Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen
And we are talking about an exceptional case. In terms of petty theft or dress code violations the argument can be easily be made that disciplinary procedures can be pursued internally. For the murder of sixteen people it becomes a difficult argument to make, regardless of the legal system.
|
My "not dressed properly"-example wanted to point that over there women were killed for violating the Taliban's dress code. If you would give in to a demand for one crime, you would have double standards if you don't do it for other crimes.
So where do you draw the line? What abouit krashkart's example, someone offing 16 people in a mall in the US? Because of the severeness of the crime, we can skip procedure and hand his butt over to the families of the victims?
If Anders Breivik would have been an Afghan citizen, the state of Norway would not have handed him over to the authorities in Afghanistan, because of the very same principles I stated before.
On a side note, because it hasn't been mentioned yet: I am wondering if there are already talks about a compensation for the families.
When Germany blew up a fuel truck, which had been captured by the Taliban, there were also some civilian victims. The compensation to these families might indeed have prevented some bigger riots. It may look weird, as nothing can take the pain away about a death of a relative, but it is also a cultural thing and realpolitik.