Iran to blind criminal with acid in 'eye for an eye' justice

[Inseriousity.]

I've just told you what 'leads' them to commit the crime (despite the fact that nothing can lead you to committing a crime as a person of sound, rational mind is solely in control of himself) - so is the poorer of the two, because of his deprived background, the less guilty of the two?

Or is it actually the case that both men are equally as wicked and deserve the same punishment for their crimes?



Hang on now, you've switched now from backgrounds to emotions at the time of the crime.

No you've told me your right-wing idea of what causes them to commit the crime. I've told you my left-wing idea so we're never going to agree on that. Of course they deserve the same punishment for the crime and there's no such thing as "less guilty." There's guilty or not guilty. If we base our justice system on different levels of guilt, like everything else, it's too ambiguous to really determine who goes where. However, you seem to depose of circumstances as if they are not relevant when you can not just throw away the environment in which you're brought up in. It's all around you.

It was an example, which you did not answer the point by the way so feel free to go back and answer it. Emotions do not come out of nowhere either; they are constructed from your environment. Would I feel sad if I got a U in an exam if the society I lived in did not place exam grades as important? Probably not hence why all those working-class children with parents who don't place much emphasis on having a good education aren't too bothered if they pass or fail. Moving away from crime but a similar example to what I was trying to get across.

[ifuseekamy]

Those kind of attacks are common in south asian countries where the obvious intention is to ruin their face so no one else will have them (says a lot about their view of women). The same thing happened to that Katie girl here who got a lot of media coverage.

[GommeInc]

I'm not a huge fan of this to be honest. An eye for an eye will make everyone blind, and I think one disgusting act shouldn't make another disgusting act justifiable. She won't get her eyes back for doing this, it's just setting for a terrible prescedent. Thankfully, we're not Iran.

[Nuxty]

It makes me sick to think about this tbh. I really feel sorry for the woman but it does not mean in a civilised society
that people enforcing the punishment should act the same way. I do think a long prison sentence is appropriate though. Also she was not anaesthetised when it happened so it is not really 'an eye for an eye'.

I agree with you 100% here Rosie. It really does make me somewhat angry and as you said, yes I do feel sympathy for the woman but taking away the offenders sight, what good will that achieve? They are proving to be just as bad as him meaning that really there isn't a great amount of justice there really - 'oh he blinded her, so lets blind him?' - I do not deem what he has done as acceptable, but I do not feel that he should have this done to him. I am a great believer in giving people a second chance, as much as it would anger me for someone to do this to someone else, I do feel that people can change and he could eventually prove himself to be a better man if they'd lock him in prision and give him a sentence, he could change? At the end of the day, they will just be as bad as he was to the woman if they proceed with this.

[Eoin247]

Imagine if this was the other way around though. If the woman had thrown the acid, her punishment would probably have been worse. I wouldn't be surprised if as well as this punishment, she was stoned to death or worse.

[Catzsy]

Imagine if this was the other way around though. If the woman had thrown the acid, her punishment would probably have been worse. I wouldn't be surprised if as well as this punishment, she was stoned to death or worse.

You could well be right there. That is barbaric but so is this suggestion.

[Nuxty]

I just think something needs to be done in order to take action against this punishments, I don't feel they are effective any more, it is just doing to people what they've done to others and the problems aren't really solved. It just disgusts me to know that the government wish to behave in such a way as bad as the man had in the first place.

[Red]

That is actually disgusting.
made me feel sick.

[Catzsy]

They have suspended this action for now. Lets hope it does not happen.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Of course it shouldn't and that has no relation at all to the topic. Your environment shouldn't excuse you from the law, I'm not saying it should. What I'm saying is that you can't deny the fact that someone's wealth and culture has an effect on whether you end up being a criminal or not. There has been several studies which have quite clearly shown a significant correlation here, one of which I outlined several pages back. Obviously not all end up like that and I have never said that either.

But you are, its typical run-of-the-mill sociological nonsense 'Mrs Doris down the road was mugged and beaten as a result of the mistreatment of Little Johnny by his Dad and the system' - of course enviroment can give people more of a chance of being a criminal, but its purely statistical - it leaves out the concept of human morality and the idea that we as individuals are responsible for our own actions along rather than our social band, race or gender.

On another note, legalise drugs? Don't be so silly.

I do not believe it is the job of the state to regulate what substances people grow and smoke in their own time, this comes from somebody who is anti-drugs and hasn't touched them despite being offered them on numerous occasions. If I turned this around however and said that homosexuality should be regulated by the state, I can only imagine your reaction would go something along the lines of 'the state shouldn't have anything to do with what people do behind closed doors' - the same logic is applied here. Both drug taking and anal sex to a degree can be dangerous, but I don't find thats any of my business.

As I have also said in this topic, I am torn about what to think about punishment. You can do just as much good by talking to the person than being just as stupid and punishing them.

Really? rehabilitation does not work, and the stats are fiddled if you try and pull that one on me;


If a child is naughty and is smacked, he or she will usually refrain from doing that same act again because they remember that not only is it wrong, but that if they do it they will be met with punishment. It goes back to the central point, those who commit wicked acts are responsible for their actions - and should be held accountable for them in the eyes of the law.

I honestly can't believe you're saying that someone should get acid thrown in their eyes, just because they did it to someone else, Dan. Sure, they might deserve it, but that doesn't mean that one human should have the authority over another to administer that type of severe punishment. Two wrongs don't make a right. We're not animals. Why sink to the same low level?

Had you read my reply you would see i'm not in support of this punishment.

Yes, when it isn't worth even commenting on.

Sure it is, its about as worthy in debate as the response 'well thats my opinion' - yes it is, I never disputed otherwise.

I somewhat agree with the quoted, but I still think it's a disgrace that it is right to dish out the same attack as a punishment. By all means lock them up, but please to goodness don't sink that low.

I'm not arguing in favour of the use of torture and bad methods, I want a strong justice system which has the death penalty (which is painless and moral) and which also has hard labor as a form of punishment to deter criminals from committing crime again - this is something that the main three parties refuse to commit themselves to.

No you've told me your right-wing idea of what causes them to commit the crime.

What causes them to commit crime is the fact that they wish to commit crime, nothing else.

I've told you my left-wing idea so we're never going to agree on that. Of course they deserve the same punishment for the crime and there's no such thing as "less guilty." There's guilty or not guilty. If we base our justice system on different levels of guilt, like everything else, it's too ambiguous to really determine who goes where. However, you seem to depose of circumstances as if they are not relevant when you can not just throw away the environment in which you're brought up in. It's all around you.

Oh there is, in many cases now background and so forth is taken into account and the criminal is somehow excused from the crime because of this. The enviroment can't be thrown away you are quite right, however a person of sound mind can see what is right and what is wrong and should act not on what sociological statistics suggest he should act, but how the law requires him to act and how morals require he act.

One of the biggest problems with crime is the wearing away of morality, again, due to the left.

It was an example, which you did not answer the point by the way so feel free to go back and answer it.

Feel free to point out the part you want a more meaty response to and i'll gladly respond.

Emotions do not come out of nowhere either; they are constructed from your environment. Would I feel sad if I got a U in an exam if the society I lived in did not place exam grades as important? Probably not hence why all those working-class children with parents who don't place much emphasis on having a good education aren't too bothered if they pass or fail. Moving away from crime but a similar example to what I was trying to get across.

The idea of what is right and wrong does to an extent, and in the cases where it lacks - it can only be rectified by punishment so that the criminal is deterred from committing the crime again as opposed to a 'talk' with a councillor who the criminal has in many cases already been through all the motions with, and simply understands that playing along as the victim is the only consquence of being caught.

The point you miss out is that many many criminals are simply wicked, and wickedness must be punished. Either the wicked live in fear of the majority or the majority live in fear of the wicked, which is it?

It makes me sick to think about this tbh. I really feel sorry for the woman but it does not mean in a civilised society that people enforcing the punishment should act the same way. I do think a long prison sentence is appropriate though. Also she was not anaesthetised when it happened so it is not really 'an eye for an eye'.

But why does it not make you sick when this government and the one before it treat the victims with contempt?