Iran uses young boy to execute serial killer

[Wallaby]

I think one problem, if I may be so bold, is that many posters see the world in a very restrictive prism. Whether is it Israel/Palestine, Muslims/the rest, sexpats/expats in Thailand, Thailand as a whole, bargirls, Issan, the best burgers, whatever; things seem to be very black and white, very 100% one way or the other. I just don't see the world that way.

While I don't know if I have bristled with moral indignation at things Western or US, I have expressed my concern or misgivings about certain things, most recently about the US' involvement in Libya. I disliked Bush and us getting into Iraq. I thought that Florida pastor who burned the Quran to be a danger. But while I can respect many things about Arabs and the Muslim world, for example, I have bristled with moral indignation about the radical, anti-western turn of certain factions within the broader religion. I have decried Shia actions in Iraq against homosexuals, women, and all others not Shia. I have expressed disgust at Sharia law in Pakastan and Afghanistan. I have ridiculed Indian actions against HIV NGO's. On Thailand, while I love the place, I have criticized many things from here. I have criticized misogyny wherever I see it.

My point is that you can have both positive and negative feelings about anything. Just because you criticize Israel does not mean you have to accept 9-year old Iranian wives. Just because you criticize Ghaddafi doesn't mean you have to accept that NATO should be involved as it is.

Anyway, those are my meager 2 cents' worth.

All perfectly reasoned and reasonable. I too was against involvement in Libya after doing a little investigating. I suppose my point is how readily some people are prepared to use one set of rules for one group and another set for another group all based on the axe they happen to be grinding. I do think that Western culture has loads to commend it and we should stop beating ourselves up about our imperfections and stop bending over backwards not to offend those who are offensive.

The universal declaration of human rights is in my view a good place to start and any dilution of it's principles should be resisted, as Iran and Egypt did when organizing the Cairo human rights convention to list human rights as compatable with Sharia.

In my view moral relativism is not acceptable - we had no problem intervening when the Pitcairn Islanders were found to be sexually abusing their children. In doing so we may have infringed on their sovereignty and even religion if they ruled such acts acceptable. We do seem to have a great reluctance to take a similar stance with other Countries. In Egypt female genital mutilation rates were 95% (2006 figs), which is shocking and disgraceful. What to do? Well make aid contingent on ending such practices would be a start.

I generally agree with your post though the 'set of rules' should only be for our particular countries, that is, if an immigrant comes to your country then they should abide by the laws and customes of your country. We should not be telling other countries that they have to abide by our laws and culture.

In relation to the Pitcairn Islanders, I'm not too sure any country infringed on their sovereignity. I was personally involved in the court case in NZ. My memory is bit vague regarding the legal arguments but basically the island was deemed to be a British colony and subject to their law, this was upheld in the NZ Supreme Court and the trials then where held in NZ. I think a few of the defendants were living in NZ at the time it just seemed a logical decision to hold it there as I think quite a few of the defendants were living in NZ at the time.

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed.

[Steely Dan]

I generally agree with your post though the 'set of rules' should only be for our particular countries, that is, if an immigrant comes to your country then they should abide by the laws and customes of your country. We should not be telling other countries that they have to abide by our laws and culture.

In relation to the Pitcairn Islanders, I'm not too sure any country infringed on their sovereignity. I was personally involved in the court case in NZ. My memory is bit vague regarding the legal arguments but basically the island was deemed to be a British colony and subject to their law, this was upheld in the NZ Supreme Court and the trials then where held in NZ. I think a few of the defendants were living in NZ at the time it just seemed a logical decision to hold it there as I think quite a few of the defendants were living in NZ at the time.

If I may veer a little further off topic in order to come back full circle to the OT.

I can think of one exception. I travelled in the Australian outback about 10 years ago and our tour guide told us that from the time the first Aboriginals arrived at the coast of Australia it took them an estimated 20,000 years to reach the centre at Alice Springs. In other words they had evolved to deal with the hostile landscape for this period of time without meeting any external human population. The Aboriginals had developed their own laws and culture and had no alcohol in their experience, which largely explains the trouble it has caused modern Aboriginals. When they encountered westerners it was as if they had encountered aliens from another planet. Cultural integration into our societies was tremendously difficult for them. In such extreme cases perhaps it is best to let them live by their own culture and norms. The Pitcairn population on the other hand was nowhere near so far removed from the norms we live by so I think it was fair for them to abide by them.

Coming back to Iran, the population is actually reasonably well educated and would have no trouble adapting to modern norms, except they are ruled by the mentally ill. The insanity of sanctioning marriage to a nine year old and allowing a child to be an executioner are in my view part of the same retrograde slide into archaic practices which are incompatable with universal human rights. They deserve no exemption unlike to aboriginals as they do know different but are choosing to stamp all over human rights for reasons of theocracy.

[Wallaby]

Yeah that could be another topic but I will say that if aborigines live in their own communities, apart from us whities, they mostly do live by their own laws and punishments. In the remote communites the only way we would know there was an issue is when they come to collect their social security payments. When they live within the white communities they must live within the 'white' laws etc.

The difference with Iran is that I don't think there is a seperate race wanting seperate laws or to be treated differently to the rest of the popluation. For better or worse.

In my view if/when Iran gets someone with a bit of sanity in power they may well become a shining beacon in the area.

[luckizuchinni]

Cultural norms and laws have been a big issue in Canada. A famous case was in 1958 when an Inuit woman named Kikkik was charged with murder and child neglect when due to the caribou not coming and her husband being murdered, she tried to trek out but lost strength and had to abandon two of her three kids in an igloo, one who later died. She was acquitted with the prime reason being she was acting as per Inuit custom to sacrifice two to save the one.

But in Iran, this is a different story. Iran has regressed from a more accepted modern outlook. This would be the same thing as Europe burning witches again or the US re-instituting slavery.

Once again, looking through the lens of a westerner, we believe that children cannot make rational, mature decisions. This is why we have statutory rape. Even if a 12-year-old begs for sex, he or she is not considered competent to make that kind of decision and an adult is obligated to turn that down and refrain. A child may agree to execute a person, but he or she does not really have the mental faculties to make a decision on that.

[geriatrickid]

I can not think of one child development expert or reputable psychologist that would approve of exposing a child to an execution, let alone participating in one.

It's interesting that some will say that Iran is capable of rational political negotiations on nuclear proliferation. However, a country that has children participate in public executions operates by a code far different than what those who promote "negotiations" understand.

[Orac]

Interesting report here:

ABSTRACT: A study was made of post-traumatic stress disorder in 200 children aged 7–11 years who had witnessed a public hanging next to their school in Isfahan, Islamic Republic of Iran. A standard checklist was completed through interviews with the children’s parents 3 months after the event. Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms were identified in 104 children (52%), with 88 suffering re-experiences, 24 avoidance and 62 hyperarousal. The mean stress severity according to the Child Post-Traumatic Stress Reaction Index was 39.1, indicating a moderate to severe severity of stress. The study highlights the serious emotional effects on children who witness traumatic events.

http://www.emro.who.int/publications/emhj/1201_2/article7.htm

[Pakboong]

What is a minor and what makes the difference?

I take your point, my bad of course a minor is below 9 years of age in Iran based on the Islamic textbook and it's literal adoption by the mad mullahs taking us back to 7th century norms. Most of the civilised world recognises the universal declaration of human rights, except for Iran, Egypt and most Islamic nations who don't think universal is a good idea - For instance the rights accorded to children.

Sanhedrin 55b

Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Pederasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that.24 (24) I.e., Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.

Congratulations on the attempt to divert attention away from a disgusting current event in by making an out of context reference to a passage in a text that has long ago been repudiated and countered. Your attempt would be laughable if the motivation for placing it here in the forum were not so suspect. Here's the reality; The ancient texts have been superseded by other rules and teachings. Jewish laws and cusoms, just like Christian, Buddhist and Hindu laws and customs has evolved and is still evolving. Long before the Sanhedrin opinions were written, the laws of Leviticus and the tale of Sodom & Gomorrah was written in Genesis. Those writings held precedence over the opinion of one Rabbi. Do you even know what the sanhedrin was? Every city in ancient Israel had a panel of 20-23 judges. It was the equivalent of of one local judge making an opinion. Just as one opinion can be modified over time in the west, so too was the case of the sanhedrin. I doubt you will find one reputable jewish religious leader or legal officer that would support the text you referenced.

This is not the appropriate place to have a discussion of ancient religious customs. We live in the year 2011 and the child killing the prisoner happened now, not 1000 years ago. The fact of the matter is that the practices of Judaism and more specifically the laws of the nations where jews live such as Israel, the USA, UK etc. forbid sexual contact between adults and minors. I do not know what the exact current position is from muslim adherhents or states where Islamic law prevails, so I won't comment. The other fact that you ignore is that it can hardly be considered a sound practice for a child to be encouraged to kill someone. Do you not think that such an act will seriously screw up the kid's head? This story isn't even about capital punishment. It's the revealing story of how Iran allegedly indoctrinates children into a cult of death. The event was wrong to those with any semblance of a moral compass.

The Talmud (Hebrew: תַּלְמוּד talmūd "instruction, learning", from a root lmd "teach, study") is a central text of mainstream Judaism, in the form of a record of rabbinic discussions pertaining to Jewish law, ethics, philosophy, customs and history.

You have referred to the British Mandate as ancient history. Of course this is wrong but there are many people in this world who consider the Talmud to be their Moral Compass and they take it quite literally. I am not one of those people and I now assume you are not either.

This was not an attempt to do anything. It is what it is. Can I assume you are not making the credible source argument?

Edited May 29, 2011 by Pakboong

[Wallaby]

Cultural norms and laws have been a big issue in Canada. A famous case was in 1958 when an Inuit woman named Kikkik was charged with murder and child neglect when due to the caribou not coming and her husband being murdered, she tried to trek out but lost strength and had to abandon two of her three kids in an igloo, one who later died. She was acquitted with the prime reason being she was acting as per Inuit custom to sacrifice two to save the one.

But in Iran, this is a different story. Iran has regressed from a more accepted modern outlook. This would be the same thing as Europe burning witches again or the US re-instituting slavery.

Once again, looking through the lens of a westerner, we believe that children cannot make rational, mature decisions. This is why we have statutory rape. Even if a 12-year-old begs for sex, he or she is not considered competent to make that kind of decision and an adult is obligated to turn that down and refrain. A child may agree to execute a person, but he or she does not really have the mental faculties to make a decision on that.

Yes but even we in the west have differing ages of consent so who are we to tell another country their 'age' is wrong when we can't even agree on an age ourselves.

[Wallaby]

I can not think of one child development expert or reputable psychologist that would approve of exposing a child to an execution, let alone participating in one.

It's interesting that some will say that Iran is capable of rational political negotiations on nuclear proliferation. However, a country that has children participate in public executions operates by a code far different than what those who promote "negotiations" understand.

I think you are clutching at straws to draw a correlation with a family allowing a child to be involved in an execution to the government's ability to negotiate.

Some countries in west consider capital punishment to be barbaric. Does that mean the US should not be involved in any negotiations because it allowes capital punishment in some states? I think it is totally irrelevent.

[Pakboong]

If we are talking about child abuse, and I assume from what is written so far that we are; How is the following less barbaric?

Under Military Order 132, six months is the maximum sentence for children aged 12 - 13; 12 months usually from 14 - 15 for offenses with a maximum penalty of less than five years; and unlimited for more serious offenses; under Military Order 378, 20 years for stone-throwing is permitted (the most common offense charged); and children 16 or older are considered adults and treated no differently.

[samurai]

I can not think of one child development expert or reputable psychologist that would approve of exposing a child to an execution, let alone participating in one.

It's interesting that some will say that Iran is capable of rational political negotiations on nuclear proliferation. However, a country that has children participate in public executions operates by a code far different than what those who promote "negotiations" understand.

I think you are clutching at straws to draw a correlation with a family allowing a child to be involved in an execution to the government's ability to negotiate.

Some countries in west consider capital punishment to be barbaric. Does that mean the US should not be involved in any negotiations because it allowes capital punishment in some states? I think it is totally irrelevent.

According to geriatrickid:

This story isn't even about capital punishment.

But I guess he is missing some basic points here.

[Ulysses G.]

But I guess he is missing some basic points here.

At least he is not making justifications and excuses for allowing a child to participate in an execution. It comes as no big surprise that the big promoters of this crime are the same folks who always seem to be defending terrorists that target women and children

[samurai]

But I guess he is missing some basic points here.

At least he is not making justifications and excuses for allowing a child to participate in an execution. It comes as no big surprise that the big promoters of this crime are the same folks who always seem to be defending terrorists that target women and children

It makes capital punishment not more or less acceptable.

It comes as no big surprise that the big hypocrites here are the same folks who always find excuses when women and children are killed in the war on terrorists.

[Ulysses G.]

If we are talking about child abuse, and I assume from what is written so far that we are; How is the following less barbaric?

Under Military Order 132, six months is the maximum sentence for children aged 12 - 13; 12 months usually from 14 - 15 for offenses with a maximum penalty of less than five years; and unlimited for more serious offenses; under Military Order 378, 20 years for stone-throwing is permitted (the most common offense charged); and children 16 or older are considered adults and treated no differently.

Throwing srones can seriously injure or kill someone. I'm not sure how prosecuting someone who does it with the intention of injuring another party is "barbaric".

Edited May 29, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Ulysses G.]

It comes as no big surprise that the big hypocrites here are the same folks who always find excuses when women and children are killed in the war on terrorists.

Agreed. There is absolutely NO excuse for Islamic terrorists using women and children as human sheilds.

[samurai]

It comes as no big surprise that the big hypocrites here are the same folks who always find excuses when women and children are killed in the war on terrorists.

Agreed. There is absolutely NO excuse for Islamic terrorists using women and children as human sheilds.

That makes the killing of woman and children not more or less acceptable.

[samurai]

What is a minor and what makes the difference?

I take your point, my bad of course a minor is below 9 years of age in Iran based on the Islamic textbook and it's literal adoption by the mad mullahs taking us back to 7th century norms. Most of the civilised world recognises the universal declaration of human rights, except for Iran, Egypt and most Islamic nations who don't think universal is a good idea - For instance the rights accorded to children.

read more about it here:

Iran hangs two child rapists in public

[luckizuchinni]

Cultural norms and laws have been a big issue in Canada. A famous case was in 1958 when an Inuit woman named Kikkik was charged with murder and child neglect when due to the caribou not coming and her husband being murdered, she tried to trek out but lost strength and had to abandon two of her three kids in an igloo, one who later died. She was acquitted with the prime reason being she was acting as per Inuit custom to sacrifice two to save the one.

But in Iran, this is a different story. Iran has regressed from a more accepted modern outlook. This would be the same thing as Europe burning witches again or the US re-instituting slavery.

Once again, looking through the lens of a westerner, we believe that children cannot make rational, mature decisions. This is why we have statutory rape. Even if a 12-year-old begs for sex, he or she is not considered competent to make that kind of decision and an adult is obligated to turn that down and refrain. A child may agree to execute a person, but he or she does not really have the mental faculties to make a decision on that.

Yes but even we in the west have differing ages of consent so who are we to tell another country their 'age' is wrong when we can't even agree on an age ourselves.

Sorry, but I have to believe that there are certain wrongs and rights as a member of the human race. And whether a "proper" age of consent is 20 or 18 or 16, well, I think the line is somewhat fuzzy. But at some point, it becomes obvious, to me, at least, that someone is too young for sex.

Do you believe that it is OK to have sex with two year olds? If so, then I have no argument that I can write here. If not, then it is just a matter of determining where that line is between 2 and say 18. But the line exists.

And before you accuse me of going too far, I am not. First, I am establishing that at some age, it is too young. Second, it is an accepted practice among many people of the RSA for HIV infected men to have sex with a "virgin" infant or toddler as a means to cure their infections. Men have been prosecuted for this as the government does not condone it, but among much of the population, such an act is acceptable.

And other things which are acceptable among other cultures are just wrong, once again in my opinion, at least. I saw an interview with a man who shot and killed his 16 year old daughter because he thought she shamed the family by talking to a boy. This was openly done, and he was not arrested as his actions were accepted by his society. And in Pakistan, a Sharia court sat over a trial of the family of a 12 year old boy who was seen walking with a 13 year old girl of another family. Their punishment? Four men from the family of the girl took the boy's 18 year old sister out and gang raped her.

I can go on an on in this vein, but the fact is that yes, I can categorically accuse some practices as being patently wrong, and I will make it my "right" to tell others that their cultures are wrong when they espouse such practices.

[Huey]

Funny how many of my fellow Americans, and folks like Geriatrickid, are bashing Iran for giving this kid the opportunity to avenge his lost loved one, when the USA has more children in jail for life than any other country in the world. According to The UN and Human Rights watch, America has more than 2000 children in jail for life while the rest of the world has just 12.

And we wanna talk about child abuse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q732d0aO4yg

Witnessing a execution is one thing, someone taking away your loved one and leaving you feeling powerless and vulnerable is another. At least this kid got the chance to have some closure, by avenging their death. It won't bring her back, nothing will, but it will give the living closure and remove any shadow of misplaced guilt.

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

[Steely Dan]

Funny how many of my fellow Americans, and folks like Geriatrickid, are bashing Iran for giving this kid the opportunity to avenge his lost loved one, when the USA has more children in jail for life than any other country in the world. According to The UN and Human Rights watch, America has more than 2000 children in jail for life while the rest of the world has just 12.

And we wanna talk about child abuse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q732d0aO4yg

Witnessing a execution is one thing, someone taking away your loved one and leaving you feeling powerless and vulnerable is another. At least this kid got the chance to have some closure, by avenging their death. It won't bring her back, nothing will, but it will give the living closure and remove any shadow of misplaced guilt.

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

I'm sure with your posting history here Armedinajad would welcome you with open arms - don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.

[KarenBravo]

Funny how many of my fellow Americans, and folks like Geriatrickid, are bashing Iran for giving this kid the opportunity to avenge his lost loved one, when the USA has more children in jail for life than any other country in the world. According to The UN and Human Rights watch, America has more than 2000 children in jail for life while the rest of the world has just 12.

And we wanna talk about child abuse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q732d0aO4yg

Witnessing a execution is one thing, someone taking away your loved one and leaving you feeling powerless and vulnerable is another. At least this kid got the chance to have some closure, by avenging their death. It won't bring her back, nothing will, but it will give the living closure and remove any shadow of misplaced guilt.

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

I'm sure with your posting history here Armedinajad would welcome you with open arms - don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.

Wassup? Can't refute his point, so you have to resort to insults?

i think you just lost your argument.

[samurai]

Certainly a son (or other relative like the younger brother) of one of the women the serial killer had murdered.

I wonder how many cheered up and celebrate that justice was served with killing the murderer.

Do you have any links to support your supposition about the young boy being a relative of a victim?

Would it make a difference for you?

[Ulysses G.]

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

Most of the "children" that you are talking about are over 16 and have participated in horrific murders or rapes and left behind broken familes and were sentenced for their crimes.

As far as I can find out from searching, the young boy that hung the criminal in Iran had nothing to do the crime or criminal. It seems that Iran's usual supporters have just made this up. What a surprise.

Edited May 30, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Huey]

Funny how many of my fellow Americans, and folks like Geriatrickid, are bashing Iran for giving this kid the opportunity to avenge his lost loved one, when the USA has more children in jail for life than any other country in the world. According to The UN and Human Rights watch, America has more than 2000 children in jail for life while the rest of the world has just 12.

And we wanna talk about child abuse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q732d0aO4yg

Witnessing a execution is one thing, someone taking away your loved one and leaving you feeling powerless and vulnerable is another. At least this kid got the chance to have some closure, by avenging their death. It won't bring her back, nothing will, but it will give the living closure and remove any shadow of misplaced guilt.

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

I'm sure with your posting history here Armedinajad would welcome you with open arms - don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.

Wassup? Can't refute his point, so you have to resort to insults?

i think you just lost your argument.

Thank you Karen.

Of course he can't.

It's not the first time people like him wished I would bash America or want to give up my nationality. Fact is, I'm very proud to be American and quite patriotic. That doesn't mean I'm blind to her faults, or that I mindlessly follow the govt's line on all foreign & domestic policy. Thats what being a patriot in the US is all about, question authority and speak out against it when you believe it's wrong.

[Huey]

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

Most of the "children" that you are talking about are over 16 and have participated in horrific murders or rapes and left behind broken familes and were sentenced for their crimes.

As far as I can find out from searching, the young boy that hung the criminal in Iran had nothing to do the crime or criminal. It seems that Iran's usual supporters have just made this up. What a surprise.

Did you search in Farsi?

No...., What a surprise

[Ulysses G.]

I'm very proud to be American and quite patriotic.

You do know that other members can go back and search your old posts quite easily?

[Huey]

I'm very proud to be American and quite patriotic.

You do know that other members can go back and search your old posts quite easily?

Go for it.

Or we can always talk about it over that beer I owe you

[Steely Dan]

Witnessing a execution is one thing, someone taking away your loved one and leaving you feeling powerless and vulnerable is another. At least this kid got the chance to have some closure, by avenging their death. It won't bring her back, nothing will, but it will give the living closure and remove any shadow of misplaced guilt.

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

Has it ever occured to you that one anyone has killed it becomes easier to do it a second time and they may follow a similar line of vengence later in life especially considering a child's mind may not be sufficiently developed to process such an action, and that's presupposing the kid was avenging a relative.

It's amazing how some liberals are as lambs with thier own home Countries but like wolves with others, especially those who sponsor terrorism and have appaling human rights records.

[samurai]

I respect Iran for this decision I only wish they did that in the US.

Most of the "children" that you are talking about are over 16 and have participated in horrific murders or rapes and left behind broken familes and were sentenced for their crimes.

As far as I can find out from searching, the young boy that hung the criminal in Iran had nothing to do the crime or criminal. It seems that Iran's usual supporters have just made this up. What a surprise.

As far as I could find out from searching , it is indeed part of the law in Iran that relatives of the victim can carry out or help with the execution or other forms of punishment as it it is the case with the victim of that acid attack who wants to blind her attacker with acid.

(That search took me 2 min with google. What a surprise. )

Under Iran's Islamic law, Shari'a, the family of a murder victim can pardon the convicted killer in exchange for financial compensation, so-called blood money, although they can also refuse it and demand the death penalty.

...

Iran earlier this month hanged one of Mostafai's clients, a man who was under 18 when he stabbed a boy to death. One Iranian news agency said the victim's parents helped to carry out the execution of their son's convicted killer.

Behnud Shojaie was put to death in a Tehran jail a month after the European Union urged Iran to halt his execution, which had been postponed several times. Iranian officials said they had tried in vain to convince the victims' parents to spare him.

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/topic,4565c225e,471f53b02,4ae56b9923,0.html

In reaction to IHR’s report, a site close to the Iranian authorities known as Ebrat News revealed more details about the execution in Qazvin. According to the site, the young man who carried out the execution was identified as Ali, 23, the son of Kimia, one of the women allegedly murdered by Mehdi. Ebrat News wrote: "The man was not a minor as claimed by some sites...so-called human rights defenders have forgotten that, according to the qesas (retribution/eye-for-an-eye) law in a murder case [in Iran], the execution must be carried out by the family or the oldest child of the offended.

...

Commenting the retribution law (an eye for an eye), Amiry-Moghaddam, said: ""Amiry-Moghaddam said about the retribution ’eye-for-an-eye’ law, "Retribution is one of the few ’rights’ given by Iranian authorities to its citizens. The Iranian government deprives its citizens of basic human rights like, freedom of speech, thought, and choice, and even personal rights like how to dress, but the ’rights’ of citizens to carry out executions or blind with acid are insisted on and encouraged."

http://www.iranpressnews.com/english/source/099435.html

I didn't make that up to support the Iran. It is, like it is. (Waiting for your apology)

The question is if that would make a difference.

Makes it a difference for you? (Seems so, because you assumed, I had made it up to defend Iran)

As I said it before: It makes the death penalty as a form of punishment not more or less acceptable.

Edited May 30, 2011 by samurai