source

Human rights activists are working against the death penalty. How do you feel about this? The matter makes me think a lot and seem inconsistent. So I shared some things with you in this regard.

The first thing that comes to mind is humanity. What is the way to keep humanity alive? The simple answer is to stop doing things that violate humanity.

Violations of humanity are committed in various ways such as rape, murder, robbery, theft, kidnapping, assault, illicit sex, cheating and thousands of other crimes. To stop these acts, criminals or violators of humanity must be punished.

What is justice? How is justice? Judgment is to ensure appropriate punishment for a crime and to make a decision so that the number of these crimes does not increase in the society. The job of the judiciary is to reduce crime and to discourage criminals from committing crimes with appropriate punishment. In fact it is very difficult to imagine what the punishment for the crime will be like.

What will be the punishment for rape? Do we know that or can we punish rape? Deciding on this is a complex matter. It is difficult to reach a proper solution in this regard.

My question to you is "If someone rapes your sister or mother, what punishment would you like to give to the rapist?"

I know that you will all demand severe and severe punishment. The punishment that you will demand from your side will not be as severe as that of the criminal. Because the victims here are you and your family. They can't guess your pain.

What will be the punishment for murder? We will discuss this matter. The job of the judge is to ensure equal punishment for the crime. So the calculation that stands out is death in exchange for death. This means that if someone kills an innocent person, the court will sentence him to death.

source

Apart from this, you cannot in any way punish the offender equally.
How many dollars would a life cost you if you wanted to be punished with a fine? Suppose a life is worth 1 million dollars, although the value of life cannot be measured in money. Anyone who has billions of dollars can kill a lot. That means he has the right to kill. You are taking money from the killer and creating the right to kill the killer more. On the other hand, the murderer who does not have money, where will he give the money from. It is not possible to punish him in this case due to lack of money. That means it is not possible to punish with money.

In the same way, if you give a murderer 30 years or 300 years in prison, there will be no appropriate punishment for this crime. In this either his punishment will be more or his punishment will be less. We do not understand in any way this measure of punishment. The death penalty must be carried out with the death penalty. Then the judgment will be correct.

It does not occur to me why human rights activists call the death penalty a violation of human rights. Violations of humanity will only happen when the perpetrator gets more punishment than his crime. But if we do the calculations, then executing the death penalty is not a violation of humanity. 1 for 1. It's easy.

Rather, if a person wants to save the offender from appropriate punishment, it is a violation of humanity. And this is what human rights activists or human rights organizations are doing. I am not saying that they are doing injustice in all areas. If you are a victim of a crime one day, human rights activists will cause problems in the criminal justice process. Then you will understand whether human rights activists are actually criminals or not.

There are some intellectuals behind human rights activists. Those who are good at showing compassion to people and helping the criminals themselves in their work. They also do not understand that the intellect of these intellectuals goes astray.

Where all the people of the country collectively seek the punishment of the perpetrators, these human rights activists help the perpetrators and violate humanity.

There are different types of these intellectuals whose views are completely different. Those who cannot agree on their own can do any good to the nation?

Now let us discuss how crime is reduced if proper punishment for crime is ensured. Suppose a person commits a crime. The man was not properly punished for that crime. He would be encouraged to commit another crime. This is the normal rule. Who encouraged the perpetrator to commit a crime? Human rights activists or organizations. In this case, I think they should be punished.

It is possible to reduce crime if we can ensure appropriate punishment for crime. If a person sees that the offender is getting proper punishment, then that person will not dare to commit any similar crime. This will reduce the level of crime.

There are currently many human rights organizations that provide appropriate punishment for crime. Behind all these organizations is politics and some selfish people. I personally hate those who indulge in crime.

In every society there are some intellectuals whose intellect works for the help of bad people who should be beaten out of the society.

All of you stay safe. Love science. Calculate yourself. Review every event of life with science. Science has to be used not only in different machines but also in human behavior.
I love philosophy when it speaks right and hate philosophy when it speaks wrong.

It is not the job of the law to save the offender, the job of the law is to punish the offender appropriately

Thanks you very much