ofc something like this should be filmed. But it should not have been leaked to the public though.

You think death by hanging (while filming it) is more cruel than mass murder? Although i'd personally like to see him rot in prison until he dies, he got what he deserved for making everyones lives a living hell during his dictatorship (79-03). Now to see how things evolve in the middle east because of this. What do you think, will the violence increase or is this really the ultimate freedom for Iraq that Bush wants us to think?

the current state of iraq has nothing to do with saddam .. its just pure chaos.. i dont think this will end anytime soon.. a very voilent repression might control it in the coming years.. but the current government or the americans arent willing to get into that..

I decided not to watch it. I don't think it you should fill your head with that type of stuff.

I used to be all for capital punishment myself until recent years were I've changed my mind.

agreed, i dont really want to see a guy getting hanged, no matter who it is. (obviously maybe i wud if i really dispised that person, but i think it wud make me feel different towards them after seeing it)


edit, 5000th post. go me!

guy should have gotten a better camera and filmed him drop aswell (fuck it)

Here's a higher resolution video and a much better perspetive.
Though it does not show the actual hanging.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-531590107320554134

I say it's a small payment for the 100's of 1000's of lives he ruined.

only allowed to execute white ppl

Don't know what colour has to do with it.

If you do something bad you should pay the price.
And I think it's safe to say Saddam paid a fraction of what he owed.

you edited out his bush and blair comment. not nice how you fucked me

dont worry he'll edit it more til hes chattin about jfk and martin lexx luthor the king

and what exactly does that payment change?

How about the victims and relatives feeling a sense of justice against someone they never thought would be tried and tested for his crimes?

How about the 1000's of oppressed people who "believed" saddam would return back to power and punish them as what happened after the gulf war.

Those are changes that will benefit them.

I can see the second point but have my problems with the first one.
Because for me "feeling a sense of justice" and "killing someone" shouldn't have a connection.

How about if someone killed your entire family for no reason and you had to see a statue of him everyday in the street, or watch him dictate on the TV and get away with it time after time?

Believe me you WOULD feel better about his death if your circumstances were similiar to what was a reality for 1000's of people.

Leave Bush out of it!

While I think and hope that you don't have any more experience in that matter than I do that may be true. That those people "feel" that they will feel better if the oppressor dies.

But the question is why? Yes of course he can't come back and do it again but most times prison does the job in those cases as well.
And there might e another person waiting to become the next dictator, so you can't feel completely safe.

Other than that I think it's just that people have become too used to killing. And with every death penalty they become more used to it.

And where wil you draw the line? Mass murderers? One murder? Rape? Abortion? Accidental killing (e.g. a traffic accident?)

Because even in traffic accidents people who lost relatives have said they want the culprit to die...

Not to mention there are sometimes people on death row who are innocent.
In the end I simply don't like the direction of it, and I belief that if forbidding death penalties helps the whole of humanity that takes precedence over the victims of such crimes.

Basically I see death sentences as a sign of archaic or oppressing governments or social structures and not real justice. And is that really what people who lived through a dictatorship want?

I have no expereince with Murder in my family!

If society have become more used to killing then the consequences should increase.

If the punishment does not exceed the potential "reward" then punishment will always fail and bad things will become more appealing.

Imagine if the law changed tomorrow and the AVG sentence went down from like 12 yrs for armed robbery to 12 months.

That would instantly make the crime more appealing and less risky to people who want to exploit it. As a result more would do it.

It's the same with murder or anything else.

There must be a point in time where someone knows they are going to commit murder.
A harsher punishment would make most of them think twice before they kill someone else.

It's that simple to me. You take someone's life you don't count as a human being. Simple.

first of the analogy with the sentence for armed robbery doesn't fit at all cause it is still a prison sentence, and I'm not saying murderers shold get out of prison easily.

You also didn't understand what I meant with people getting usd to murder. What I mean is that if death penalty is considered justice , people will see it as a way to solve problems more easily. Or differently put the more people are killed "for justice" the more unjust killings will follow.
Of course you are right that punishment should be severe but i highly doubt someone will commit a murder because he will "only" go to jail for 15 years and not killed.

Also if 15 years or longer is such a mild punishmen why are there so many attempted suicides in prison?


and you also didn't say what happens if the court made a mistake finds out a years, but damn the assumed murderer is already dead?
Just say "Oops, my bad. Next case please."

Well mistakes do happen but it's safe to say that 99.9% of the time they get it right.
Again it comes down to you wanting to give .1% of a vote the same influence as what the other 99.9% of people would oppose.

Again suicides in prison are rare compared to the numbers who are committed, again you seem to be focusing on small numbers here.
If you do that then you can argue anything.

Maybe you're right regarding death. For me a life in prison would be far worse than death, but I still think they could come up with better punishments than locking people in a warm cell, feeding them 4 times a day and allowing them to converse with people on their channel.

Do you even do any research on the matter or just talk out of your arse all the time? Since 1973 in the USA 123 people have been released from prison and death row. That's hardly 0,1% like you claim so boldly. And if you think prison is some warm cuddly place you must seriously be retarded.

send the to prison somewhere not in the western world would solve that problem i guess. I remember a story about a Romanian prison where the prisonsers volunteered to go to a labor camp just to get out.


Well there is some truth regarding the small numbers, but in this case we are talking about intentioannly killing an (innocent) person! Which I would also call murder (granted that is debatable (sp?) but I would).
But it definately is an "accidental death" and every western government passes laws that chances for accidental deaths in any situation have o be minimized or elimanated at (almost) all costs...

But the question is why? Yes of course he can't come back and do it again but most times prison does the job in those cases as well.

No.
Not really.
Not ever.

Tell me one single dictator who was beaten on the battlefield, imprisoned and then came back and regained control of a country.

I think you just got jamerio'd :/

No, not everyone would feel better if the person who killed their family or whatever dies, do not assume that your feelings represent those of everyone else.

However I wouldn't deny that what you say is the case for the majority of people. Just not everyone by far.

Yes but given that most civilised and successful countries work on democracy then as you said if most people feel that way then why isn't it imposed?

There's always going to be people that oppose everything-so do you suggest we don't carry out the majority vote?

The point is, it all comes down to numbers and votes and that's the perspective I'm talking from.

Woah, you seem to be taking my post much further than it really is. I just stated not everyone would feel better if someone who killed their family is killed; in response to your "Believe me you WOULD feel better about his death" statement.

I was not commenting at all on whether death penalty should be imposed or not, or whether majority vote should prevail or not...

Oh I see my bad.

Sure there will always be a small % who will always forgive (I never assumed otherwise even if it sounded that way).

Well even in your beloved Britain the support for the death penalty is less than 50% so you don't have your numbers.

That's becasue I never claimed the masses would support it.

I said that if someone's family or loved one had been killed by saddam then his death and execution would be welcome by the majority of people involved in the victims lives.

So when you got people who's lives have not been affected by such a person then it's a bit rich saying he should not have been killed, or shown on TV etc becasue they have no idea how they would feel had saddam been killing and torturing their family.
As a result most people are not qualified to say how they would feel in such a situation becasue they would not have faced such emotions-which means their opinion is open for debate.

The stuff about majority votes is just general common sense IMO.

So we should let people's emotions run the world?

Well not for everything because there are lot's of thing's which need educated people behind them.
Such forcasting budgets, pensions etc.

But for something as basic and fundamentally wrong as killing another person (and choosing a punishment) then yes I think that's a choice to be made by society and not politicians.

Wow why don't you just hop on back to the dark ages?

Sorry, but leaving determining the sentence to the victims is a very very bad idea.

If someone steals my money or something I might also go with "Cut his hand of" even though I usually think that's a little too drastic.

No one said victims should determine the sentence as that would obviously be biased.
I said victims are likely to be less forgiving than everyday people who are reading this.

saddam was a US puppet during the whole time he was in power, only when he stands up to them do they try and disgrace him, call him an evil dictator etc. i think it would open many many many peoples eyes if they realised just to what extent the US has been playing the middle east

please educate us with the litrature! no really i would like to read it

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/31/world/main534798.shtml

http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A522...ge=printer

i dnt necessarily have any links to the stuff but u can easily find some stuff, as well as infer what was going on in reality...

i simply cant b assed to post all this stuff and then argue for ever and ever with other ppl abt it...

There isn't a situation I can think of where killing someone could be justified. Saddam killed, thats bad and wrong, so we kill him? Its animalistic behaviour, we need to move on.