# The Death Penalty?



## spnadmin (Feb 9, 2013)

When I check around the web many sites report that Sikhs oppose the death penalty, under most or all circumstances. How accurate is that view?  Where do you stand on this controversial issue?

Please share your views.


----------



## BlazinSikh (Feb 10, 2013)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!

Personally it is in no one's right to decide who dies or live, this is all under Waheguru hukam, on what happens. If someone was meant to die then they would die, if someone was meant to live then they would live. My personal view is if someone commits a disgusting crime, which makes one feel that death should be the punishment, i would say NO! reason for this is:
1) My believe is no one has the right to decide who is to die and live, except Waheguru Ji.

2) I believe death is a easy way out of anything, the person who commits a crime would have not learned anything, or the crime they have committed.

3) Just as Waheguru Ji has mercy upon us, we should should also show mercy upon others, a person especially a Sikh/human who carries anger/wrath is not really a Sikh/human. 

4) The greatest punishment to give to anyone is to remove all freedom, when they have no freedom they will suffer from within. 

These are just my view...

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!


----------



## kds1980 (Feb 10, 2013)

spnadmin said:


> When I check around the web many sites report that Sikhs oppose the death penalty, under most or all circumstances. How accurate is that view?  Where do you stand on this controversial issue?
> 
> Please share your views.



Majority of sikhs demand death penalty for 1984 culprits.


----------



## BlazinSikh (Feb 10, 2013)

kds1980 said:


> Majority of sikhs demand death penalty for 1984 culprits.



That is true, even though I would never know the pain of the victims of 1984, I still believe fightin' fire with fire will do nothing but cause a bigger fire.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!


----------



## a.mother (Feb 10, 2013)

Personally I am very much against of death penalty.We are not the one who can decide who can live or have to die (who are we, same as other ) .What if today someone is hanged or something but if tomorrow we got to know that person was innocent THEN WHAT. Can we bring the person back? No. Then how we can allowed to kill someone. Person who are judges they are not God, they can be in pressure or something-2-2-2-2, then how is their decisions can be right or fair. 
Second thing if anyone does the crime then death penalty is very easy way for them to escape, let them suffer so much so each moment can remind them what they have done.


----------



## Luckysingh (Feb 10, 2013)

I have mixed views on this matter !

As a sikh, I know that forgiving, encouraging, rehabilitation..etc.. is more of the attitude compared to a straight death penalty.
If Only my sikhi was the determining and deciding factor in handing out punishments, then the death penalty wouldn't be on the list!!

However, if I let my emotions do the deciding then I end up doing a U-Turn!
As a person and knowing that there are some very nasty people out there that I just could not forgive, then I would 'demand' death !!

I know it sounds harsh, but it's a harsh reaction for a harsh crime.
Let's say, the recent saudi who raped and killed his little 5 year old !!
If I were a judge, how could I send him for rehabilitation ?
what if I were the judge for Saddam or Osama ??
My only option would be to kill them myself or get them killed !!

I'm sorry if I offended, but certain peoples action make it difficult to know that you have let them live on and continue living.


----------



## Awakeand Singh (Feb 11, 2013)

BlazinSikh said:


> That is true, even though I would never know the pain of the victims of 1984, I still believe fightin' fire with fire will do nothing but cause a bigger fire.
> 
> Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!



Indeed, the killing of Indira Gandhi caused a much bigger fire, the effects of which are still being suffered. For those who were in favor of the assassination, do you think it was justified by the organized pogroms which followed, and their resultant toll of death and injury? 

I agree that the rehabilitation of the murderer is the preferred course of action. But, is this always practical? We speak of death being an easy way out, and letting the person live and suffer instead. Who says he/she will be remorseful? Many people serve long prison terms for murder and have no regret at all for their actions - even many years afterward. prison, as it exists today in most places, not only fails to rehabilitate the criminal, but more often teaches him/her new criminal skills - confirming and further strengthening the criminal identity.

We say that human beings have no right to judge others nor take the lives of others. By extension this should also include the murderer! Can it not be argued that one who pre-meditatively takes the life of another has forfeited his/her right to life as well?

I'm not proposing solutions of my own; merely widening a question that has been with us since forever, and contains many, many facets and ramifications.


----------



## aristotle (Feb 11, 2013)

Death penalty is direct barbarism. Moreover, if you go through the people administered death penalty in India, you would perhaps think it is only the Sikhs, Muslims and Christians who perform heinous crimes..

Let me give you a couple of examples...
*Sikh Genocide 1984: Sentenced to death on seven counts, mass murderer Kishori Lal’s released cleared by Indian State
(Feb 13 2012)
Kishori Lal, a former butcher who stayed in east Delhi’s Trilokpuri, had been *accused of killing victims in the neighborhood.* He had been *sentenced to death seven times* by the lower courts. The Supreme Court, later, commuted them to life terms. Kishori Lal was among 25 people, convicted by city courts for offences connected to the 1984 genocidal violence against the Sikhs.
*To a large extent persons responsible for brutally murdering and burning Sikh alive, have enjoyed impunity*, and there were *just few exceptional counts of convictions*, such as that of Kishori Lal.

As per news reports dated February 12, 2012, acting on the recommendations of the state Sentence Review Board (SRB), Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi (L-G) Tejinder Khanna recently *commuted the sentence of Kishori Lal and 14 other life convicts* to give them a *chance to “reform and rehabilitate themselves”*.
(Source: http://www.sikhsiyasat.net/2012/02/13/kishori-lal-set-to-be-released/)

* Indira Gandhi Killers To Be Hanged Friday
(December 01, 1988)
Two Sikhs condemned to death in the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi *will be hanged* Friday, Indian officials said here tonight.

The decision follows the* rejection of their motions for clemency* by President Ramaswami Venkataraman and his *dimissal of further appeals* on their behalf by their attorneys last week.

------

Vrinda Grover, a lawyer and womens' activist recently said, " *Men from minority communities make up a disproportionate number of death row inmates*. In the Indian context, a review of crime that warrants capital punishment reveals the discriminatory way in which such *laws are selectively and arbitrarily applied to disadvantaged communities, religious and ethnic minorities*." (Source: http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...lty-is-a-deterrent-to-rape/article4236020.ece)


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Feb 13, 2013)

As a Sikh every Soul has deserved a second chance, but what is if the person killed another person, didn´t they knew what they did?  I mean - behind every deed there is an thinking. And we Sikhs , are taught to draw the Sword if injusticed is done! All our Gurus ... look how they martyrd themselfs ! Until Guru Gobind SIngh ji , who himself created Khalsa...  And how did we make justice? Fighting and killing...  And here applies the same...  the death penality  is the same - the human who was unjust, unfair , should be taken justice from. 

Furthermore , if you dont give death penality the culprit still is imprisoned for all his life - isnt that unjust as well?


----------



## Harry Haller (Feb 14, 2013)

BlazinSikhji

Some thoughts



> 1) My believe is no one has the right to decide who is to die and live, except Waheguru Ji.



Waheguruji, in my opinion, has no interest in who lives or dies. This type of personalisation belongs to the Abramahic religions. Waheguruji, Creator, makes the rules, we play within them, death is all around us, Creation is constantly renewing, dying, being born. 



> 2) I believe death is a easy way out of anything, the person who commits  a crime would have not learned anything, or the crime they have  committed.



I think the only reason for death is not to punish the criminal, but to remove them from society permanently in order to save innocent people from suffering. 



> 3) Just as Waheguru Ji has mercy upon us, we should should also show  mercy upon others, a person especially a Sikh/human who carries  anger/wrath is not really a Sikh/human.



Again, it is my belief that Creator shows no mercy, shows no favours, has no anger, no wrath, does not reward, does not punish. There must be laws, and those laws must be upheld without anger or wrath. A society that upholds its laws calmly and with grace to protect the innocent, the downtrodden, the raped, the killed, by removing criminals permanently, in my view, is fully within Sikhism. 



> 4) The greatest punishment to give to anyone is to remove all freedom, when they have no freedom they will suffer from within.



Oh I disagree, a greater punishment would be to torture them daily. Again, in my view this is not about the greatest punishment, it is about the removal of criminals from society, permanently. It does not have to be linked with suffering, revenge, anger, it needs to be surgical, it needs to have a point greater than punishment. 

However, the death of those that are innocent is a powerful argument against the death penalty, for that I can offer no response.


----------



## SaintSoldier1699 (Feb 14, 2013)

This is a tough one.  

Having failed prison policies which do not reform prisoners is a missed opportunity to help those that want to help themselves to change for the better.  I know of some new prisons run under private companies who are making a change in this area and have become successful in retraining and also, getting external employers to outsource  their work to re-skilled prisoners.

Back in the day I read somewhere that prisoners were made to do infrastructure work ie build roads, rail tracks, buildings, mining etc so at least there is some payback to society rather than killing I guess.

One event in Sikh history that I have heard alternate stories on is in regards to when Guru Gobind Singh Ji removed the masand system.  Did he really punish them to death?  If so, then this shows the Guru was a supporter of the death penalty.

Another example, I also have heard people raising the point that during Maharaja Ranjit Singh's rule there were no death penalties?  Then some call justice by killing is a puratan way of doing things?

Thoughts on these would be a great insight from those much wiser than me.

There just seems to be too much ying yang depending on what the current Sikh agenda is, ie in regards to Bhai Rajoana majority wanted to abolish the death penalty, then same people wanted death penalty for the Delhi rapists?


----------



## Awakeand Singh (Feb 14, 2013)

For those who support the idea of lifetime prison sentences, is it fair to society to demand that they pay for the upkeep of a killer for as long as he/she will live?!


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 14, 2013)

Awakeand Singh said:


> For those who support the idea of lifetime prison sentences, is it fair to society to demand that they pay for the upkeep of a killer for as long as he/she will live?!



Yes, because it costs much less than the death penalty which requires many appeals. And more  important, the guilty is reminded daily of his/ her atrocities.

Lastly, and the most important thing is that just in case the person is not-guilty and found so eventually with the help of new technology and DNA tests, we have saved one more life from going to the gallows for naught.


----------



## Luckysingh (Feb 14, 2013)

A true sikh gurmukh sees no difference in dukh and sukh. The gurmukh accepts them equally as dictated by his divine hukam.
However, If some psycho takes away the life of a close one, then this will leave me to endure the most painful dukh. 
Most of us would demand life punishment or death sentence for this psycho in order that we may be able to handle this painful dukh.

But this is what differentiates me from the gurmukh that I should try and be, this lack of ability to eradicate duality enabling me to handle dukh and sukh on equal par !!
It's this weakness that is the reason that gives a strong desire for revenge and life/death punishment.

Just goes to show,that being a sikh is a lifetime of a challenge !
I can imagine that every time one feels that they may be closer to being gurmukh then the steps just get further away.
It gives the sikh something to live and aim for, otherwise what will one do once they have attained full gurmukh status ?


----------



## BlazinSikh (Feb 17, 2013)

harry haller said:


> BlazinSikhji
> 
> Some thoughts
> 
> ...



Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!

Mr Harry Haller Ji, 

Giving my thought on your first thought, what you say i partly agree, but if Waheguru Ji does not care on who lives and dies, why would he give us another opportunity to live life again?

On your second thoughts, my idea would be if you want to remove a criminal away from innocent people, sending them to a prison far away from a city/town would be a best idea. 

On your third thought, i do agree with, but i still believe Waheguru Ji shows mercy, but not on any random Joe, my thoughts would be a Sikh who follows Waheguru Ji Law/Command/Hukam.

Lastly on your last thought, i'm kinda changing my view on what i believe should be a punishment. My new view on a punishment should be to do the opposite of what a criminal enjoys. What i mean by this is that there are some people out there in this world who enjoy not having freedom, there are some people in this world who enjoy being tortured, and pain. So i think what a punishment should be whatever pains one. 

Sorry for the late reply, and thank you to those who have replied back (even though this is not even a thread that i had started, still thank you)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!


----------



## Harry Haller (Feb 17, 2013)

> Giving my thought on your first thought, what you say i partly agree, but if Waheguru Ji does not care on who lives and dies, why would he give us another opportunity to live life again?


 
I do not believe that Creator does



> On your second thoughts, my idea would be if you want to remove a criminal away from innocent people, sending them to a prison far away from a city/town would be a best idea.
> 
> It depends on the crime, I am not advocating death for chocolate theft, although it should be...
> 
> ...


----------



## BlazinSikh (Feb 17, 2013)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!



> In my mind this is not in anyway Sikh thinking, this is the sort of  thinking that looted Sirhind. To delight in extracting the most pain  from a criminal, to actually have a thought process along how to inflict  the most torture is not something I agree with. The prime objective is  removal for the criminal, and rehabilition. Education, assistance,  training, criminals are our brothers and sisters, the death penalty  issue only raises itself for crimes proven and of suffiicient magnitude,  and even then must be carried out with compassion.



If you're trying to say convert (or whatever word suites you) the wrong to right, then i completely agree with you 100%.


----------



## gurtej khubbar (Feb 17, 2013)

BlazinSikh said:


> Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh!
> 
> 
> 
> If you're trying to say convert (or whatever word suites you) the wrong to right, then i completely agree with you 100%.



What about cases of gang rapes of 6 year olds.. Would U still hold the same belief?


----------



## Harry Haller (Feb 17, 2013)

gurtej khubbar said:


> What about cases of gang rapes of 6 year olds.. Would U still hold the same belief?


 
the death penalty issue only raises itself for crimes proven and of suffiicient magnitude, and even then must be carried out with compassion.


----------



## kds1980 (Feb 17, 2013)

What about these type of cases?



> *In jail, Guru exhorted IM men to stage attacks across India*
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...attacks-across-India/articleshow/18551645.cms


----------



## aristotle (Feb 18, 2013)

kds1980 said:


> What about these type of cases?



kds Ji,

What do you think about *Swami Aseemanand* (Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/aseemanand-confessed-role-in-samjhauta-blast-claims-probe/734614) and *Sadhvi Pragya Thakur*(Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...desperate+to+carry+out+blastsâ€™/1/29648.html), or *Kishori Lal* (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2wGgjDG1Yk)? 

It is an open secret they are bound to be declared scot-free or at the most served with petty penalties, just because they belong to the majority community.

This game is much bigger than meets the eye.


----------



## kds1980 (Feb 18, 2013)

aristotle said:


> kds Ji,
> 
> What do you think about *Swami Aseemanand* (Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/aseemanand-confessed-role-in-samjhauta-blast-claims-probe/734614) and *Sadhvi Pragya Thakur*(Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...desperate+to+carry+out+blastsâ€™/1/29648.html), or *Kishori Lal* (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2wGgjDG1Yk)?
> 
> ...



I think you did not get my point.The news mentioned that Guru was promoting Im men to carry out terrorists attacks all over India.

And this is not about Afzal Guru . Many Hi profile big criminals in India can easily operate their crime network from jail.So what to do do about them if death penalty is not given to them?

As far Kishori lal or Aseemanand  is concerned  they too should had been given death penalty


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 18, 2013)

harry haller said:


> the death penalty issue only raises itself for crimes proven and of suffiicient magnitude, and even then must be carried out with compassion.



Harry ji,

Guru Fateh.

I beg to differ with you. There is no compassion in the death penalty no matter how many heinous crimes the criminal has committed. To call murdering a murderer  compassion is a cop out, hatred, vengeance and stooping to the level of the murderer's values. We are better than that.

I have no idea if you remember or not, when Balbir Singh Sodhi was gunned down at his gas station in AZ immediately after 9-11 by Frank Silva Roque, he was given the death penalty. The Sodhi family fought till the AZ Supreme Court to have the sentence changed to life without parole. That is the Sikhi spirit and as mentioned before, it also costs a lot less than the death penalty.

@KDS: Unfortunately justice is not blind in India but is blindfolded. Hypocricy is  the mode de jour laced with a lot of corruption. India claims itself to be the largest democracy in the world but it acts like Israel against its "enemies", another  democratic country. But again that does not mean we should abandon our Sikhi principles and stoop low. 

It is interesting to notice that the country which is considered the most "religious" where people chant mantras and other babbles 24/7 is the worst country as far as its morality in all aspects is concerned.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Harry Haller (Feb 18, 2013)

Tejwantji

In the circumstances you mention, I can understand why the family did this. 

I do not know the background, maybe there was remorse, maybe the family understood the aspect of mistaken identity, but some crimes are so repulsive, so horrible that removal is the only option open. 

I quote the tenth master,. "_When all other  means have failed_, it is but _righteous to draw the sword_."


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 18, 2013)

harry haller said:


> Tejwantji
> 
> In the circumstances you mention, I can understand why the family did this.
> 
> ...



Harry ji,

Guru Fateh.

The family did it because it is against Sikhi to stoop to that level and become judge, jury and executioner. There was no mistaken identity. The defence claimed the murderer was insane which was rejected by the judge and the jury. 

No matter how repulsive the crimes are, stooping to the same level  is not a Sikhi value according to me.



> I quote the tenth master,. "_When all other  means have failed_, it is but _righteous to draw the sword_.



Lastly, you have misunderstood the verse by our Dasam Guru. It is about fighting against injustice which may involve killing as a self defence or to defend others. It has nothing to do with vengeance which the death penalty is. In the same breath, let's not forget what our Dasam Guru told Bhai Ghaniyah which was, not only offer water to those who considered us their enemies but also do something to heal their war wounds.

This is the true Sikhi spirit.

Let's agree to disagree on this point.

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Harry Haller (Feb 18, 2013)

> Let's agree to disagree on this point.


Tejwantji, your post fills me with confusion, so if you will humour me, I would like to clarify. 



> The family did it because it is against Sikhi to stoop to that level and  become judge, jury and executioner. There was no mistaken identity. The  defence claimed the murderer was insane which was rejected by the judge  and the jury.


By mistaken identity, I mean the mistaking of a Sikh for a Muslim. But here is where I am confused, the family did not wish to be judge, jury and executioner, but they had no need to be, that is what the courts and the federal facilities are there for. 



> No matter how repulsive the crimes are, stooping to the same level  is not a Sikhi value according to me.


Then perhaps you will join me in my distaste that some murderers and terrorists are celebrated at the very highest authority that exists in Sikhi.Perhaps you can explain why the shooting of an unarmed woman, by men that were paid to protect her, has resulted in these men being honoured and lauded?



> Lastly, you have misunderstood the verse by our Dasam Guru. It is about  fighting against injustice which may involve killing as a self defence  or to defend others. It has nothing to do with vengeance which the death  penalty is. In the same breath, let's not forget what our Dasam Guru  told Bhai Ghaniyah which was, not only offer water to those who  considered us their enemies but also do something to heal their war  wounds.


I have never mentioned vengeance, but I do believe in justice. My only support for the death penalty is to protect the innocents that would suffer if a certain type of person were allowed to live. 

For the record, the crime you have mentioned, I think it is right this was changed to life, however, let us talk about say Saddam, the man was tried, convicted, and hung. There were no other options, and we must not close our minds to the fact that this option does exist.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 18, 2013)

harry haller said:


> Tejwantji, your post fills me with confusion, so if you will humour me, I would like to clarify.



Harry ji,

Let me give it another shot. No pun intended.



> By mistaken identity, I mean the mistaking of a Sikh for a Muslim. But here is where I am confused, the family did not wish to be judge, jury and executioner, but they had no need to be, that is what the courts and the federal facilities are there for.



It does not matter. Mistaken identity out of ignorance which results in a heinous murder is wrong. Hatred is hatred. Period.



> Then perhaps you will join me in my distaste that some murderers and terrorists are celebrated at the very highest authority that exists in Sikhi.Perhaps you can explain why the shooting of an unarmed woman, by men that were paid to protect her, has resulted in these men being honoured and lauded?



I am in total agreement with your above post starting from Bhindranwale,  I must add.



> I have never mentioned vengeance, but I do believe in justice. My only support for the death penalty is to protect the innocents that would suffer if a certain type of person were allowed to live.



Justice is a very subjective thing and how killing someone will protect  the innocents from suffering? Life without parole can do the same or may help  the victims heal because they know the person is paying the price with his/her every breath till the last breath which may take years. This is the true punishment for the crimes committed in my opinion. Killing the criminal acts as a saving grace.



> For the record, the crime you have mentioned, I think it is right this was changed to life,*however, let us talk about say Saddam, the man was tried, convicted, and hung. There were no other options, and we must not close our minds to the fact that this option does exist.*



Before talking about Sadaam Hussain, let's admit that we have been in bed with many people like him and still are. Iraq was a manufactured war by The US and The UK. Sadaam was one cruel and fiendish man like many of our other friends, either dictators, Kings or Chiefdoms. We gave him the WMD's to be used against Iran. Both Rumsfeld and Cheney who worked in the American Administration did that and we have the pictures of them with Hussain as the proofs. We did not defend the Kurds as Papa Bush promised them when Saddam used WMD's supplied by us on them. Saudi Arabia is the same as Saddam if not worse. The one good thing according to me Sadaam did was giving $25k to each Palestinian family whose houses were bulldozed by the Israeli Defence Forces at will, which did not set well with us nor with our BFF Israel. 

Sadaam should have been captured, tried and hanged if that were to be the law of the land by its own people, not by us. By invading Iraq, we handed it  over to Iran and made Iran bolder to become nuclear because neither the Brits nor the Yankees understood the difference between the Shias and  the Sunnis. Sadaam was our buffer zone, the second good thing he did for us against Iran, the advantage that we lost because of the invasion of Iraq. Now, Iraq is Iran's closest ally because both countries are Shias and Iraq along with Iran is helping Assad of Syria who is also a Shia. We lost more that 5000 of our best and billions of dollars for naught.

By ignoring Afghanistan in order to spread democracy in Iraq, we made Afghanistan the largest exporter of heroin which was sold to our kids to fund the terrorists to kill our soldiers. In other words, we funded wars on both sides

If we ponder all the above, we would perhaps take a different view.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 24, 2013)

The Death Penalty

George Carlin - Death Penalty - YouTube


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Feb 24, 2013)

A true Khalsa would try not to mix his own feelings with the commited deed of the culprit. 

As Sikhs and Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh ji:animatedkhanda1:, we need to find the right conclusion via (Gurbani), because Gurbani is our dictator. We need to decide through Sikh principles - of what is unjust and what just.  We cant just sit there and do nothing , because a 'psycho' will continue to murder - and if Guru ji would do nothing(not creating Khalsa) there would hardly be ANY Sikh left. Even if in one Situation we made the wrong choice, in the end creator knows.
 The death penality is ONlY then given , when all other things fail ! (rehabilitation etc...)


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Feb 24, 2013)

TigerStyleZ said:


> A true Khalsa would try not to mix his own feelings with the commited deed of the culprit.
> 
> As Sikhs and Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh ji:animatedkhanda1:, we need to find the right conclusion via (Gurbani), because Gurbani is our dictator. We need to decide through Sikh principles - of what is unjust and what just.  We cant just sit there and do nothing , because a 'psycho' will continue to murder - and if Guru ji would do nothing(not creating Khalsa) there would hardly be ANY Sikh left. Even if in one Situation we made the wrong choice, in the end creator knows.
> The death penality is ONlY then given , when all other things fail ! (rehabilitation etc...)




TigerStylez ji,

Guru Fateh.

I think you are confused between killing someone to defend oneself in order to to fight tyranny and injustice, and the death penalty. Many death penalties are given to the innocent who have been accused wrongly. With the help of science,many of them have been released but many have been sent to the gallows for the crimes they did not commit, which is NOT the Sikhi Way. We, as Sikhs have the responsibility to defend all the innocent. That is what Gurbani teaches us.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## TigerStyleZ (Feb 25, 2013)

I  dont think I am confused , if someone is given the death penality the person (judge , or whatever)  deals for his or the interest of the whole society/community. Lets take an example of a raper/murder. Because they are 'dangerous' not only for oneself but or the common good. Thats why I said  : The death penality is/should only then given , when all other things fail ! (rehabilitation, scientific prove etc...) In the end you cant be 100 % sure if someone is guilty or not . There is and still will be a risk that you have the wrong  person. So in this case the death penality is dealing with 'injustice' as well.

Furthermore you have to ponder why the 'crime' commited has been commited, maybe the person was forced to do and deal like this.

Yes, you are right we have to defend all innocents , but what is with  a suspicious ? Will you be able to let him  go and let him his free will? Or would you like to see him in 'prison' until he isnt guilty? But in the same time you are stealing his limited time on eath...

The other question that arises is that - how far we can go as human beings to control /know someoone unique and pure identity?


----------

