Comments:Iran executes woman despite stay of execution

I seriously  condemn  the  action of  Iran.
 * That will show them!.--66.229.26.39 12:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

'erode the ground for understanding and mutual trust between Iran and the European Union'
'erode the ground for understanding and mutual trust between Iran and the European Union'

I assume this is "diplomatically speaking" how you say, 'executing children is fucking barbaric and proves you're thugs'. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I hate Iranian government and authorities!

Funny Iran said it will stop executing children.--KDP3 (talk) 22:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Iran said they would stop stoning to death as a method of execution as well (like, 7 years ago), but they keep doing it in practice. Surprise surprise. 131.107.0.71 17:30, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Rule of Law
I'm disturbed by the lack of regard for rule of law shown here. Despite the various problems in Iran, I thought they were at least obliged to follow their own laws. On the other hand, I think it's good policy to execute all murderers, but that doesn't countenance a disregard for legal procedure. 209.30.165.25 09:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have no problems executing murders and rapist but Iran has a dirty history of just killing kids and gays for no reason.--KDP3 (talk) 11:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Who gives a flying fuck? AN eye for an eye.

--Brian McNeil / talk 13:22, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. And besides, I feel sorry for you death-penalty freaks, but the capital penalty has been long proven ineffective as a crime deterrent. It just makes you feel better. How barbaric. -Aless.mac (talk) 12:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah the slap on the hands that liberals think is "justice" is working to.--66.229.26.39 01:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 66.229.26.39 from Miami, you should try and go to Iran if you like the Rule of the Law so much. Maybe send there your daughter if you are too busy. -Aless.mac (talk) 04:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunate?
I'd say this was an unfortunate turn of events, however its neither "unfortunate" (quite the contrary, it is to be expected), nor a "turn" of events in the bizarre reality of Iran.

I dont know that why west is asking
i don't know that why west is asking for not executing teenagers who commits murder or something worst then that if you kill someone even if your 14 you should be sentenced to death because you have killed the person and its not joke to kill someone and just go on and say that i am not mature or i am just a teenager anyways to me its funny to not execute teenagers because they are not mature it cant be excuse for not executing anyways i support what the Iranian government did.
 * Ha! Most of the Western world has abolished capital punishment. America is the unsightly exception. Iran, well... They would not hesitate to execute someone by stoning them to death. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean, the U.S. of America in North America. Canada doesn't have DP, but a couple of countries in South America still do practise it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_nation). -Aless.mac (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Because the West, for the most part (with notable exception of USA) does not execute people in general - it's barbaric. 131.107.0.71 17:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah but giving 3 meals a day a nice bed and the worlds best medicine is punishment while thousands staved in the streets.--66.229.26.39 01:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Where did you see "thousands starving in the streets" (again, with notable exception of U.S.)? Most (all?) other Western countries have a decent welfare safety net, so you really have to try hard to get yourself in a position where you're actually starving. 131.107.0.70 03:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, go to Chicago some time, welfare net my ass. I think we should take an island, wall it off, empty all the world's prisons in it and let them duke it out until their time is up. Prisons don't rehabilitate, it's pretty much been proven that some criminals will never be functioning members of society. If you're in a non-segregated area with the worst of the worst, I doubt you'll rob another 7/11 if you know you'll go back to that hellhole. It's cheaper, more efficient and much less humane than spending billions sustaining a concrete country club (well, at least US prisons!) for rapists, murderers and pedophiles.
 * As it sits, if I could get away with a crime, I'd do it. The thought of prison isn't a deterrence, it's the time I'd be spending there that is. That, to me, is a problem that could be corrected by having a much more brutal prison system. It will never be because people will cry out that it's barbaric and wrong. Tough, life is filled with barbaric and wrong things so get a fucking helmet. If you commit a crime serious enough to warrant prison (not jail) then you've voided your human rights in my book.--64.90.84.103 23:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Prisons in Brazil are brutal enough but they still have a very high rate of violent crime. England used to hang people - even teenagers - for minor crimes in the 17th century. Finland, on the other hand, is one of the safest countries in the world but their prisons aren't as brutal. The conclusion? The only way to undermine criminality is strenghtening welfare and improving education so that people will not have to resort to crime in order to survive. As to the remaining crime freaks (including white-collar criminals), the certainty of being caught and punished is more important than having excessively harsh penalties. -Alemaco (talk) 03:28, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, "The thought of prison isn't a deterrence, it's the time I'd be spending there that is." ... that sounds like it is deterring you from committing crimes. --SVTCobra 23:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "good"
good &mdash;78.144.18.112 (talk) 15:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)