Saudi man reportedly faces paralysis in eye-for-an-eye sentence

A Saudi man who stabbed his best friend, causing his paralysis 10 years ago has reportedly been sentenced to being fully paralyzed himself if he can’t come up with roughly $266,000 to pay the victim.

Ali Al-Khawahir was 14 years old when he stabbed his friend in the backbone, causing permanent paralyzation, according to a report in the Saudi Gazette. Originally the victim requested 2 million Saudi Riyal — more than half a million U.S. dollars — but later reduced the amount to 1 million.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04...#ixzz2PF5pjf6C

Justice or torture.

Seems awfully harsh especially considering the kid was 14 at the time of the crime.

Originally Posted by FIA

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04...#ixzz2PF5pjf6C

Justice or torture.

Seems awfully harsh especially considering the kid was 14 at the time of the crime.

This is going to get moved...

In relation to the sentence, I guess it follows the same logic as the death penalty.

1. Deterrent value
2. "Justice" requires that you paralyse someone who paralysed their victim
3. It protects the public

Of course, I do not think many of us will consider this "just", more barbaric. In the same way I do not consider that putting criminals to death should be an acceptable punishment.

What do you expect from a country that will kill you for being gay?

Wow. I wonder if they'll force a doctor to perform whatever surgery is chosen for the paralyzing? Maybe they'll get some thugs to stab him. If he was able to work they could at least get installments out of him perhaps.

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Wow. I wonder if they'll force a doctor to perform whatever surgery is chosen for the paralyzing? Maybe they'll get some thugs to stab him. If he was able to work they could at least get installments out of him perhaps.

I wonder what they do to rapists.

Do they get someone to rape them back?

Originally Posted by paulg

I wonder what they do to rapists.

Do they get someone to rape them back?

One thing that is for sure is that you do not want to commit a crime in Saudi Arabia. I have been there once before. Not a place I would like to live in but is definitely a place one would feel safe in because you know that if someone were to commit any sort of murder like crime they would be beheaded in public (executed). Good for the safety of many out there but I can not say that I like the methods that they use to deter crime.

In countries where religious extremists exist the government must be tough with their actions on crime or else we would see what we are now seeing in Libya,Iraq,Afghanistan and Syria.

This case though is about a 14 year old and the fact is many 14 year old kids do not always know right from wrong and many at that age do many wrong things. I know myself back then that I did a few things I would not do now. As most of us grow older we learn from our mistakes and the majority of us would not do anything now that we may have done when we were younger kids. I reckon that someone in Saudi Arabia will pay the amount on behalf of this person and he will not be paralyzed. Plenty of people with money in Saudi Arabia so I reckon someone will pay up on his behalf.

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

One thing that is for sure is that you do not want to commit a crime in Saudi Arabia. I have been there once before. Not a place I would like to live in but is definitely a place one would feel safe in because you know that if someone were to commit any sort of murder like crime they would be beheaded in public (executed). Good for the safety of many out there but I can not say that I like the methods that they use to deter crime.

In countries where religious extremists exist the government must be tough with their actions on crime or else we would see what we are now seeing in Libya,Iraq,Afghanistan and Syria.

This case though is about a 14 year old and the fact is many 14 year old kids do not always know right from wrong and many at that age do many wrong things. I know myself back then that I did a few things I would not do now. As most of us grow older we learn from our mistakes and the majority of us would not do anything now that we may have done when we were younger kids. I reckon that someone in Saudi Arabia will pay the amount on behalf of this person and he will not be paralyzed. Plenty of people with money in Saudi Arabia so I reckon someone will pay up on his behalf.

Geee, I've been told by others here that the death penalty isn't a deterrent.

well the number of foreign nationals on death row in Saudi is pretty high...

Saudi Arabia is the only country to have public executions by beheading, although other countries have public executions... stoning, hanging and firing squad mainly. North Korea executed one of their own vice-minister of the NK Army by mortar...

http://www.catholic.org/internationa...y.php?id=48269

reportedly, Kim Jong Un himself issued the method of execution itself as to "be completely obliterated, without any trace remaining, not even hair" - the minister was stood on the exact spot that the mortar team had zeroed in their mortar - and a large shell was fired at the spot... at least the death should have been instantaneous.

I'm sure that beheading is pretty instant... hanging and stoning don't seem all that instant - although apparently a hanging (when done correctly) is instant... you never know with all that twitching and such...

If death is the sentence, it should be done in a manner that is immediate without suffering imo.

Originally Posted by paulg

I wonder what they do to rapists.

Do they get someone to rape them back?

I saw graffiti once in Seattle: "Disarm rapists."

Originally Posted by wyb

well the number of foreign nationals on death row in Saudi is pretty high...

Saudi Arabia is the only country to have public executions by beheading, although other countries have public executions... stoning, hanging and firing squad mainly. North Korea executed one of their own vice-minister of the NK Army by mortar...

http://www.catholic.org/internationa...y.php?id=48269

reportedly, Kim Jong Un himself issued the method of execution itself as to "be completely obliterated, without any trace remaining, not even hair" - the minister was stood on the exact spot that the mortar team had zeroed in their mortar - and a large shell was fired at the spot... at least the death should have been instantaneous.

I'm sure that beheading is pretty instant... hanging and stoning don't seem all that instant - although apparently a hanging (when done correctly) is instant... you never know with all that twitching and such...

If death is the sentence, it should be done in a manner that is immediate without suffering imo.

Awful as it is, the guillotine strikes me as one of the quickest and surest means of execution, and with a minimum of pain (I think). I gather that one main reason it was invented was errant strikes with the ax in the older style be-headings created unsavory drama and howling by the victim. One notable executee was supposedly struck wrongly twice and had his sentence commuted!

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I saw graffiti once in Seattle: "Disarm rapists."

A rapist most likely likes sex and being disarmed is most likely going to be a big deterrent to him or any future rapist. That is my guess and I could be wrong. Having their private part beheaded like they do in public in Saudi Arabia would probably deter many future rapists out there would be my guess.

Here's the better question, who has their crime rate significantly higher? Saudi or USA? LOL

The ONLY issue I have with this is that he was only 14 yrs old. Otherwise I'd give the green light.

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I saw graffiti once in Seattle: "Disarm rapists."

what if he were an exhibitionist?

would he have to have people expose themselves to him?

Originally Posted by FIA

Geee, I've been told by others here that the death penalty isn't a deterrent.

FIA - the death penalty is a deterrent for many crimes. Many people are discouraged from importing drugs into the middle east and Asia due to the strict enforcement of the anti drug laws. It is unerving when you arrive at an airport and see hangman noose warnings everywhere. They also usually provide "amnesty" trash cans with warnings that passing that point with drugs will forfeit your life. Whilst drugs are still imported it certainly is not as common a trade as it is in the West.

I'd also suggest that making speeding or drunk driving a capital offence will dramatically reduce road deaths. Considering the tens of thousands of people who die on the roads in the US each year this draconian measure would lead to many lives being saved as few people will risk a lethal injection for the sake of a few drinks when they are driving. However, I do not think as a society we would want to impose such excessive punishments for those offences.

However, due to the nature of murder, it is often committed as either (i) a crime of passion; (ii) due to mental disturbance / heavy drug or alcohol influence or alternatively (iii) as part of an act of "combat" (as many drug gangs consider rival groups their enemies and the streets their battleground). Under those circumstances the threat of one day being executed is not a major consideration at the time the offence is being committed. The murder rate in states where murder is still a capital crime is indicative of this.

In summary, the death penalty is generally a deterrent for many crimes but not really for murder.

Originally Posted by London Talking

FIA - the death penalty is a deterrent for many crimes. Many people are discouraged from importing drugs into the middle east and Asia due to the strict enforcement of the anti drug laws. It is unerving when you arrive at an airport and see hangman noose warnings everywhere. They also usually provide "amnesty" trash cans with warnings that passing that point with drugs will forfeit your life. Whilst drugs are still imported it certainly is not as common a trade as it is in the West.

I'd also suggest that making speeding or drunk driving a capital offence will dramatically reduce road deaths. Considering the tens of thousands of people who die on the roads in the US each year this draconian measure would lead to many lives being saved as few people will risk a lethal injection for the sake of a few drinks when they are driving. However, I do not think as a society we would want to impose such excessive punishments for those offences.

However, due to the nature of murder, it is often committed as either (i) a crime of passion; (ii) due to mental disturbance / heavy drug or alcohol influence or alternatively (iii) as part of an act of "combat" (as many drug gangs consider rival groups their enemies and the streets their battleground). Under those circumstances the threat of one day being executed is not a major consideration at the time the offence is being committed. The murder rate in states where murder is still a capital crime is indicative of this.

In summary, the death penalty is generally a deterrent for many crimes but not really for murder.

I think it could be a more effective deterent if it were carried out in a reasonable period of time.

Originally Posted by London Talking

FIA - the death penalty is a deterrent for many crimes. Many people are discouraged from importing drugs into the middle east and Asia due to the strict enforcement of the anti drug laws. It is unerving when you arrive at an airport and see hangman noose warnings everywhere. They also usually provide "amnesty" trash cans with warnings that passing that point with drugs will forfeit your life. Whilst drugs are still imported it certainly is not as common a trade as it is in the West.

I'd also suggest that making speeding or drunk driving a capital offence will dramatically reduce road deaths. Considering the tens of thousands of people who die on the roads in the US each year this draconian measure would lead to many lives being saved as few people will risk a lethal injection for the sake of a few drinks when they are driving. However, I do not think as a society we would want to impose such excessive punishments for those offences.

However, due to the nature of murder, it is often committed as either (i) a crime of passion; (ii) due to mental disturbance / heavy drug or alcohol influence or alternatively (iii) as part of an act of "combat" (as many drug gangs consider rival groups their enemies and the streets their battleground). Under those circumstances the threat of one day being executed is not a major consideration at the time the offence is being committed. The murder rate in states where murder is still a capital crime is indicative of this.

In summary, the death penalty is generally a deterrent for many crimes but not really for murder.

well said.

Originally Posted by paulg

what if he were an exhibitionist?

would he have to have people expose themselves to him?

Yes. It is the law.

Originally Posted by mj745

Here's the better question, who has their crime rate significantly higher? Saudi or USA? LOL

The ONLY issue I have with this is that he was only 14 yrs old. Otherwise I'd give the green light.

+1, I agree. At that age they really do not know much.

Originally Posted by mj745

Here's the better question, who has their crime rate significantly higher? Saudi or USA? LOL

Which country would you rather live in?

Originally Posted by London Talking

Which country would you rather live in?

That depends lol.. If I was in real estate and construction then Saudi Arabia. I could make as much money as I wanted,pay no taxes on my income or pay any property tax on my properties and then use that money to enjoy my summer vacations in Europe.

If I was an average employee who wants freedom of speech (to some extent that is) and am willing to fork out 30-50% of my income to the government then the US would be a better choice.

You can see nice chicks in bikinis on the beach in the US but in Saudi Arabia one can not but that is what taxes are for lol.. Like bribery money lol..

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

That depends lol.. If I was in real estate and construction then Saudi Arabia. I could make as much money as I wanted,pay no taxes on my income or pay any property tax on my properties and then use that money to enjoy my summer vacations in Europe.

If I was an average employee who wants freedom of speech (to some extent that is) and am willing to fork out 30-50% of my income to the government then the US would be a better choice.

You can see nice chicks in bikinis on the beach in the US but in Saudi Arabia one can not but that is what taxes are for lol.. Like bribery money lol..

I can triple or quadruple my money by moving to Saudi Arabia. I have no interest, not even for a year. I know people who took the plunge and end up bordering on suicidal once they lived there for an extended period of time.

It might, just might, be partly tolerable if you have a family and relocate there together to live in a gated ex pat community. However, that is not an environment that I would want to place children in. It is also a desperate lifestyle of basically sitting at home at all times, crippled by kidnap risk and the tight restrictions.

However, the restrictions on a single man, especially when non-Arab or Muslim are ridiculous. Cinemas and malls are no go areas on many weekends as they are reserved for women, no bars, no restaurant culture, littered with no go zones, television and internet censored to the max, music restricted, no visiting public places on "family days", restrictions on leaving the country (i.e. you can fly to London easily but can't drive to the UAE), it is a solitary existence. Simple acts like walking to the shops, watching a movie or getting laid are incredibly difficult. Nor would I want to live in a country that treats its people like Saudi Arabia does . No thanks, money isn’t everything.

Originally Posted by London Talking

I can triple or quadruple my money by moving to Saudi Arabia. I have no interest, not even for a year. I know people who took the plunge and end up bordering on suicidal once they lived there for an extended period of time.

It might, just might, be partly tolerable if you have a family and relocate there together to live in a gated ex pat community. However, that is not an environment that I would want to place children in. It is also a desperate lifestyle of basically sitting at home at all times, crippled by kidnap risk and the tight restrictions.

However, the restrictions on a single man, especially when non-Arab or Muslim are ridiculous. Cinemas and malls are no go areas on many weekends as they are reserved for women, no bars, no restaurant culture, littered with no go zones, television and internet censored to the max, music restricted, no visiting public places on "family days", restrictions on leaving the country (i.e. you can fly to London easily but can't drive to the UAE), it is a solitary existence. Simple acts like walking to the shops, watching a movie or getting laid are incredibly difficult. Nor would I want to live in a country that treats its people like Saudi Arabia does . No thanks, money isn’t everything.

This is why one sees so many Kuwaitis and Saudis in Europe during the summer. Even the locals need to get away lol.. I agree with you but for some people there are some who would rather turn a blind eye on fun for a few years just to make a small fortune and then move some where else to enjoy it. Not many countries out there that have cheap fuel and allow you to earn thousands,millions or billions tax free. If you need access to women and getting laid then that country can be hell lol..

You can speed though and pretty much park where you like and they have great beaches of which are clean. No chicks in bikinis on the beach though. For work it is good but for fun and pleasure it can be hell for many non-locals and even locals as well.

Originally Posted by London Talking

Which country would you rather live in?

Hmm considering I LEFT the US I doubt there's much of a competition