Pakdasht justice? - Page 8

garinda · 24-03-2005, 02:16

Oh dearie me!
l seem to be in a terrible fix. People keeping anonymously taking my karma, fair enough thats what it's there for.
The only trouble is the comments that are made are more interesting than the removal of the karma and the dislike of my posts. The last one accused me of 'arrogance'. l've never been afraid to speak out for what l believe, it's how l was brought up, along with listening to other peoples points of veiw. l do not think of my self as superior to anyone, quite the opposite in many cases, therefore according to the dictionary l 'aint arrogant, [ lots of other things l can assure you.]
For the two anonymous comments l received via the karma, l've recieved 7 private messages saying they basically agree with what l'm saying, that a verdict needs to be reached before 'justice' is administered.

Garinda voice of the mice.

WillowTheWhisp · 24-03-2005, 09:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

and in answer to

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Willow's statement that aren't some people guilty before a fair trial, the answer is in the eyes of the law -no.

Would you mind telling me exactly where and when I EVER said that ANYONE is guilty BEFORE a fair trial?

I don't mind the fact that you disagree with me garinda but don't use underhand tactics of misquoting me in order to score points. I've noticed you doing the same kind of thing with another member of the board too.

Were you perhaps referring to this statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

At one time I was very much against the death penalty with the argument that you can't bring back a life if it's proved that there has been a miscarriage of justice but maybe in some cases where there can be no doubt of a person's guilt?

In which case I shall clarify in simpler terms in the hope that you can understand me. I said that there was a time when I was very much against the death penalty TOTALLY utterly and completely, across the board, no way, no how, not never, ever at all. In my belief it was WRONG unacceptable and should never, ever, ever be carried out. My main reason for feeling that way was not in support of Ghandi's statement that an eye for an eye would lead to the whole world being blind (I think this applies more to vigilante revenge killings and reprisals rather than the criminal justice system) My reason was that on rare occasions there have been miscarriages of justice and innocent people have been executed.

That hasn't happened often but the fact that it has happened at all was enough to make me support the abolition of hanging.

However, I went on to say: " maybe in some cases where there can be no doubt of a person's guilt" by which I meant that my view has now changed to thinking more in terms of supporting the death penalty in cases where there is no doubt of the person's guilt, where there are numerous eye witnesses or the person has been caught red-handed. I am leaning towards the belief now that execution of such a person is preferable - more especially when you hear of cases where someone has been released and gone on to kill again. I don't think the families of the later victims would feel that the death penalty would have been inappropriate.

Pakdasht justice?23-03-2005 19:41The deth penalty tells everyone that killing is acceptable if you have a good reason. ie as punishment. Sorry but taking a life is wrong. No excuses!

I seem to have been deducted karma points now for something which I haven't actually said but simply said "maybe". Ooh look and it was done by somebody who can't spell properly too!

garinda · 24-03-2005, 09:52

At one time I was very much against the death penalty with the argument that you can't bring back a life if it's proved that there has been a miscarriage of justice but maybe in some cases where there can be no doubt of a person's guilt?[/QUOTE

Willow l'm sorry l think l misunderstood what you meant with the last bit of this post- about 'no doubt of a person's guilt.'

I didn't mean to miss quote what you had posted. l don't think we will ever agree on this issue but l certainlry respect your point of view.

Margaret Pilkington · 24-03-2005, 17:39

This post has generated a lot of passion.......I have considered very carefully before contributing.

I think that in SOME cases capital punishment is justified.

The evidence needs to be absolutely cast iron.....and with the recent advances in Forensic science I think that there should be little chance of the mistakes that occaisionally happened in the past.

I think that only the ghoulish would want to see capital punishment carried out.

If the death sentence were to be reinstated (which, out of interest, I don't think it ever will) then the method that it is carried out should be as humane as possible.

park381 · 24-03-2005, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

This post has generated a lot of passion.......I have considered very carefully before contributing.

I think that in SOME cases capital punishment is justified.

The evidence needs to be absolutely cast iron.....and with the recent advances in Forensic science I think that there should be little chance of the mistakes that occaisionally happened in the past.

I think that only the ghoulish would want to see capital punishment carried out.

If the death sentence were to be reinstated (which, out of interest, I don't think it ever will) then the method that it is carried out should be as humane as possible.

Margaret, I think that is the most level headed post on this topic, have read most of the posts, but thought it better not to express my views, chance they be taken the wrong way, but I think you have summed it up with thought and care.
p.s. worthy of + Karma, but the system won't let me at this point in time

Margaret Pilkington · 24-03-2005, 18:17

Like you, I thought long and hard about my posting.
The subject is Always going to generate a lot of 'heat'.......and it would be so easy to see things as all black or all white, but IMHO there are many grey areas.

I do think that criminals have an easy life...OK they may have been removed from their families and have their freedom curtailed, but they do not have to worry about how they are going to pay their council tax.....or their electricity bill.....or where their next meal is coming from. They usually have excellent facilities for leisure and learning.
Wouldn't some of our pensioners envy their position in life????? And is that wrong????

park381 · 24-03-2005, 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Like you, I thought long and hard about my posting.
The subject is Always going to generate a lot of 'heat'.......and it would be so easy to see things as all black or all white, but IMHO there are many grey areas.

I do think that criminals have an easy life...OK they may have been removed from their families and have their freedom curtailed, but they do not have to worry about how they are going to pay their council tax.....or their electricity bill.....or where their next meal is coming from. They usually have excellent facilities for leisure and learning.
Wouldn't some of our pensioners envy their position in life????? And is that wrong????

That is so true, having a daughter that trained at Magul, left and went back there as a "ward" manager in later years, the thoughts of how they (the punters) are treated, yes I think you have got that one just about right.

WillowTheWhisp · 24-03-2005, 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I do think that criminals have an easy life...OK they may have been removed from their families and have their freedom curtailed, but they do not have to worry about how they are going to pay their council tax.....or their electricity bill.....or where their next meal is coming from. They usually have excellent facilities for leisure and learning.
Wouldn't some of our pensioners envy their position in life????? And is that wrong????

Very wrong in my opinion. I've even heard a habitual criminal wanting to be arrested and imprisoned because life is easier on the inside!

Gobsmacked · 28-03-2005, 01:01

Pakdasht justice?24-03-2005 01:12your arrogance has become very irritating- garinda

Your post actually struck me as being arrogant in the way you pointed out that you had read the link. It seemed to imply that you assumed no-one else had.

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

l think anybody who hadn't read the original link you posted and commented without reading it would most unwise. l did.

And for merely asking why you assumed that you were the only one to have read the link you feel justified in deducting karma points from me?

garinda · 28-03-2005, 01:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gobsmacked

Pakdasht justice?24-03-2005 01:12your arrogance has become very irritating- garinda

Your post actually struck me as being arrogant in the way you pointed out that you had read the link. It seemed to imply that you assumed no-one else had.

And for merely asking why you assumed that you were the only one to have read the link you feel justified in deducting karma points from me?

Lol, hello! Because there was only us two on line at the time, at least l had the balls to sign mine, and only gave it because your comment was so pithy.

The Scouse mouse squeeks again, isn't there a slightly North of Lancaster site you can be rude to people you find challeging?
Only joking, you're very welcome, and l welcome constructive critisism.

Gobsmacked · 28-03-2005, 01:20

But why assume that others had not read the link? If you read it then surely others are equally capable of having done so. Why would anyone comment on something they hadn't read? I don't.

garinda · 28-03-2005, 01:28

My reason was, the link was already part of the thread for people to read, it seemed by posting it again later was just trying to underline the horror of the crime, when anybody taking an interest in the thread would have already read it.
The same day l upset Willow by misquoting her, she pointed this out to me, l was wrong and appologised, this was much more civilised than just deducting karma so you could say l was irritating you.
I only want to be Queen of Peoples Hearts