East conflict is due to this belief based on their scriptures. Atleast I have come across one person who proves my point to her :-)

Sorry Krish to dissapoint you, I'm not a conservative christian, I'm a Jew.

Craig, you must mean that Israel is completely surrounded

Steve

Oops. then I am still waiting for a day I openly hear from a conservative christian :-). But I am confident I will hear one day.

That's ok Krish, I think you will have to wait a while before you openly hear from one on intentblog.com, it doesn't seem to be too friendly to the conservative christians.

You may want to hunt for a Christian pro Israel blog, they must be around somewhere, you are resourceful I'm sure.

Btw Craig, the countries surrounding the north sea have a lot of oil reserves, should they be scared too?

Here's a sobering thought for the group:

Their are over 70 million evangelicals in the US alone.
That's almost 1/4 of the country's population.

I'm sure the fur is going to fly :)

Steve

Amba, you conveniently ignored to highlight that there are 3/4th of US population who are non evangelicals :-)

Good post Dave. Yes, this is about morals. If we live in a society where we don't permit killing/murder, that means the government needs to set the example for the citizens to follow. Has the death penalty deterred the high homicide rate in the U.S.? No, it has not.

Nice point Mark, I would like to add that we need to try much harder as a society not to permit killing and murder, as we all know the Govt is pretty lousy cleaning up everybody's messes. We saw this with Katrina.

Perhaps if the killer/murder had a mother and a father or at least a father figure in their life, that might be a good start, not the whole answer, but let's focus on we the people.

Steve

Amba,

I am Jewish in the heart, much love to you my brother.

Well, it seems nobody really seems to fare well when they take on the Norseman, after all, it was not until we gave your Anglo cousins the fighting spirit of Thor, that they became a race worth note.

Israel would not be surrounded if the United States and England did not put you there in the late 40s. . .

So, instead of trying to pick a fight, why do you not do as Scripture commands and seek the destruction of political systems that put monetary value upon dead wood, and use usurious methods of exploitation to further increase the plight of our fallen comrades in life.

Peace brother, peace and love

No fights Craig, peace

I noticed from your link that you live in Spokane. Well how can I pick a fight with someone that lives in a city where I was born ?? :)

Mom still lives there, visited last summer, we intially moved away to Seattle, eventually she moved back to be near old friends.

Now I'm living in sunny LA, I read the reports up there.... burrrrr!!!

Stay warm my friend and onward and upward.

Steve

Oh Seattle,

I just lost my lady love to the city of Seattle, she had to move over there for a job she could just not pass up. Gosh darn it. . .

It seems I have been a little testy on this thread, with you and Yogi in particualr, I mean, sentences like 'your Anglo cousins' help nobody.

I apologize.

Now, about that world revolution. . .

No worries Craig, gets the juices going :)
I've taken the drive from Spokane to Seattle, in fact got a speeding ticket, you mean one can't drive 82 in a 60 mph zone?

Perhaps you can visit her from time to time.

Feel free to start the revolution, myself, I'm doing the Tikkum Olam thing one spark at a time :)

Steve

Dave,

My reaction to the death penalty is already recorded in Gothams post, (perhaps you can refer to my comments there) somewhat passionately- I may add. However such is my belief in that the death penalty should be awarded .. albeit in the "rarest of the rare " cases that I need to reiterate it here as well.

Simply put, can we distinguish between the death penalty granted by a jury against one man, and the death penalty granted by a country against another..?

To repeat my comments in Gothams post--- on the one hand,we have a criminal,assuming he is provedsuch beyond all doubt, guilty of a crime so heinous, judged by a peer group of the common man,in a public court of law, with time and deliberation, with all facts placed before the justice system,
given time to appeal before a higher court, and finally when all avenues are exhausted (including the lack of forgiveness by the victim), then is found suitable for the death penalty.

On the other hand, we have a head of state, armed with the approval of chosen cronies, in closed door sessions that within themselves justify the reasons for armed conflict, against a cause that is subjective in itself, and in particular cases totally untrue, with all the means of forgiveness at his disposal, yet elect to unleash war without trial, against a country- not an individual -using all physical means at his disposal, without legal approval save his version of what he thinks is "right", now why is THAT not termed as a Death Penalty..?

The recipient of the first- a deserving individual, proven guilty in law,

the recipient of the second- an undeserving country, proven victim of politics, and individual opinion.

Which is the death penalty and which is not..? Which is justifiably awarded and which is not..? Which is legal and which is not.?

Which punishes the guilty criminal and which the innocent civilian?.

Which is villified and which is glorified..?

Which is argued against by prominent minds.. the same who are happy to approve of medals of gallantry for war conduct.. killing of the enemy..?
Which has a clear victim and which has not..?

Which is frowned upon and which actually has a legal lawful Geneva convention to supervise the rules of killing..?

Someone tell me what the difference is between the first death penalty and the second.

Someone tell me which is more morally justifiable.

The day such war is outlawed, I say that the death penalty should be then dispensed with. Until then....

AS I mentioned in Gothams post... its so easy to promulgate forgiveness or a limited punishment.. but what if you are the Victim..? Can you forgive a crime so impossibly cruel done to you without similar reaction..? That if not punished suitably may multiply itself..?

What if a mass killer so convicted, let loose on a technicality by law, or paroled after 20 years, or escapes to strike again.Kills YOU and ME!
Will the justice system be culpable of homicide..?

Im afraid I may be too human and too dead to forgive that decision!

I always felt that the death penalty was essential to deter others, specifically for two offences - rape and terrorist activity. However I am against it for two reasons.

One, it has not deterred others, though I don't think it has ever been applied to a rapist. Even so, I'm sure that if it were, it would not stop others. Secondly, if it is a crime to take human life, how can the judiciary be empowered to do the same thing - the logic escapes me.

Dara.

As far as the two points raised above, that of deterrance and that of the crime of death, valid as they are, I have two questions.

1, Has deterrence been measured.? How would one measure if Tookies' passing away at government hands would result in discouraging other would be killers,.,? Just how would one really know.? All I can say is that if I were contemplating such a crime, I wouldnt do it today or tmrw.. I would be deterred. Perhaps for a few days.. perhaps forever. I would perhaps be one among the five out of ten. Thats a 50% strike rate. Thats means that it would work.

2. Again my earlier comments stand. If the court does not condone the death penalty let all wars and all armed responses be disallowed. After 9/11 why attack Iraq.?Or Osama.? Thats a death penalty on thousands of people not to mention American soldiers and lives. In fact theres no court and no jury here.. so that makes it illegal. If one is wrong so is the other...how is it ever different..?

Prabhu,

"1, Has deterrence been measured.? How would one measure if Tookies' passing away at government hands would result in discouraging other would be killers,.,"

As u have correctly pointed out It may not dicourage others but atleast it won't encourage.

How do we motivate employees. Two ways ( well there are many motivation thories)

1)Reward ( which motivates)
2)Punishment( the process of administering an undesirable
consequence for a desirable behavior)

Can we apply similar principle here??

Yogi

Multi-faceted problem that begins and ends with a question of certainty. IF our justice system were perfect and there was absolutely no question of a man's guilt would the Death Penalty be justified? Our system is imperfect even with the best forensics, investigators, police, attorney's, courts etc the interpretation of data from all sources is still open to speculation. Throw in prejudice, unprofessionalism, dereliction of duty and incompetence...how can a society possibly come up with a logical argument for Killing a person. 11 men on death row in Illinois alone have been released after DNA evidence exonerated them. Do we keep killing people until the day comes when technology is so perfect we can determine with 100% accuracy a man's guilt or innocence. And when that day comes is it now morally justified to kill another human being? Once you have the PERFECT foundation to determine guilt then you can begin to question the morality of a death penalty...without that foundation you have no right to even consider taking a man's life. The Laws of Nature dictate who lives for how long. WE as a species are killing the planet, each other, and ourselves. Consciously and unconciously. NO One or group has the right to kill another human being...all theory, all the justification, all the arguments, all the heinous evidence does not posit the right to kill a person. Nature, the Universe gives and takes life through a brilliant and complex system which is certain, undeniable, empirically evident and without a REASON, A CALCULATION, OR AN INTERPRETATION. Our laws should be enumerated in such a way to "agree" with nature, to eliminate possibility in a person, decision making ability in a person... in other words choice. If, with this perfect foundation, we can now determine 100% accurately the guilt of that person, that person no longer receives the freedom of Choice. It is gone for this lifetime. Take a man's choices, not his life.

Yogi

1. As regards the discouraging of would be killers.. absolutely.. I think tookies death would act as a strong deterrent... as u so rightly point out.. atleast it will not encourage similar behaviour.

2. As far as motivation goes... frankly my friend, this is not a comparable situation. When I speak about the death penalty , I do so with trepidation.. there should be complete understanding that the crime is the "rarest of the rare". Thats why I keep raising bigger issues.. such as the role of the victim (assuming he is left alive), and the psychological affect the crime has had on him/her. Lets say the victims family has been killed (sorry I keep sounding gruesome) and he is left a mental wreck.. forever to spend his "vegetably" life in an institution. Why should the killer be enjoying the luxury of a life in jail in full control of himself and his senses..?

So why and how would he be rewarded to change his behaviour post crime.. and what message would that send to other potentials..? And what proof that he has changed for the better except possibly his word and what may actually be fantastic acting ability..?

And Yogi.. I still dont have an answer for my comparision of the death penalty with war.. which is truly .. according to me, death penalty awarded on a larger scale, government sponsored and therefore with no fear of public retribution.

Obviously this.. like abortion .. is a contentious and subjective topic and there will never be a complete right or wrong. Im just surprised to find myself such a minority.. and especially when some of the doubts I have raised can possibly never be addressed satisfactorily.

Cheers

Logical, consistent, sound: excellent!

Great post Mike

Mike,

Once again... Im not going to question the fundamentals of DNA testing.. forensic faux pas.. and incompetent officialdom.

My imagery was based on a crime that would take place in a public place... a killing in broad daylight in front of cameras and a million witnesses... a crime of magnitude and brutality that is beyond dispute. What then... ! Will there still be doubt..? Everyone has seen the crime, the victim, and the perpetrator.

Atleast then will the penalty be awarded..? If THAT can be in doubt, then there can be not much belief left anything else.. for we may never be able to trust our senses..

Prabhu - The core discussion of the death penalty issue does not revolve around guilt or innoncence, even though this is important as recently outlined by Mike. Most of us who do not support the death penalty do not do so irrespective of the fact that the person is guilty. Now re-read Dave's post and he has articulated clearly why this should be so. If you are simply thirsting for revenge - too bad for you, you are the ultimate victim. And if you want 2 wrongs to make a right, there's no point discussing anything further.

Now do go and re-read Dave's post again. It contains the answer to your questions which you keep repeating needlessly.

Divya

Ive read the post sufficiently I believe , and the conclusion I still draw is that it remains a subjective issue.
Incidentally, Im merely putting forth my personal viewpoint.. and theres no "thirst for revenge" I can assure you. I put forth a case study. I do respect your opinion but do request that you respect mine. Its a personal issue!! But in any case its merely healthy discussion isnt it on a problem that can never have a just solution.But I do get the hint... I should rest my case... personal slights have never been my cup of tea..and you do seem to be heading in that direction.

Good bye!

Mike,

I am wondering is there a slightest chance that we will ever have a 100% perfect system. Can you at least suggest something else in the absence of the present system???

Here is a new case. One Indian hit a Saudi and the Saudi lost one of his eyes. Court ordered to remove one of eyes of the Indian as a punishment.

An Eye for an Eye

Kill for a Kill

Doesn't sound good is it?? I felt very bad when I read this story. How could some one take an eye for an eye????

Tookie’s story makes us to believe that he is a changed man, He said No gangs, He wrote a book etc.., Probably if he has been spared he may even get a parole after another 20 years. May be he is a changed man.!!. I really don’t know.

These incidents make us to sympathize to this gentleman. Why?? Because we watch this on T.V. This is our immediate emotional reaction. Most importantly we are not affected by any of this.

Let us rewind 20 years back and think about those who lost their loved ones.

As I said who know in 50 years from now I may become good friend of a criminal who raped and killed my daughter. I will be able to forgive all these people and live with them.

By that Time I will be more than Gandhi, Buddha and Jesus Christ.(ohh God)

Yogi

Sorry Prabhu, Didn't mean to make it personal. You gotta feel passionately about things and that's the reason for such outbursts.

Yes, ultimately it is subjective. But this point does not go to your favor but quite the opposite. Moral issues are not solvable. Period. There is no absolute right or absolute wrong. Given this is the situation, and will always be, how can we make an official policy of killing someone? There will always be a doubt that this is morally wrong. And there may be circumstances where it is right. I don't care if Saddam hangs for example. But I would not like to see the death penalty as part of the Iraqi constitution because on the strength of this policy others who are not deserving of death will also be put to death. So it's better to have Saddam languish in prison whether he deserves to die or not. I hope you see why it becomes important to abolish the death penalty irrespective of examples here and there where it may be justified.

We all have argued mainly against the death penalty on this and other intentblogs. Let the convicted live out in jail, and that's that. What do you say when the convicted murderer continues to murder, even in prison. As an example:

"In 1974, Clarence Ray Allen ordered a 17-year-old young woman, Mary Sue Kitts, murdered because she knew of Allen's involvement in a Fresno, Calif., store burglary.

After his 1977 trial and conviction, Allen was sentenced to life without parole.

According to San Francisco Chronicle columnist Debra Saunders, "In Folsom State Prison, Allen cooked up a scheme to kill the witnesses who testified against him so that he could appeal his conviction and then be freed because any witnesses were dead -- or scared into silence." As a result, three more innocent people were murdered -- Bryon Schletewitz, 27, Josephine Rocha, 17, and Douglas White, 18.

This time, a jury sentenced Allen to death, the only death sentence ever handed down by a Glenn County (California) jury. That was in 1982.

For 23 years, opponents of the death penalty have played with the legal system -- not to mention played with the lives of the murdered individuals' loved ones -- to keep Allen alive.

Had Clarence Allen been executed for the 1974 murder of Mary Sue Kitts, three innocent people under the age of 30 would not have been killed."

I'm just introducing realty here folks, this is not an isolated incident, a gang leader in prison can continue to control activities outside, very difficult to stop.

Amba

Yogi

My suggestion is this...stop killing people while our system evolves and then when it gets to 100% continue to stop killing people. Punish forever, but don't execute.

Peace
Mike

Prabhu,

I have no idea about whether deterrence has been measured. However, I did try to get some kind of figures, on the net, after I read your query and a quick search has not been very successful either. The only figures I did get were at this site:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur

Was horrified to see that India tops the world in murders at 37,170. Unfortunately am unable to figure out the period either or its authenticity. In case you or anyone is interested and more savy at this sort of thing, maybe we could get some authentic data. However, India - like the USA - does have capital punishment and if this is the state we are in I wonder if it could be termed as being a deterrent.

As regards disallowing war and terming it illegal I am completely with you in theory. Is it practical? Disband all armies, weaponry and the complete armament industry - which nation or group will do anything but pay lip service to this idea? After greed it is perhaps mankind's oldest failure. Besides I don't think all wars are illegal, sometimes they are a necessity. Though I agree with you that Iraq is unjustified I think going after Bin Laden is justified and hence I feel that the Afghanistan operation was necessary and was conducted after giving the ruling Taliban time to hand over Osama.

So though I feel that capital punishment is unjustified, because it is enshrined in our law books and till it is altered I will just have to live with it. Similarly I abhor war but think it is, in certain cases, justified. I would also feel better if for the kind of cases that you refer to as 'rarest of rare' the imprisonment should be a lifetime without recourse to any pardons, remissions etc.

The basic idea behind giving punishment is to make one realize his mistake and thus help one outgrow the loop entangled in which he/she was forced to commit that mistake.

Seen thus, punishment is a very important tool of furthering our evolution.

Death penality negates this very purpose, for it does not leave one to think and grow.

Harb

Dara,
This has reference to the website you put forth in your post.
Ive been warned off this conversation so I wont go on about this.. but thank you for your info. If I do get some stats on the deterrence factor.. I will endeavour to pass the same on to you on a future post.

Cheers

Mike,

You will never ever have a 100% perfect system.

If you are thinking that keeping some one in American prison as a punishment, I am sure Half the world poor would love to be in that prison.

As I said I am not in favor of capital punishment and I am not cruel to kill some one. But as Prabu clearly pointed out some people don't open their head a mm more to think that what will happen if some one do a mass murder and just serve lifetime in prison. Think about all those serial killers. Think about those terrorist etc..,

We are all here for a healthy discussion. Mike your point is also taken and this is my view.

Yogi

Dara,

Your analysis is fantastic.

"Besides I don't think all wars are illegal, sometimes they are a necessity" you are absolutely right.

I want to echo the same in capital punishments. Further to that the verdict is often given by the jury and then only it goes to the government to further review this process.Which means there are different levels of checks and discussions prior to the final decision.

I don't think capital punishments are required but some times they are necessary.

I don't think any one mind hanging osama.Though I differ from your thoughts but your analysis is good.

Yogi

Mass murderers and serial killers are also product of the circumstances.

Harb

Harb,

It sounds like you are getting old or probably your are more experienced.Philosophical thoughts.

I will take this. As you said they may also be a product of this society. I think we are all in need of villains, may be we create them.

Unless the life will be boring. CNN and BBC'S won't have any news either.

Yogi

Yogi, it all is One's own play, all are created by It/Him as per the need of the times, all are playing their part, what we have to do we have to do like Arjuna, what The Play or what I call the Scheme of Things have to do have to do like Krishana. The Scheme of Things moves on the apparently two opposite feet of good and evil, saint and sinner, hero and villian just as we move on our apparently two opposing feet (opposing in the sense that they both try to move ahead of the other).

Yogi,

Touche!

Quite frankly I agree with you in your argument, it works both ways. My main opposition to it stems from the fact that if killing a human being is wrong, I agree with that, then how is it right to legally pass a death sentance and take another life. I realise now that this is what I haven't been able to sort out for myself.

Just this morning I read that a BPO employee, recently married, was raped and killed by the driver of her transport in Banglore. My first reaction was "The man doesn't deserve to live" and right now hours later I still feel the same. Yet I still can't shake off the feeling that it would not be right to hang him.

I see these same cabs in Pune all over the place taking Call Centre employees at all hours to and from work. I now fear for these youngsters. Every time I feel I have made up my mind on this issue something like this comes up and then I am faced by reasoning like yours and Prabhu's and I am forced to rethink. Its a dilemma really for me.

Yogi,

What you will miss and what my position actually is on all such matters that I have no position.

Whatever the society in its collective wisdom has been doing all through the history and what it is doing now and what it will tomorrow is all acceptable to me and I have no individual wish/viewpoint. Just what prevails is the best for me. I really want to be silent, but then fall for speaking out for the sake of the blog and get one-sided and so much less than the whole.

An other point we miss is that all life is in movement. There may be times when capital punishment may be right there may be times when it may not. Same for all other things. Just as when we are a child we may need some advice from our parents but not later when we are parents ourselves. As we change through all ages similarly our culture goes through like ages. And hence no decision can be held true for ever.

Harb,

You are right as far as I am concerned. Live by the laws of your society. I also feel that at times somethings may be right, like turning the other cheek and sometimes you roll up your sleeves and heave ho!

However, if one were to decide whether such a law should be in the books is the question to which there seems no easy answer. Heart, mind, conscience, forgiveness and compassion all pull in different directions.

Dara,

Once we have elected the law-makers let them decide. What will happen will happen for the best.

Dara & Harb,

Good thoughts.

Dara, as I said it is our immediate reaction. Now that a BPO employee is raped and killed. We watch that on TV and we feel that this guy should be hanged to death. Probably 15 years from now for the same guy, if he has been given a death sentence,( assume that this guy writes a book and tell everyone that raping and killing is bad etc..,) we will all think that the government is doing a terrible thing by killing this guy. Does he deserve to live?? To me a big no.

If we do that we are sending a message that if you rape and kill we will still spare your life.

Same goes with Tookie. It is our immidiate reaction to what we see on T.V.

This is what I have been argueing all along.

We are getting carried away by our immidiate emotions.

Agree????

Deep down I am not in favour of capital punishment.( I am fighting with in me on this issue)

Yogi

Here we go there are more people behind capital
punishment.

Employees of various call centres demanded that capital punishment be meted out to the rapist Shivakumar, who raped and murdered a call centre employee Prathibha Srikant Murthy, in Bangalore.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/wfsf/high/2005/12.18/images/high1576519.jpg

yogi

Yogi,

Deep down I don't know and thats the truth.

Dara,

He possesses the greatest knowledge who knows that he does not know. Though I know a bit lol.