A spine for a spine makes the whole world ..umm ..crippled

CptStern

CptStern

suckmonkey
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
10,303
Reaction score
62
Saudi Arabian judge asks hospitals to paralyse man

Country's strict enforcement of sharia law sees 'eye for an eye' punishment sought for after cleaver attack

A Saudi judge has asked several hospitals whether they would punitively damage a man's spinal cord after he was convicted of attacking another man with a cleaver and paralysing him, local newspapers reported today
Click to expand...

hey some countries do the same thing; an eye for an eye, but it's exclusive to murder cases. the method of dispensing justice might be at the end of a syringe instead of a scapel but the fundamentally it's the same principle

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/19/saudi-arabia-judge-paralyse-convict

Okaz reported that a leading hospital in Riyadh – King Faisal specialist hospital – said that it would not do the operation. The article quoted a letter from the hospital saying "inflicting such harm is not possible", apparently refusing on ethical grounds.
Click to expand...

I guess it goes against their hippopotamus oath
 
I'd argue that paralyzing someone for life is more cruel than the death penalty or life in prison. However as you said, the death penalty at it's core is "an eye for an eye".
 
ya somehow I dont think they have a clause in the Saudi arabian bill of rights (hahahaha) that covers cruel and unusual punishment. and if there is it's probably a field manual on how to do it effectively
 
He shouldn't have committed the spineless act in the first place.

Don't see why a doctor should have to put his back out to perform surgery though, wouldn't it be less expensive/easier to just execute him? If they paralyze him he'll be a drain on the system for the rest of his life.
 
Lone Wolf said:
He shouldn't have committed the spineless act in the first place.

Don't see why a doctor should have to put his back out to perform surgery though, wouldn't it be less expensive/easier to just execute him? If they paralyze him he'll be a drain on the system for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

This is a terrible way of thinking about this kind of thing.

"Paralyzing people is horrible-"

A+, Ten points, Gold Star.

"- so he deserves to die".

F, Zero points, Dunce cap.
 
Actually, his point was "Paralyzing people is bad for us".
 
I see his point. A paralyzed person pretty much contributes 0 to the overall economy, and the production capabilities of a nation. Why make cripples when you can, I dunno, make him work in prison?
 
Not really an eye for an eye when a doctor needs to perform the punishment. You know, those guys who have that silly "first do no harm" thing.
 
Bad^Hat said:
Not really an eye for an eye when a doctor needs to perform the punishment. You know, those guys who have that silly "first do no harm" thing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure they have that thing in Saudi Arabia.

This sort of punishment would make people prefer to kill people rather than seriously maim them. If you break someone's back on accident, you're probably better off just finishing the job.
 
I'm not gunna lie, sometimes I feel the urge to scream "unusual punishment!" then other times I'm like "Off with their head!" but in any situation I say send them to Mars with a cheap ass rocket and see how little is required to populate the place. its a waste to kill someone without using them first
 
Lone Wolf said:
He shouldn't have committed the spineless act in the first place.

Don't see why a doctor should have to put his back out to perform surgery though, wouldn't it be less expensive/easier to just execute him? If they paralyze him he'll be a drain on the system for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

Saudi Arabia doesnt have a system to drain. He'll be a burden upon his family, and thats it.
 
Solaris said:
Or perhaps give him a fair trial in front of a jury of his pears?
Click to expand...

The_Biting_Pear_of_Salamanca_by_ursulav.jpg
 
I had already copy pasted the link to it. Mine has the "lol wut" though, which seems appropriate.

[IMG]http://i645.photobucket.com/albums/uu180/Skyflyer231/lolwut.jpg
 
I don't agree with this. This is too medieval and its like the old days where they removed the hands of thieves. Just give him a long sentence and hard labor and be done with it.
 
Well that is the problem, is countries like this are still living in the medieval days...

Saudi Arabia has been much more willing than most countries to join the rest of the world in modern times, but their justice system is still in the 12 century...
 
If the guys intention was to paralyze the other man then do it. If it was an accidental result of the fight then no.

Here in the USA we have the death penalty. But if you ACCIDENTLY killed somebody or didnt intend to murder them and the state cant prove that you intended to, you are never going to receive death penalty (life in prison is even iffy for those cases)
 
It's as barbaric an idea as the death penalty.
 
I think the death penalty is NOT barbaric but over used. Needs to be reserved for the worst of sexual predators (pedophiles, violent sexual rapists, etc) or the worst of the worst murders (IE: killing a family raping their bodies while torturing the ones that are still alive)

vs something like a shooting in the heat of passion, etc. Death for the example above for a sick crazy ****, but life or less for a crime of passion.
 
Eejit said:
It's as barbaric an idea as the death penalty.
Click to expand...

You know, I never can understand what your ideas are on society, war, law and order, etc. etc. I just can't fathom how one could think like that.

So I'm just going to call you a hippy from now on, and see if that works out.
 
The death penalty only "works" if you believe that people cannot change. But if you're comfortable with the complicit murder of your fellow citizens, then by all means.
 
^ That and if you believe your justice system is infallible and will never execute an innocent person.
 
15357 said:
I see his point. A paralyzed person pretty much contributes 0 to the overall economy
Click to expand...

Stephen Hawking begs to differ.

By the way, don't all native Saudi citizens(ethnic Saudis) get a substantial amount of money from the state to begin with? Even if they're working?

Or is that just UAE/Dubai?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top