Capital punishment for rapist....

Capital punishment for rapist....

Background 

• Six drunken men were joyriding in a bus last Sunday when they picked up the physiotherapy student and her 28-year-old male companion. They took turns raping her before throwing the pair off the speeding vehicle. During her ordeal, the victim was attacked with an iron rod, causing serious intestinal injuries. Six men have since been arrested.
• A combination of abusive sexual behavior, a scant fear of the law and India's creaky judicial system encourage such attacks.
• The number of rape cases in New Delhi has risen by nearly one-fifth to 661 this year from a year ago, according to government figures, the highest among India's big cities.

Favor of Strict laws: 

• Fear of law: There is no fear of law left in criminals so there is need to make stricter laws in India which will again establish the respect for law in heart and mind of citizens.
• We need even more fearful laws then capital punishment so criminals think twice before such heinous crimes. Only decent people have any reason to be afraid of the law any more. If there is, in fact, no protection for the law-abiding, then why should we pay taxes for something we do not get?
• All rich people and politicians long ago began to hire private security men who do the job the police once did, but only for them. Because there is no fear left in criminals for the law. How we can let live such criminals in our society unpunished?
• Imprisonment in India is not so tough punishment. Length of the imprisonment should be increased for all such crimes. Just keeping criminals on 2 years or so in jail doesn't change much in them. Most of them with political connections come out on bail or again join crime full time after coming out of jail. We need drastic change in our law and order system to establish fear of law can be established between criminals. Starting point of this can be capital punishment for these rapists. They deserve it government should do whatever required to give them such punishment.

Against of Strict laws: 

• In past 10 years we have executed only 2 people under capital punishment. Even we make such stringent law it wouldn't change much.
• Rather than death penalty, swift arrest and fast-tracked trial leading to conviction alone can instill fear of law in people and deter commission of crimes, be it against women or in general.
• Decision to give them capital punishment because it is not the right way to deal a crime with another crime. Capital punishment itself is a judicially assisted murder.
• Death penalty cannot be a deterrent unless swift and sure delivery of justice can be ensured." In 2011, no investigation was done in 36.6% of recorded instances of rape.
• Police should get active now and administrators should empower police to act against criminals. There are many cities in our country where politicians first helped criminals to grow. And later they have to empower police to curb those criminals. And police successfully curbed crimes in many cities with political support, so real question of political willingness to curb crimes. If you use criminals, to win elections then you will never wanted to wipe them out.
• Fast track special courts to deal with sexual crimes, improved justice delivery system and stringent sexual harassment laws.
• The conviction rate of rape cases has dropped from 46% in 1971 to 26% in 2012.50 even death penalty is there no one can confidently say that conviction will really take place.

Conclusion: 

• Making only stricter laws would not establish the law and order in our country. But in such special cases government should take strict action against guilty and set an example for criminals. We cannot just let go every time by just depending on the existing system. We have to improve our system and empower administration to become a better society.

Keep posting Your points 2.....

Is Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in retail sector good for India?

Here are some information for u................

Background
The recent cabinet decision on FOE in retail has triggered protests by opposition and key allies of the ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA), who are demanding a roll back of the policy. The hour-long meeting held in Parliament House failed to resolve the logjam in the two Houses as opposition parties, led by BJP and the Left, stuck to their stand and demanded rollback of the Cabinet decision to allow 51 per cent FDI in multi-brand retail. Though at present only 53 cities with population not less than 10 lakh in the country have been identified for FDI As the fourth-largest economy in the world in PPP terms, India is a preferred destination for FOE. During 2000-10, the country attracted $178 billion as FOE. 

1. The companies offers the jobs to Indians and they call them to foreign and people do their jobs in out of our country and so increase the economy of other countries. Then how it is helpful for Indians.
2. FDI will surely help India in growing economy and increasing employment too. But the government should make effective policies so that we can gain more than to be ruined of by foreign companies. The total share should not be given to the FDI and power too, government should imposed certain regulation keeping in mind of small scale industries.
3. It increases the competitions among the company which compel the company to reduce the price of product and to increase the quality of product. It also increase the foreign currency in India and strength the economy of India. It also provide a lot of employment.
4. Government increased the FDI limits so to consume black money by third party and it is very significant to find out the cash flow is FDI is from countries like Mauritius, Switzerland. 
5. FDI plays an important role as by providing:
   
   - Direct Funds for longer period of time.
   - Better Technological and management practices.
   - Increase Market Competition.
6. the small retailers will be affected and business of those retailers who are giving service from a long period will be hardly affected and big retail companies will buy commodities directly from farmers which will affect the entire supply chain of suppliers and distributors. Indirectly it will hamper the economy of India.
7. good effect:
   1> This will bring modern technology to the country.
   2> reduce wastage of agricultural produce.
   3> Enable our farmers to get better prices for their crops.
   4> We can get good quality product in low cost.
8. Favor
   • This will bring modern technology to the country.
   • Improve rural infrastructure. It would help build infrastructure and create a competitive market. • Reduce wastage of agricultural produce.
   • Enable our farmers to get better prices for their crops.
   • Consumers will get commodities of daily use at reduced prices.
   • Biggest beneficiary of this would be small farmers, who would be able to improve productivity and realize higher remuneration by selling directly to large organized players and shorten the chain from farm to consumers.
   • Government too stands to gain by this move through more transparent and accountable monitoring of goods and supply chain management systems, It can expect to receive an additional US$ 25-30 billion by way of taxes
   • Opening of retail can be seen as a solution for food inflation, which has been confounding policy-makers. FDI in retail would help in building much needed back end infrastructure. Additionally, he said, investments in cold storage chain infrastructure would reduce loss of agricultural produce and provide more options to farmers. 
9. Against • Our interest rates today are as high as 14 per cent to 16 per cent how do we compete with the economies which have a 4 per cent interest rate. Our infrastructure our trade facilitations our labor laws, all these factors collectively don't make India low cost. So do you want India to become a center where we allow foreign companies to come in and set up these large chains which eventually instead of selling domestic products out sourcing internationally the cheapest sources and selling those products. Please remember domestic retail normally sources domestically, international retail sources internationally because they source from the cheapest sources.
   • Even if big retail companies help the farmers in resurrecting their economy, what plan does the government has for millions of middlemen who are part of the business process chain that ensures manufactured products reach end users.
   • We engage millions of uneducated and semi-educated people at various stages of retail business spread across towns and cities but we are afraid that Tesco and Wal-Mart will only engage smart and educated workforce in small strength, comparatively. Conclusion
   • Government is taking this decision in good faith. Few persons and lobbies controlling the rates of food commodities in India. And bringing more competition in market will bring better prices for buyers as well as sellers of commodities. Parties protesting against FDIs in retail have choice to not allow FDIs in the states they are ruling. Government should make a regulatory body for the commodity trade as we have for cellular services. 

Keep post more point plz.....