China has executed Zheng Xiaoyu, former head of their Food and Drug Asociation, for accepting bribes to approve untested drugs. Although the consequences of what he did were tragic (at least 10 people died after taking a fake drug) the sentence is shocking and ought to be condemned. Even more horrifying was Tehran's confirmation that a man has been stoned to death for adultery. It's hard to imagine a more unpleasant method of execution, or a "crime" less deserving of it. Whatever the failings of our own justice system, I for one am very pleased to live in a country that doesn't have the death penalty.
6 comments:
Completely agree. It can't be said often enough that the death penalty is wrong. Even the victims of murderers do not usually get up in the morning thinking that they are going to die that day. For a state to do that is wicked.
Couldn't agree more, LB. The Death Penalty is completely and utterly abhorrent. The Chinese Government apparently carried out the execution to demonstrate to the world that they are going to be tough on fake pharmaceuticals - among other things-but I fail to see why the execution of one man makes their point; with widespread corruption inherent in Chinese Government, they would do well to put their house in order and tackle the causes of such corruption with root and branch reformation of the system; this may be a tough act in such a populous state, but isnt it time to make a start?
They don't mess about there do they? Countries that have the death penalty are no better than the people they execute. The Iran one in particular also makes a good case for the limits of multi-culturalism - there's no way that the supporters of such a judicial punishment and the supporters of Western-style liberal democracy could ever possibly hope to live together in the same society.
I agree... worrying. But they are still executing people in the USA... as far as I know..
I cannot see any justification for judicial execution.
Thank goodness we no longer have it. Apart for being a barbaric practice, just think about how many people who were convicted of the most serious crimes and subsequently had their convictions quashed.
I don't know how America can defend the fact that they still have the death penalty, but defend it it does!
Let me play devil's advocate ... one of the arguments against the death penalty is that, where a wrongful conviction occurs, you cannot go back in time and change things if the death penalty has been enacted. However, where it is clear that the conviction is correct (i.e. caught driving a Jeep into Glasgow Airport, with the intention of causing death to as many people as possible) should we not consider the death penalty ? Is the dishonour associated with being a suicide bomber that was caught and then suffered the death penalty without having achieved their aim enough of a deterrent for some ?
Post a Comment