This is the question one of my friends asked me.
Of course, I negated her with a big NO but I was struggling to recover from the shame of the news that the girl who was hospitalized after a brutal gang rape incident passed away.
Notwithstanding the gravity of the event, social networking sites keep asking for LIKES and SHARES. Some of them give you a KBC kind of option; if you are LIKING the post you support death penalty for the culprits and if you COMMENT you support life long imprisonment. Leave it aside. Whenever Facebook gets flooded, such scums float around.
It's not a crime that a person possess an instinct of strong amorous desire to a particular person or to the opposite gender in general. It's not an offense that a person of age above 18 watches a sexually pleasing video in his/her own private environment. The essential thing one should keep in mind is, "Is my act causing harm to another one?". If the answer is YES, think of the situation where the same act is done on you by them. This reasoning is purely psychological and can be reached by applying common sense. We don't need to look up on heaven or hell. After all that's what religion teaches us;think of the most pompous seat reserved for you in heaven for the good things you do, and of the most repulsive punishments awaiting you at hell for the sins you commit. We don't need religion to judge whether my act promises me a reward after death. We don't have to be morally good for a reward.Think about it rationally. "Is my act causing harm to another one?". Apply this question and seek the answer by yourself. Now, reciprocate the roles of persons and ask it again. Reach a conclusion not for heaven's sake but for humanity's.
Protestors demand death penalty to the people accused. Thinking emotionally,one would feel the same. However, our country is not known for having the best investigators and police force who can take impeccable judgements. They are unfamiliar to the modern methods of investigation that involves the use scientific, psychological and logical methods. Their primary power is that of muscle. Assume the situation, there was a person in the bus who was innocent. Nevertheless, he was caught for traveling in the bus in which the crime occurred. Now the girl passed away. If police decides the culprits by situational evidence, this innocent man will be caught along with the original culprits. So, an innocent man suffers. This is the problem of not using enough technological and scientific methods to assess a crime. Our police has to learn more about it. So, I wouldn't recommend death penalty to them. I appreciate the comment of former Supreme Court Judge Justice:V.R.Krishna Iyer in this regard. The culprits must be castrated. It seems to be logical to me. What do you think?