|
|
Updated Wednesday, February 10, 2010 9:28 am TWN, The China Post news staff Abolishing death penalty is right; but new laws neededThe debate's moderator asked Dukakis the following question: “Governor, if Kitty Dukakis [his wife] were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?” Dukakis' reply may have been the final nail in his doomed campaign. “No, I don't,” he answered. “I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty all of my life,” Dukakis said before launching into an in-depth explanation of his stance on the issue. Some political commentators believe that answer cost Michael Dukakis the election against Republican candidate, George H.W. Bush. An ordinary man's answer to the question on what he would want to happen to a person who raped and murdered his wife would be that he wants the perpetrator to die — preferably a slow and painful death. Even those who don't support the death penalty would have a desire for vengeance if an immediate family member were to be victimized in such a horrible way. It's a natural human reaction. That said, society cannot tolerate vigilante justice and stopping people from meting out what they think a perpetrator “deserves” is one of the functions of the justice system. All over the world,there have been clan feuds based on “justice” that have lasted for years. A murder would be responded to by two murders and two murders by four and so on and so on for decades. Today when a crime is perpetuated we call upon a higher authority — our legal system — to adjudicate. Recently in Taiwan an 18-year-old girl died. This girl had been the victim of a sexual assault at the tender age of five. The attack this girl suffered was so horrible that this column cannot print the particulars, but this unfortunate child was forced to undergo multiple operations and many years of pain before dying aged 18. The person who committed this crime was never found, but if he had been captured, what punishment is severe enough for such an evil creature? If we think about it, a quick and generally painless execution is too good for a criminal like this. But, modern society has rightly decided that torturing someone to death, for example, is unacceptable. The point is that the death penalty is not what a sadistic criminal “deserves;” they deserve far worse. Comments February 11, 2010 hakkaklkhtwlee@ Reply No parole life sentence has not yet become part of Taiwanese Criminal Law, so death sentence remains perhaps the final deterrent against the commission of heinous crimes. Your editorial is quite a balanced article worth reading by the general public. My underlying concern or fear is that innocent people could have been executed in the heat of vengeance against the social outcast. A healthy debate about this issue in the highest legislative body, would be desirable before the final decision is made into law. February 12, 2010 cigars898@ "...many studies have proven that capital punishment is not a deterrent to serious crime." Who cares. It's a consequence not a deterrent. The brutal acts committed by those facing the death penalty were not heat of the moment murders, they were premeditated or committed by some psycho that would do it again and again. This article makes it sound like Taiwan is executing people every other day like the Chicoms. Think what keeping these people alive does to the prison system. How is it our responsibility to rehabilitate these monsters, let them reckon with God. February 13, 2010 carltanong@ cigars898Would you mind giving us some pointers of how the Saudi Arabian gov't punished the criminals who committed heinous crimes down to those criminals who committed mere crimes? How the Saudi Arabian gov't protects her law abiding citizens? February 14, 2010 cigars898@ I have no idea what you think the Saudis and Taiwan have in common. I do know that the Saudi's follow Sharia Law if that helps you out. Please explain yourself. February 16, 2010 carltanong@ cigars898Oh I see. Whenever you failed to explained in writing arguments, you will just post "Please explain yourself". It's just similar in the restaurants "EAT ALL YOU CAN, BUT PLEASE SERVE YOURSELF". February 17, 2010 cigars898@ carltanong@ wrote: I'll type slowly so you can understand. What did I fail to explain? Your 1st statement, in relationship to the article, is irrational. Is there anything written about Saudi Arabia in the article? Are you concerned that Taiwan is going to implement Sharia Law? Do you know what Sharia Law is?cigars898 Oh I see. Whenever you failed to explained in writing arguments, you will just post "Please explain yourself". It's just similar in the restaurants "EAT ALL YOU CAN, BUT PLEASE SERVE YOURSELF". February 19, 2010 smokingisbad@ @carltanongSave yourself the trouble trying to reason with "cigars898". He's the same gentleman behind most comments in this section attacking anything that even vaguely resembles like democracy. Have a look at past editorial comments (shouldn't be too difficult; they are scarce) and look for irrational and non-relevant remarks in which the author enjoys SHOUTING at people -- in particular whenever the topic is Taiwan's ex-president Chen. February 20, 2010 carltanong@ @smokingisbadYou are right. This cigars898 is critically ill. He uses different pennames and all his comments and styles are one man with many faces. Shouting, crying like a baby, fearing that a bullet will pierce the inside of his skull etc etc etc and blah blah blah. And most of all, he changed his own topics and diverted into other topics. Look at his above statements. He doesn’t understand what he writes and in turn asks me what he writes. Hee hee. Like corrupt Chen. Today it’s 5 "YES". Tomorrow it’s 5 "NO". Let him type slowly. Anyway, he doesn't know what topics he is typing. And eventually, cigar898 will request me to explain what he is typing. February 20, 2010 tsaiyunghsia8263@ //"...many studies have proven that capital punishment is not a deterrent to serious crime." Who cares. It's a consequence not a deterrent.//Who cares? As a Taiwanese citizen, I do. It is exactly such knee-jerk impulsive decisions that our legal system should guard against. Just wanted to register my support for the anti-capital punishment camp. February 20, 2010 smokingisbad@ carltanong@ and cigars898@, from smokingisbadCorrection: I mistakenly switched your email-names! Sorry about that to both gentleman. But I - unintentionally - may have proved that this paper's editorial comment reviewer seems to be rather selective in what comments he or she decides to publish. February 20, 2010 cigars898@ tsaiyunghsia8263@ wrote: How is that a knee-jerk impulsive decision? I never said anything about expediting trials or throwing at facts and evidence to get a guilty verdict. Is no capital punishment a deterrent? I absolutely agree that the courts should be very sure of their decision but I think if you throw a baby in a pot of boiling water to prove a point, you don't deserve to live.//"...many studies have proven that capital punishment is not a deterrent to serious crime." Who cares. It's a consequence not a deterrent.// Who cares? As a Taiwanese citizen, I do. It is exactly such knee-jerk impulsive decisions that our legal system should guard against. Just wanted to register my support for the anti-capital punishment camp. February 20, 2010 cigars898@ carltanong@ wrote: Still laughing.@smokingisbad You are right. This cigars898 is critically ill. He uses different pennames and all his comments and styles are one man with many faces. Shouting, crying like a baby, fearing that a bullet will pierce the inside of his skull etc etc etc and blah blah blah. And most of all, he changed his own topics and diverted into other topics. Look at his above statements. He doesn’t understand what he writes and in turn asks me what he writes. Hee hee. Like corrupt Chen. Today it’s 5 "YES". Tomorrow it’s 5 "NO". Let him type slowly. Anyway, he doesn't know what topics he is typing. And eventually, cigar898 will request me to explain what he is typing. February 22, 2010 carltanong@ Sorry. The receiver is out of reach at this moment. Please try to post your messages later. Thank you. February 23, 2010 carltanong@ @smokingisbadRest assured that all the Ladies and Gentlemen of this paper editorial comment reviewer did not select and decide which comment to be publish. Maybe cigars898 blocked all your comments in China Post. Hee hee. Or the smoke from cigars898 contains unknown viruses that blocked the eyes of the reviewers. Heehee. |
  | |||||||||||||||
Sitemap | Top Stories | Taiwan | China | Business | Asia | World | Sports | Life | Arts & Leisure | Health | Editorial | Commentary
Travel | Movies | TV Listings | Classifieds | Bookstore | Getting Around | Weather | Guide Post | Student Post | English Courses | Terms of Use | Sitemap
