I dont know how you felt today but when I heard the news I felt sick, even if I couldnt see the Chinese government backtracking out of sudden compassion.
It may be extreme but I dont ever want to go there, the mass dog and cat farming and killing being one thing, the organs removing on live prisoners being another. Sorry to add a nasty comment to the Current Affairs Forum but Im just stunned after hearing the news.
To me it seems straight forward.....
Their country
Their laws
Their culture
Who are we to go there and flout their laws..Mentally ill or not.
If we use our country as an example.....I don't think we would come out as a good one, Do you ?.
If you can't do the time. Don't do the crime. !!
To be honest I thought this too, if you are going to carry drugs (or whatever) if the laws of the country say this isnt acceptable and you know it, dont do it or be tempted to do it.
On the other hand was he taken advantage of? Was he vulnerable? Whoever took advantage and supplied the drugs should also be taken into consideration?
As usual, more questions.
Fudge
In a way I agree with their law's but he did have a mental illness and should of had some form of medical check over by a doctor who knew about his illness. Unfortunately I've had to deal with mental illness in my own family and the suffer does not always know right from wrong, it's not their fault and they shouldn't have to be put to death due to not understanding what they are doing.
Cis
It said he was 'believed' to have had a mental illness, but this wasnt confirmed.
to me it s seems he was manipulated into carrying the drugs, he was naive (look at the song he wrote and his ambition: to become a super pop star at 53) and as far as I know didnt even take drugs or was a drug dealer before.
Moreover I really dont see how one can, Chinese or Briton, agree with a death penalty for smugling drugs, this is completely mad! Drugs make you dependent and eventually kill you AND do not bring the money to the governement because not sold in shops, but alcohol and cigarettes are addicite and kill you in the end too, especially alcohol when overdosed.Therefore IMHO it's just a cultural, ie conditioning matter. A century ago it was ok to drink absinth (it was legal) in many european countries and even smoke opium, so should every person who was selling (legally) the stuff have been shot?
I do think it was very extreme and China has more exectution every year than every other country on the planet united. It's my opinion that there is a complete logic in "no compassion for animals" (in the extreme as the millionns of dogs and cats farmed, caged and killed for fur), "no compassion for humans". Sorry to draw an extreme view, but in he UK (as elsewhere in Europe) children's rights and protections ( = not ok to be beaten up; right to education, etc, even if not carrying the father's name) came in place right after women's rights were passed as law (wife beating; right to earn own salary and not to have to give it to husband as it used to be the case, right to a bank account, right to go to shcool = only one century ago!). Then animals right (much later) came to be acknowledged. I think compassion is for every living being and when I see how animals end up in some parts of the world I cannot pretend it's ok, it s their culture. One has principles or not.
OK Im not saying boooo China, the sole ugly country, because we are all guilty of horrors and absurdities in our respective countries. However I cannot turn a complacent and righteous face to this kind of horror because it would make me some intolerant person in the eyes of others; in the same way, I am outraged by "two women die every week from domestic violence in the UK" (same for France) and lots of other tragedies and as an example the fact that you get less time in prison for rape than for selling ash.
I know it sounds like Ive gone completely off the tracks of my first post, but to me it is not understanding to say "it's ok" regarding the Chinese Government behaviour, it just makes it easier for us emotionally and politically.
I dont know how you felt today but when I heard the news I felt sick, even if I couldnt see the Chinese government backtracking out of sudden compassion.
It may be extreme but I dont ever want to go there, the mass dog and cat farming and killing being one thing, the organs removing on live prisoners being another. Sorry to add a nasty comment to the Current Affairs Forum but Im just stunned after hearing the news.
The Chinese have always had a dodgy record for human and animal rights. Look at how they treat their own people. The Japanese are slaughtering 33,000 dolphins a year, and this horror is now recorded for posterity in the movie, The Cove...40 hours of which were edited to remove the full unshowable horror of what goes on.
I do agree that whilst in someone's country, you abide by their laws. I don't agree with the death penalty. It's not our place in life to take the life of another. But the Chinese are not arsed about that. They are a nation to be feared, in my opinion, and not labelled The Sleeping Dragon, for nothing. God help us if they decide to take over the world.
agree with that.
I agree with Fadette. I can understand why Shaikh's defence and British politicians have made a big thing of the mental illness line, but the point surely is that they shouldn't be executing people at all. Whether it's in China, the US, or wherever, it is morally wrong (in my opinion) to murder people judicially.
Some people may believe there is some logic to the concept of killing someone who has killed another, but that simply undermines the idea that killing people is a wrong thing to do. How can you condemn killing and then kill the perpetrators? Moral high ground? I don't think so.
China carries out, I believe, 72 per cent of all the executions on the planet. Obviously not much of a deterrent then, is it? The US executes more than its fair share, but if there is any evidence that it is putting off other killers, I have yet to see it.
In my view, a civilised country is a country that does not execute people.
I agree with Fadette. I can understand why Shaikh's defence and British politicians have made a big thing of the mental illness line, but the point surely is that they shouldn't be executing people at all. Whether it's in China, the US, or wherever, it is morally wrong (in my opinion) to murder people judicially.
Some people may believe there is some logic to the concept of killing someone who has killed another, but that simply undermines the idea that killing people is a wrong thing to do. How can you condemn killing and then kill the perpetrators? Moral high ground? I don't think so.
China carries out, I believe, 72 per cent of all the executions on the planet. Obviously not much of a deterrent then, is it? The US executes more than its fair share, but if there is any evidence that it is putting off other killers, I have yet to see it.
In my view, a civilised country is a country that does not execute people.
No one is saying that it is right to kill another human being but we all have the right to defend ourselves and in my understanding so do countries. They also have that right to administer their judicial rights. It just so happens that their laws include the death penalty for this particular crime.
Who am I to judge what is right or wrong in some other country ?.
If we are such a good example of a civilised country, why do so many other countries target us and question the way we act. Are we really a prime example of the perfect country.
I'm not saying the death penalty is right, but regarding the statements:
has more exectution every year than every other country on the planet united
and
China carries out, I believe, 72 per cent of all the executions on the planet
Is that based on a count of the number of people or on a percentage based on population? I'm guessing it's the former, but that doesn't take account of the size of China's population. Of course, with more people, whether it's executions or anything else, it will seem that China has more of it.
Like in the UK, some cities are quoted as having high crime rates because of the number of this type of crime or that type of crime etc., but it's based purely on the number of that type of crime taking place, not calculated based on the density of population as a ratio, so the figures being reported are distorted in that respect.
Let's keep some perspective on things. It could just as easily be that, ratio-wise, the US has a higher rate of executions than China. Without hard facts (which I don't have to hand myself) it's not possible to say one way or the other.
Regarding this particular story, the Chinese foreign office in the UK said (so it was reported in the news) that in respect of this man's mental illness, no record of such an illness was presented to China. You would have thought that someone suffering from Bi-polar to such an apparent extreme as reported, would have had some medical evidence to back it up that our Government or even his family could have provided to help his case? To be honest, I don't know the facts, that's just what I've read.
I don't personally think execution serves as a true deterrant for crimes. Criminals just don't care.
All Love and Reiki Hugs
Who am I to judge what is right or wrong in some other country ?
You may not care to, but I am happy to judge. Killing is wrong. I'm not a Christian but that is one thing the bible certainly got right - so presumably all the Christians out there, at least, will agree with me.
And getting into arguments about ratios and perspectives, Giles, is ultimately as much of a red herrring as the mental health argument. But here is some information from Amnesty International USA ( http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGACT500122007&lang=e ):
"As in previous years, the vast majority of executions worldwide were carried out in a small handful of countries. In 2006, 91 per cent of all known executions took place in six countries: China, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan and the USA. Kuwait had the highest number of executions per capita of population, followed by Iran.
"Based on public reports available, Amnesty International estimated that at least 1,010 people were executed in China during the year, although these figures are only the tip of the iceberg. Credible sources suggest that between 7,500 to 8,000 people were executed in 2006. The official statistics remain a state secret, making monitoring and analysis problematic.
"Iran executed 177 people, Pakistan 82 and Iraq and Sudan each at least 65. There were 53 executions in 12 states in the USA."
Good to see the Americans in such good company.
Incidentally, Shaikh not only claimed to have spoken to the angel Gabriel, but he also apparently sent out hundreds of emails in large print to all sorts of people including Paul McCartney and Top Gear. Sounds pretty disturbed to me.
Regarding this particular story, the Chinese foreign office in the UK said (so it was reported in the news) that in respect of this man's mental illness, no record of such an illness was presented to China. You would have thought that someone suffering from Bi-polar to such an apparent extreme as reported, would have had some medical evidence to back it up that our Government or even his family could have provided to help his case?
Just wanted to note that certainly not everyone who is suffering with a mental health problem will have an "official" diagnosis or have formal evidence of being mentally ill in their medical records. Many people suffer increasing mental distress for years before they first approach their GP or another professional.
There are many reasons for this, such as fear of stigma, lack of awareness, and with bi-polar disorder the additional issue is that when the sufferer is in the manic stage of the illness they actually feel good and energized and do not understand that they are unwell, they will often be delusional and not infrequently will put themselves into dangerous situations, which seems to have happened in this tragic case.
Masha
No one is saying that it is right to kill another human being but we all have the right to defend ourselves and in my understanding so do countries. They also have that right to administer their judicial rights. It just so happens that their laws include the death penalty for this particular crime.
Who am I to judge what is right or wrong in some other country ?.
But surely this question of 'countries' is irrelevant. Something is either morally right or morally wrong, no matter what the (man made) laws of any particular country may stipulate. IMHO it is not right to take someone's life, no matter what the law of a country may say.
But surely this question of 'countries' is irrelevant. Something is either morally right or morally wrong, no matter what the (man made) laws of any particular country may stipulate. IMHO it is not right to take someone's life, no matter what the law of a country may say.
I agree with Sunanda on this.
And even for those people who strongly support the death penalty for certain crimes, surely the commonly quoted argument of "fairness", "justice" etc doesn't stand - as there are and there will always be miscarriages of justice - if there is even a tiniest possibility of convicting an innocent person (and we know that it is by no means uncommon), with the death sentence being carried out there is obviously no chance to correct any mistakes. This alone makes the concept of death penalty illogical and senseless (apart from inhumane).
Masha