Comments on: The death penalty: Masorti has its say

By: Liat Nagar

Liat Nagar — Sat, 09 May 2015 10:24:58 +0000

All sorts of facts have been left out of this discussion, including those mentioned by Lynne Newington. There are degrees of culpability to be considered in relation to murder, and it becomes amorphous when considering the possible deaths relating to many who use the drugs sold to them.

That the AFP could have arrested Chan and Sukumaran in Australia and brought them to justice here is an important factor to consider – they were only 21 and 24 at the time (obviously stupid, reckless and only capable of thinking of themselves, but that’s another story), which in this particular case does require consideration. That we in Australia have a terrible and ineffective system for dealing with drug addiction and all its dreadful accoutrements, is another. We fill our gaols with addicts, criminalise sickness, while the really evil perpetrators are untouched. Our politicians are too weak to take different action through new legislation, afraid of community backlash (and the community in general are judgemental and baying for revenge), and ignoring recommendations of special commissions convened to sit, assess, reflect and advise on the matter. Switzerland and Portugal are two countries who deal differently with the situation, having legalised heroin use, for example; it’s regulated, monitored, and has resulted in destroying much of the black market, reducing crime, and even reducing heroin use as well as death by drug use. Perhaps we should be concentrating on that instead of getting the big guns out for people who make hideous mistakes when young.

When so easily speaking of the death penalty for murder, as Raymond does, let’s remember that some court decisions as to ‘guilty’ have been incorrect. One case that springs to mind is that of baby Azaria Chamberlain, where the mother, Lindy, spent three years in gaol after being convicted of killing her. Turns out she didn’t do it. Too bad if the death penalty had applied there.

By: Eleonora Mostert

Eleonora Mostert — Sat, 09 May 2015 01:50:17 +0000

OK learned Rabbi’s. On leaving the country there is a warning posted,and on entering the country they were warned so your requirement of the person who wishes to commit a crime has been covered. They were warned with the very public story of Schappelle Corby and her famous surfboard. The list goes on. The question should be “If this country finds it fit to execute drug smugglers, why haven’t they executed those who bombed the night WHERE hundreds were murdered. Why was there no mention of this when the Lawyers and our Government petitioned for these people?

By: Lynne Newington

Lynne Newington — Fri, 08 May 2015 08:23:20 +0000

No mention here of the fact the Australians executed recently were handed over on a silver platter to a country where the death penalty is mandatory.
There’s enough on record and recently rehashed on this particular subject.
A father was betrayed ten years ago end of story.

By: Raymond

Raymond — Fri, 08 May 2015 06:25:26 +0000

It is difficult to fathom why mercy should be gifted to those who denied it to their victims. That said by Geoff Bloch says it all.
And I for one am for the death penalty for those who commit terrorist attacks, Rape, Murder, and last but not least Pedophilia. The last in the list for the reason they have taken the innocence of a child or children.

By: Geoff Bloch

Geoff Bloch — Fri, 08 May 2015 05:11:03 +0000

According to the learned Rabbis, Israel ought not to have executed Adolph Eichmann yemach shmo, because he was not given the warnings that the halacha strictly requires. This is the logical but morally bankrupt conclusion to draw from their arguments.

The Sanhedrin was dealing with individual crimes of passion, not with modern terrorist mass murder we are witnessing.

Their closing statement that “Jews who were victims ….. between 1942 and 1945 following the Wansee Conference should be the first to reject any government’s justification of taking life” unfortunately demonstrates a complete lack of moral clarity.

It is difficult to fathom why mercy should be gifted to those who denied it to their victims.

I couldn’t agree more with Rabbi Woolstone.

By: Rabbi Pinchos Woolstone

Rabbi Pinchos Woolstone — Fri, 08 May 2015 04:18:50 +0000

I believe that there are major Poskim who would sanction the death penalty today for heinous crimes against humanity such as genocide.
There would be dissenting voices from equally esteemed Posekim.
There are ample Biblical, Talmudic and Halachic sources to give both positions validity.

By: Avigael

Avigael — Fri, 08 May 2015 04:06:09 +0000

It also needs to be recognised that life in the womb also needs to be protected. You cant scream ‘no death penalty’ and then support abortion also.

In all legal issues, halachic or civil, there are always exceptions to the rule for good reason. Seriel murderers come to mind where it is known the person is insane and will not rehabilitate. To remove this is foolish.