Why cutting the hand of the thief???

[aim]

:sl:
In many Muslim countries Muslim cut the hand of theaves so why they do it in some countries and not in other.

[Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Allah curses a man
who steals an egg and gets his hand cut off, or steals a rope
and gets his hands cut off."]


Please I want answer with references.

[aim]

Plus don't you think that is too much??

[themuffinman]

i dont think its too much, you have to realize this is under sharia law if fully implemented there really shouldnt be a need to steal as sharia also requires full payment of zakaat ( charity) and if implemented correctly noone should be poor so the stealing isnt justified. also with a harsh punishment like that people would think twice about stealing wouldnt they =P

[aim]

i dont think its too much, you have to realize this is under sharia law if fully implemented there really shouldnt be a need to steal as sharia also requires full payment of zakaat ( charity) and if implemented correctly noone should be poor so the stealing isnt justified. also with a harsh punishment like that people would think twice about stealing wouldnt they =P

But Islam is seen by all Muslim like the perfect religion of all times and now they do not pratice this in many countries.

Then you have to immagine that when a person has his hand cut it will be very difficult for him to work to eat and to do essential things.His life becomes a nightmare. And easily wherever he goes everyone will know that he is or was a theaf. How will he be accepted to work and can he. In this point Islam is certainly not a religion of pardon.

I am sorry you didn't convince me because what you have said is very shallow.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Ayesha Rana]

I don't think it is too much because in the ****ries where the law is implemented the stealing rate is VERY low compared to those where there is no capital punishment. The Shariah aims to preserve 5 things.
Religion, Life, Intellect, Progeny and Wealth.


Religion: by prescribing death on the one who changes his religion
Life: by prescribing death on the one who kills willfully without reason
Intellect: by prescribing lashing for the one who drinks alcohol and for the one addicted to substance abuse
Progeny: by stoning for the non-virgin adulterer and adulteress.
Wealth: by cutting the hand off the thief.

Allah wants to preserve these matters so severly so the rulings sre severe concerning them.

Ask yourself, if these rulings are put into practice then who would violate these matters?

Then you have to immagine that when a person has his hand cut it will be very difficult for him to work to eat and to do essential things.His life becomes a nightmare. And easily wherever he goes everyone will know that he is or was a theaf. How will he be accepted to work and can he. In this point Islam is certainly not a religion of pardon.

.

That's just it!
If the guy had any sense then he'd realise the seriousness of the situation and he would not steal, would he?

[themuffinman]

But Islam is seen by all Muslim like the perfect religion of all times and now they do not pratice this in many countries.

Then you have to immagine that when a person has his hand cut it will be very difficult for him to work to eat and to do essential things.His life becomes a nightmare. And easily wherever he goes everyone will know that he is or was a theaf. How will he be accepted to work and can he. In this point Islam is certainly not a religion of pardon.

I am sorry you didn't convince me because what you have said is very shallow.

the religion is perfect......the prophet was perfect, and the four rightly guided caliphs implemented sharia as it was meant to be implemented but after that i cannot say and certainly today there is no true sharia anywhere in the world yes there are Islamic countries but in order to have full sharia u need a caliphate not a monarchy...so now you have countries implementing some parts of sharia but disregarding others

[Ayesha Rana]

Exactly, Islam is perfect. Don't judge a pefect car by a dumb driver cos a dumb driver could easily crash an excellent car...it doesn't mean the car is at fault. But judge it by a perfect driver who will show you its true worth. Likewise judge Islam by looking at the best models for us, such as the prophet and his close companions. And be open minded.

[aim]

Good,
So first what is your sources and how did you know that the rate was very low.
2nd in Islam you say :everyone is free to choose his\she religion "la ikraha fi didni" so why killing if his\she changes ,this is a deep contrast.

[Umar001]

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

Wa 'Alaykum Salam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh,

You have to look at Islam as a whole, including this law. What are the limitations it places, who is punishable, who is accountable, what is the purpose of it, and so forth.

It may seem too much if one takes it out context or does not understand it fully.

I hope someone will clarify the matter for you Brother.

And Allah knows best.

Br.al-Habeshi

[aim]

I am sorry, if I said sth bad but you didn't answer my question.
One time I read sth and after I find it's opposite. (I mean here the feedom of religion)
Eg if sb converts to Islam and wants to change will he\she has to die.

Please answer this question it is very simple and don't change the subject please I really want to know.
Thanks

[aim]

I am sorry, if I said sth bad but you didn't answer my question.
One time I read sth and after I find it's opposite. (I mean here the feedom of religion)
Eg if sb converts to Islam and wants to change will he\she has to die.

Please answer this question it is very simple and don't change the subject please I really want to know.
Thanks

[Umar001]

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

I am sorry, if I said sth bad but you didn't answer my question.
One time I read sth and after I find it's opposite. (I mean here the feedom of religion)
Eg if sb converts to Islam and wants to change will he\she has to die.

Please answer this question it is very simple and don't change the subject please I really want to know.
Thanks

Do not be sorry.

You must know I did not try to answer your question, I was merely stating that in searching for your answer you need to look at the bigger picture and wished you well in finding the answer.

Since you are pushing me to provide an answer I will ask you to clarifiy your question. You said:

In many Muslim countries Muslim cut the hand of theaves so why they do it in some countries and not in other.

Please show tell me what Muslim Countries cut the the hand of thiefs and when they had done so, sources please. Also Muslim countries which do not have this law.

Moreover you also provided a hadith:

[Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Allah curses a man
who steals an egg and gets his hand cut off, or steals a rope
and gets his hands cut off."]

Please can you give reference and provide the rest of the hadith which talk about the cutting of the hands and how this was done by the companions and the scholars.

Then I can start to try to find an answer to your loaded question.

Br.al-Habeshi

[themuffinman]

I am sorry, if I said sth bad but you didn't answer my question.
One time I read sth and after I find it's opposite. (I mean here the feedom of religion)
Eg if sb converts to Islam and wants to change will he\she has to die.

Please answer this question it is very simple and don't change the subject please I really want to know.
Thanks

you see unlike other religions where your life, ur religion and your whole identy is serperate, islam is ur life and religion and ur nation or identity, there is no nationalism in islam. islam doesnt care what race you are in islam ur muslim. if sum1 was to betray their country the punishment would be death, so apostating from islam is treason

[aim]

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,



Do not be sorry.

You must know I did not try to answer your question, I was merely stating that in searching for your answer you need to look at the bigger picture and wished you well in finding the answer.

Since you are pushing me to provide an answer I will ask you to clarifiy your question. You said:

In many Muslim countries Muslim cut the hand of theaves so why they do it in some countries and not in other.

Please show tell me what Muslim Countries cut the the hand of thiefs and when they had done so, sources please. Also Muslim countries which do not have this law.

Moreover you also provided a hadith:

[Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Allah curses a man
who steals an egg and gets his hand cut off, or steals a rope
and gets his hands cut off."]

Please can you give reference and provide the rest of the hadith which talk about the cutting of the hands and how this was done by the companions and the scholars.

Then I can start to try to find an answer to your loaded question.

Br.al-Habeshi

Nice reply,
1st==> Eg in Arabia Saudia they cut the hands the heads they also stone people. You can use video google to find these videos it is easy.
But in country like Tunisia and Morocoo for eg they do not.
The hadith from the boukari chapter 82 hadith number 774 (I have the two books translated by Muslims) and I even have tafsir ibnu kathir and many other.

And now please anwser my question "Super Moderator".
I hope you want change the subject again because then it will mean you have no answer unfortunately and I will be deeply disappointed my friend Al Habeshi. imsad

[themuffinman]

i already gave u a reply the punishment for treason in ANY nation is death so why not islam?

[czgibson]

Greetings,

i already gave u a reply the punishment for treason in ANY nation is death so why not islam?

According to Amnesty, more than two-thirds of the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty. See here.

Peace

[alcurad]

it seems that these questions will be perpetually asked no matter how many threads are created. there is something called search at the top of the page, quite nifty if you know how to use it..

[themuffinman]

Greetings,


According to Amnesty, more than two-thirds of the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty. See here.

Peace

yeah well nations can change their ruling but islam doesnt.

[czgibson]

Greetings,

it seems that these questions will be perpetually asked no matter how many threads are created. there is something called search at the top of the page, quite nifty if you know how to use it..

Why is it, do you think, that questions like this are perpetually asked?

Peace

[AntiKarateKid]

Greetings,


Why is it, do you think, that questions like this are perpetually asked?

Peace

There is no blanket answer. Discussions about law are over some people's heads. Others might be too lazy to find out themselves. Yet others might have a hidden agenda and wish to travel the beaten road of distortion.

In addition to this, this idea is "new" to some people who do not see this everyday. Hence their confusion or curiosity. Besides, they amy want to talk to real life Muslims.

[aim]

What should I do to see the bigger picture and I think that Islam is made of many point so what is the most important thing to start to .

[aim]

And I have read that God give people faith and choose them in their so if I try hard and can't reach faith.

Because I am trying since many years but nothing, you have seen in previous post that they are things that I disagree with.

If I die and I am a pagan even if I am tried???

[aim]

And I am still trying,
what should I do exactly ??

[Whatsthepoint]

Progeny: by stoning for the non-virgin adulterer and adulteress.

Er...what?

[Whatsthepoint]

i dont think its too much, you have to realize this is under sharia law if fully implemented there really shouldnt be a need to steal as sharia also requires full payment of zakaat ( charity) and if implemented correctly noone should be poor so the stealing isnt justified. also with a harsh punishment like that people would think twice about stealing wouldnt they =P

What about kleptomaniacs? People who feel the urge to steel?

[alcurad]

depends on the 'level' of kleptomania, doesn't it..
generally, some of the 'prescribed' punishments could be dependent on the times, different situations etc. as it is, capital punishment for apostasy has been generally refuted-leaving a religion doesn't equal treason in a world of nation states-, shown to be mostly a special case for a special time, perhaps the same goes for the others.

[themuffinman]

as for kleptomaniacs, the pen is lifted for those who are insane, they bear no consequences for it if it can be proven that it really is a problem, hell people claim being gay is a problem in the mind i call bull....

[Umar001]

Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem,

Hey, hope you're well today! Peace be upon those who follow guidance.

Nice reply,
1st==> Eg in Arabia Saudia they cut the hands the heads they also stone people. You can use video google to find these videos it is easy.

Come on, I need an authoritative source, if you can direct me to a youtube video which has official information from Saudi Arabia or direct me to a site which has their laws then that is evidence, just saying 'search youtube' is not always good enough.

But in country like Tunisia and Morocoo for eg they do not.

Did they used to and when did they abolish it?

The hadith from the boukari chapter 82 hadith number 774 (I have the two books translated by Muslims) and I even have tafsir ibnu kathir and many other.

Is the wording as you have it above from Bukhari Hadith number 774?

Though I don't feel very satisfied that you have provided evidence for Saudi Arabia, I will answer your questions, but the reason I wanted you to do research is so that you realise when and how and for what are people punished, is it because they steal food when they are hungry (shouldn't be so) or is it because they are greedy and ruin people's life and emotionally cause grief which can least for years and disrupt society, so much so that people are paranoid about people stealing, as in some cases in the United Kingdom where even a child 11 or 10 used a knife to steal a game from a girl!

:sl:
In many Muslim countries Muslim cut the hand of theaves so why they do it in some countries and not in other.

[Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Allah curses a man
who steals an egg and gets his hand cut off, or steals a rope
and gets his hands cut off."]


Please I want answer with references.

So why do some cut the hand of thiefs? Because they, in some way, may follow the Islamic teaching. Why do some other countries not do so, because in some way or another they do not follow the Islamic teaching.

But we have to look into it specifically in each country. It is like asking 'why does one woman wear hijab and another doesn't?' The general answer is one follows Islam and one does not, but we should ask the ladies so we hear it from their mouths, that's why I asked you to seek official papers from those specific goverments.

Plus don't you think that is too much??

If one knows the limitations then no. My question is do you know the limitations friend? Read this from Islamqa:

The hadd punishment for theft

the criminal punishment in muslim countrys seem to be different from the sunnah, like chopping a theifs fingers off and leaving his thumb if he stole for the first time(in iran this happens).is this sunnah?

Praise be to Allaah.

Theft is haraam according to the Qur’aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus (ijmaa’). Allaah has condemned this action and decreed an appropriate punishment for it. The hadd punishment for a thief is to cut off his hand. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (as for) the male thief and the female thief, cut off (from the wrist joint) their (right) hands as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allaah. And Allaah is All Powerful, All Wise” [al-Maa’idah 5:38]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The hand should be cut off for (the theft of) a quarter of a dinar or more.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, al-Hudood, 6291)

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) cursed the thief because he is a corrupt element in society, and if he is left unpunished, his corruption will spread and infect the body of the ummah. He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “May Allaah curse the thief who steals an egg and has his hand cut off, or steals a rope and has his hand cut off.” (al-Bukhaari, al-Hudood, 6285).

What indicates that this ruling is definitive is that fact that a Makhzoomi noblewoman stole at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and Usaamah ibn Zayd wanted to intercede for her. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) became angry and said, “Do you intercede concerning one of the hadd punishments set by Allaah? Those who came before you were destroyed because if a rich man among them stole, they would let him off, but if a lowly person stole, they would carry out the punishment on him. By Allaah, if Faatimah bint Muhammad were to steal, I would cut off her hand.” (al-Bukhaari, Ahaadeeth al-Anbiyaa’, 3216)

This is the ruling of Allaah concerning theft, that the hand should be cut off from the wrist joint.

Al-Nawawi said in his commentary on Saheeh Muslim: Al-Shaafa'i, Abu Haneefah, Maalik and the majority (of scholars) said: The hand should be cut off from the wrist, where the hand meets the forearm. Al-Qurtubi said: all the scholars said: The hand should be cut off from the wrist, not as some of the innovators do when they cut off the fingers and leave the thumb.

Because cutting off the hand is a serious matter, cutting off the hand of the thief should not be done for just any case of theft. A combination of conditions must be fulfilled before the hand of a thief is cut off. These conditions are as follows:

The thing should have been taken by stealth; if it was not taken by stealth, then (the hand) should not be cut off, such as when property has been seized by force in front of other people, because in this case the owner of the property could have asked for help to stop the thief.

1- The stolen property should be something of worth, because that which is of no worth has no sanctity, such as musical instruments, wine and pigs.

2- The value of the stolen property should be above a certain limit, which is three Islamic dirhams or a quarter of an Islamic dinar, or their equivalent in other currencies.

3- The stolen property should have been taken from a place where it had been put away, i.e., a place where people usually put their property, such as a cupboard, for example.

4- The theft itself has to be proven, either by the testimony of two qualified witnesses or by the confession of the thief twice.

5- The person from whom the property was stolen has to ask for it back; if he does not, then (the thief’s) hand does not have to be cut off.

If these conditions are fulfilled, then the hand must be cut off. If this ruling was applied in the societies which are content with man-made laws and which have cast aside the sharee’ah of Allaah and replaced it with human laws, this would be the most beneficial treatment for this phenomenon. But the matter is as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith” [al-Maa’idah 5:50]

See al-Jaami’ li Ahkaam al-Qur’aan, 6/159; al-Mulakhkhas al-Fiqhi, 2/442

And now please anwser my question "Super Moderator".
I hope you want change the subject again because then it will mean you have no answer unfortunately and I will be deeply disappointed my friend Al Habeshi. imsad

Don't tell anyone but I am only a supermoderator because I used to be popular, nothing to do with how much knowledge, so if you don't get answers don't be dissapointed. So please don't call me Super Admin, call me Abdullah.

And Allah Knows Best

Br.'Abdullah

[Yanal]

:sl:
I am answering your thread title question " Why cut the hands of theives?"
In muslim or ISlam you can say stealing is haram and if someone steals they getthere hands cut off so that they can ask for forgivness and never steal again because they have no hands anymore, unless they use their feet.

[- Qatada -]

:salamext:

Cut off (from the wrist joint) the (right) hand of the thief, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allâh. And Allâh is All*Powerful, All*Wise.

But whosoever repents after his crime and does righteous good deeds (by obeying Allâh), then verily, Allâh will pardon him (accept his repentance). Verily, Allâh is Oft*Forgiving, Most Merciful.


(Qur'an Al Ma'ida 5:38)



A couple of points to note on the punishment of amputation for theft:

a-the punishment will not be applied if there is any doubt as to the guilt of the suspect

b-the punishment will not be applied if the value of the stolen goods is below something of great value -> determined by 'urf [customs of society]

c-the punishment will not be applied if the thief stole out of need/poverty

d-the punishment will not be applied if the goods weren't in proper storage (al-hirz) -> also determined by 'urf (customs of society)

e-the punishment will not be applied if the thief returns the goods and seeks forgiveness of the victim of the theft, before the case enters the judicial system

f-the punishment will not be applied if the culprit is not a sane adult and the crime was not committed under duress

g-the punishment will not be applied if the goods were not legally owned

h-the punishment will not be applied if it is a child stealing from parents or parents stealing from children or one spuse from another according to the opinion of all jurists except Imam Malik.

i-the punishment will not be applied if the person is permitted to enter the place from where he stole because in such a case there is no proper custody (al-hirz)

j-according to Imam Abu Hanifa the punishment is not applied to the non-muslim living in the muslim state, however Imam Shafi', Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal have said that it is.

If the theft passes these restrictions, then it recieves the hadd punishment of hand amputation. Any theft that does not meet these restrictions recieves ta'azir (discretionary punishment). In such cases the Islamic society would most likely follow case/common law by rule of precedent where like cases are treated alike.



Coming to the scenario where amputation is applied in theft, it is interesting to note the effect this has on society. I'd like to quote some parts of a discussion at a conference of the Saudi scholars:

At this point Dr. Dawalbi made a comment:

"I have been in this country for seven years", he said, "and I never saw of heard of, any amputation of the hand for stealing. This is because the crime is extremely rare. So, all that remains of that punishment is its harshness, which has made it possible for those who are tempted to steal, to keep their hands whole. Formerly, when these regions were ruled by the french-inspired Penal Code, under the Ottoman Empire, pilgrims travelling between the two Holy Cities - Mecca and Medina, could not feel secure for their purse or their life, unless they had a strong escort.

But when this country became the Saudi Kingdom, the Qur'anic Law was enforced, crime immediately disappeared. A traveller, then, could journey, not only between the Holy Cities, but even from Al-Dahran on the Gulf to Jeddah on the Red Sea, and traverse a distance of more than one thousand and five hundred kilometres across the desert all alone in his private car, without harbouring any fear or worry about his life or property, be it worth millions of dollars, and he be a complete foreigner."

The Saudi Delegation resumed:

"In this manner, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where Islamic law is enforced, state money is transferred from one town to another, from one bank to another, in an ordinary car, without any escort or protection, but the car driver.

Tell me, Gentlemen: in any of your Western States, would you be ready to transfer money from one bank to another, in any of your capitals without the protection of a strong police force and the necessary number of armoured cars?

...Only here, Gentlemen, in this country where Islamic Law is enforced, the American Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. William Rogers, during his visit last year, could, he and his suit, dispense with the armoured cars, which had been carried in by special planes, and which accompanied them in their tour of more than ten countries. Only here, Gentlemen, did the Government of the Kingdom not allow its visitors to go around in these cars. Eventually, Mr. Rogers spontaneously declined the guard of honour usually placed by the Government at the disposal of their foreign guests; he walked through the soulks by himself, and confessed that, in this Kingdom, and in this Kingdom alone, one had such a feeling of security that one had no more need of a guard.

...Stealing is almost unknown in our Kingdom, when people, in the great Capitals of Western countries under secular regimes, have no more security for their lives of their possessions.

(Doi, Shari'ah: The Islamic Law, Ta Ha Publishers 1984, pp. 260-261)

Personally, I know many people who have lived for ten or twenty years in Saudi Arabia and they have testified that they have never come across such a case of amputation for theft. When you implement such a balanced code, theft becomes un heard of.



I want you to look at this UN survey of burglaries between 1998-2000*. Tell me who is at the bottom of the list? Who is at the top?

*http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_bur



1. United States 2,099,700 burglaries (1999)
2. United Kingdom 836,027 burglaries (2000)
.
.
.
54. Saudi Arabia 11 (2000)!!!!


Which law is more successful?


These are concrete statistics here. There is no doubt when the UN conducts a survey and the country implementing Islamic law has the fewest burglaries, it demonstrates which is the most successful law in this regard.

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/q...-38-a-634.html

[Hamayun]

^^ Great post. And the stats prove that it works.

[Akeyi]

even thieves are humans

And we believe in hell and heaven more than we would believe something which we saw with our eyes.

Every punishment is torture even to worst man.

Punishments are there to deter from doing haram.

And not every thieves hand will be cut there are levels of this things. And when i was a kind i heard on tv that there were thieves who cut old ladies hand to take her golden bracelets.

And because of we believe to hell more than things we saw with our eyes. We pity us. If we get punished from our crimes in this world our our victim forgaves us then we wont be punished in afterlife.

And in ottoman empire which lasted from 13 century to 20 century which has a army and leader which complimented by our prophet s.a.v there was only 6 thieves who their hand cut. This is the work of sharia.

[greenhill]

There was a similar thread like this a few years ago (and I see this was posted way, way, way before I became a member) and it seems that the OP has since gone responding mainly to this thread...

I will say the same thing I said in the other thread …

The cause and effect - steal and get your hand cut off, is a simple way of putting it. It should be enough of a deterrent for people. However, even if a person is caught it should not mean that the punishment of having his hands cut off is the only punishment to be meted out. It should be discovered why he stole in the first place.If it was genuine case of having no food to feed his family, then the authorities should help him find halal means of subsistence (or even give him zakat) with the 'reminder' that should he be caught doing it again he may very well face not having a hand.

Islam is not barbaric, the prophet (pbuh) was forgiving, we should be too!


:peace:

[fromelsewhere]

Salaams,

Cutting the right hand of a thief in Islam... Salafists (ultra-conservative Islamists) think this makes sense, as you can read from the very popular Salafi website: https://islamqa.info/en/9935.

The hadd punishment for a thief is to cut off his hand. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (as for) the male thief and the female thief, cut off (from the wrist joint) their (right) hands as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allaah. And Allaah is All Powerful, All Wise” [al-Maa’idah 5:38]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The hand should be cut off for (the theft of) a quarter of a dinar or more.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, al-Hudood, 6291)

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) cursed the thief because he is a corrupt element in society, and if he is left unpunished, his corruption will spread and infect the body of the ummah. He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “May Allaah curse the thief who steals an egg and has his hand cut off, or steals a rope and has his hand cut off.” (al-Bukhaari, al-Hudood, 6285).


Others who are more moderate see things very differently, as you can read here: http://misconceptions-about-islam.co...ands-theft.htm


The verse in question will be given then a discussion will be presented. It should be noted that like all punishments relating to members of a society, they are only enforceable if such a society is governed by the laws of The Quran. In such a society, it is a requirement for believers to provide for those in need [2:177, 2:215, 2:219, 5:89, 59:7].

The male thief, and the female thief, you shall mark, cut, or cut-off their hands/means as a recompense for what they earned, and to serve as a deterrent from God. God is Noble, Wise. Whoever repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, then God will relent on him. Truly, God is Forgiving, Merciful. [5:38-39]

The above verses are commonly translated to mean physical cutting off the thief's hand or hands, however whilst this understanding is a theoretical possibility, when all the information is reviewed it is only one of several possibilities, hence the above translation. Firstly, it should be noted that the verse makes clear whoever commits theft but repents after and makes amends, then this is acceptable to God, thus no punishment can be administered in this case. This of course would only apply to those who do this before they have to be tried and found guilty. To prove this, see the verse below in which being punished is contrasted to relenting:

There are some who await God's decree whether He will punish them or relent on them. God is All Knower, All Wise. [9:106]

And how repenting and making amends shows a true repentance, thus reinforces the notion that a true/sincere repentance is accepted:

And whoever repents and takes corrective action, certainly he turns toward God with true repentance. [25:71]
...
Thus, it is possible to understand the punishment for thieves in four alternative ways:
(1) cutting off their hands
(2) cutting or marking their hands
(3) cutting their means/power to steal, e.g. detention/jail.
(4) cutting their sustenance, e.g. in order to compensate the value of the theft.
It does seem the punishment could be flexible depending upon the time, circumstances and severity of crime - it is up to the society to choose one of these meanings or a combination of them depending on the severity of the crime and their ability to enforce the penalty.


Please remember that "there is no compulsion in religion." There is no need to be a zealot. I have always considered Salafists to be quite wayward in their approach (to put it nicely) and good at creating large, unnecessary divisions in society and lots of mischief, but that is just my opinion.

[azc]

^What's quantum ofthe punishment for theft in your country...?

[azc]

Plus don't you think that is too much??

what is too less.....?

[AabiruSabeel]

Cutting the right hand of a thief in Islam... Salafists (ultra-conservative Islamists) think this makes sense, as you can read from the very popular Salafi website: https://islamqa.info/en/9935.

Why do we see deceptive tactics here? You are selective quoting the Fatwa to support your misconception. Read the Fatwa once again and in full.

Let me quote some of the remainder here:

Because cutting off the hand is a serious matter, cutting off the hand of the thief should not be done for just any case of theft. A combination of conditions must be fulfilled before the hand of a thief is cut off.

These conditions are as follows:

The thing should have been taken by stealth; if it was not taken by stealth, then (the hand) should not be cut off, such as when property has been seized by force in front of other people, because in this case the owner of the property could have asked for help to stop the thief.

1- The stolen property should be something of worth, because that which is of no worth has no sanctity, such as musical instruments, wine and pigs.
2- The value of the stolen property should be above a certain limit, which is three Islamic dirhams or a quarter of an Islamic dinar, or their equivalent in other currencies.
3- The stolen property should have been taken from a place where it had been put away, i.e., a place where people usually put their property, such as a cupboard, for example.
4- The theft itself has to be proven, either by the testimony of two qualified witnesses or by the confession of the thief twice.
5- The person from whom the property was stolen has to ask for it back; if he does not, then (the thief’s) hand does not have to be cut off.

If these conditions are fulfilled, then the hand must be cut off.

[cooterhein]

Why do we see deceptive tactics here? You are selective quoting the Fatwa to support your misconception. Read the Fatwa once again and in full.

Let me quote some of the remainder here:

Because cutting off the hand is a serious matter, cutting off the hand of the thief should not be done for just any case of theft. A combination of conditions must be fulfilled before the hand of a thief is cut off.

These conditions are as follows:

The thing should have been taken by stealth; if it was not taken by stealth, then (the hand) should not be cut off, such as when property has been seized by force in front of other people, because in this case the owner of the property could have asked for help to stop the thief.

1- The stolen property should be something of worth, because that which is of no worth has no sanctity, such as musical instruments, wine and pigs.
2- The value of the stolen property should be above a certain limit, which is three Islamic dirhams or a quarter of an Islamic dinar, or their equivalent in other currencies.
3- The stolen property should have been taken from a place where it had been put away, i.e., a place where people usually put their property, such as a cupboard, for example.
4- The theft itself has to be proven, either by the testimony of two qualified witnesses or by the confession of the thief twice.
5- The person from whom the property was stolen has to ask for it back; if he does not, then (the thief’s) hand does not have to be cut off.

If these conditions are fulfilled, then the hand must be cut off.

Do you understand why some people are uncomfortable with this sort of thing? I'm not entirely sure if you understand the nature of the objection.

[hisnameiszzz]

I personally think cutting of hands is a bit extreme but it definitely works.

In the UK, a person can steal repeatedly and even make a living from it and the worst thing that will happen to them is they might get a prison sentence (which a lot of people see as a bonus because it is free food and accommodation and no Council Tax).

[Born_Believer]

:salamext:

Cut off (from the wrist joint) the (right) hand of the thief, male or female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of example from Allâh. And Allâh is All*Powerful, All*Wise.

But whosoever repents after his crime and does righteous good deeds (by obeying Allâh), then verily, Allâh will pardon him (accept his repentance). Verily, Allâh is Oft*Forgiving, Most Merciful.


(Qur'an Al Ma'ida 5:38)



A couple of points to note on the punishment of amputation for theft:

a-the punishment will not be applied if there is any doubt as to the guilt of the suspect

b-the punishment will not be applied if the value of the stolen goods is below something of great value -> determined by 'urf [customs of society]

c-the punishment will not be applied if the thief stole out of need/poverty

d-the punishment will not be applied if the goods weren't in proper storage (al-hirz) -> also determined by 'urf (customs of society)

e-the punishment will not be applied if the thief returns the goods and seeks forgiveness of the victim of the theft, before the case enters the judicial system

f-the punishment will not be applied if the culprit is not a sane adult and the crime was not committed under duress

g-the punishment will not be applied if the goods were not legally owned

h-the punishment will not be applied if it is a child stealing from parents or parents stealing from children or one spuse from another according to the opinion of all jurists except Imam Malik.

i-the punishment will not be applied if the person is permitted to enter the place from where he stole because in such a case there is no proper custody (al-hirz)

j-according to Imam Abu Hanifa the punishment is not applied to the non-muslim living in the muslim state, however Imam Shafi', Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal have said that it is.

If the theft passes these restrictions, then it recieves the hadd punishment of hand amputation. Any theft that does not meet these restrictions recieves ta'azir (discretionary punishment). In such cases the Islamic society would most likely follow case/common law by rule of precedent where like cases are treated alike.



Coming to the scenario where amputation is applied in theft, it is interesting to note the effect this has on society. I'd like to quote some parts of a discussion at a conference of the Saudi scholars:

At this point Dr. Dawalbi made a comment:

"I have been in this country for seven years", he said, "and I never saw of heard of, any amputation of the hand for stealing. This is because the crime is extremely rare. So, all that remains of that punishment is its harshness, which has made it possible for those who are tempted to steal, to keep their hands whole. Formerly, when these regions were ruled by the french-inspired Penal Code, under the Ottoman Empire, pilgrims travelling between the two Holy Cities - Mecca and Medina, could not feel secure for their purse or their life, unless they had a strong escort.

But when this country became the Saudi Kingdom, the Qur'anic Law was enforced, crime immediately disappeared. A traveller, then, could journey, not only between the Holy Cities, but even from Al-Dahran on the Gulf to Jeddah on the Red Sea, and traverse a distance of more than one thousand and five hundred kilometres across the desert all alone in his private car, without harbouring any fear or worry about his life or property, be it worth millions of dollars, and he be a complete foreigner."

The Saudi Delegation resumed:

"In this manner, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where Islamic law is enforced, state money is transferred from one town to another, from one bank to another, in an ordinary car, without any escort or protection, but the car driver.

Tell me, Gentlemen: in any of your Western States, would you be ready to transfer money from one bank to another, in any of your capitals without the protection of a strong police force and the necessary number of armoured cars?

...Only here, Gentlemen, in this country where Islamic Law is enforced, the American Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. William Rogers, during his visit last year, could, he and his suit, dispense with the armoured cars, which had been carried in by special planes, and which accompanied them in their tour of more than ten countries. Only here, Gentlemen, did the Government of the Kingdom not allow its visitors to go around in these cars. Eventually, Mr. Rogers spontaneously declined the guard of honour usually placed by the Government at the disposal of their foreign guests; he walked through the soulks by himself, and confessed that, in this Kingdom, and in this Kingdom alone, one had such a feeling of security that one had no more need of a guard.

...Stealing is almost unknown in our Kingdom, when people, in the great Capitals of Western countries under secular regimes, have no more security for their lives of their possessions.

(Doi, Shari'ah: The Islamic Law, Ta Ha Publishers 1984, pp. 260-261)

Personally, I know many people who have lived for ten or twenty years in Saudi Arabia and they have testified that they have never come across such a case of amputation for theft. When you implement such a balanced code, theft becomes un heard of.



I want you to look at this UN survey of burglaries between 1998-2000*. Tell me who is at the bottom of the list? Who is at the top?

*http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_bur



1. United States 2,099,700 burglaries (1999)
2. United Kingdom 836,027 burglaries (2000)
.
.
.
54. Saudi Arabia 11 (2000)!!!!


Which law is more successful?


These are concrete statistics here. There is no doubt when the UN conducts a survey and the country implementing Islamic law has the fewest burglaries, it demonstrates which is the most successful law in this regard.

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/q...-38-a-634.html

The best and most well researched response on here. This should be satisfactory for anyone seeking to know the reason for this particular Islamic law.

[fromelsewhere]

Why do we see deceptive tactics here? You are selective quoting the Fatwa to support your misconception. Read the Fatwa once again and in full.

Let me quote some of the remainder here:

Because cutting off the hand is a serious matter, cutting off the hand of the thief should not be done for just any case of theft. A combination of conditions must be fulfilled before the hand of a thief is cut off.

These conditions are as follows:

The thing should have been taken by stealth; if it was not taken by stealth, then (the hand) should not be cut off, such as when property has been seized by force in front of other people, because in this case the owner of the property could have asked for help to stop the thief.

1- The stolen property should be something of worth, because that which is of no worth has no sanctity, such as musical instruments, wine and pigs.
2- The value of the stolen property should be above a certain limit, which is three Islamic dirhams or a quarter of an Islamic dinar, or their equivalent in other currencies.
3- The stolen property should have been taken from a place where it had been put away, i.e., a place where people usually put their property, such as a cupboard, for example.
4- The theft itself has to be proven, either by the testimony of two qualified witnesses or by the confession of the thief twice.
5- The person from whom the property was stolen has to ask for it back; if he does not, then (the thief’s) hand does not have to be cut off.

If these conditions are fulfilled, then the hand must be cut off.

I put the website link so people can look up the full text. I just put the first part of it, which is the part I consider to be relevant and that makes me particularly uncomfortable (I assume it's also the part that makes others uncomfortable as well). The 'conditions' are so basic that I consider them to be pretty much self-evident, and they certainly don't make the cutting off of a thief's hand any more palatable to me. I think it goes without saying that for a crime to be considered "theft", it must be something of a certain value that was stolen (not a pencil or a discarded book), and one would hope that the "theft" would at least be proven in a court before any punishment, small or harsh, would be issued.

Personally, I much prefer link #2 that argues that we don't need to "physically" cut off the hand... it can be understood to be more symbolic than anything. But it's just me. I have a strong distaste for Salafi philosophy.

[fromelsewhere]

^What's quantum ofthe punishment for theft in your country...?

Are you trying to ask how people are punished for theft in my country?
It depends on how much the thief stole. If you steal above a certain amount, you definitely get prison time. The amount of prison time you get depends on how severe the theft was. There is a max (also maybe a min?), I'm not sure what it is.
If you steal a small amount, you may still get prison time but the sentence would be small (less than 2 years?), or you may just have to pay back + pay a penalty + community service (or a combo).

I'm not a law expert, though. But the punishment is proportional to the severity of the crime. I find this to be quite fair.

[cooterhein]

The best and most well researched response on here. This should be satisfactory for anyone seeking to know the reason for this particular Islamic law.

I'm satisfied in knowing that this really is Islamic law, or that it was at least. It's pretty much just the Salafists and the terrorists at this point. What I'm not satisfied with is the idea that this is, or ever was, a moral, just, or remotely acceptable penalty for this crime or for any other crime.

[AabiruSabeel]

Do you understand why some people are uncomfortable with this sort of thing? I'm not entirely sure if you understand the nature of the objection.

I'm satisfied in knowing that this really is Islamic law, or that it was at least. It's pretty much just the Salafists and the terrorists at this point. What I'm not satisfied with is the idea that this is, or ever was, a moral, just, or remotely acceptable penalty for this crime or for any other crime.

Being a disbeliever, you will never be satisfied with the laws revealed by Allah :swt:.

Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of Allah,-that is the (only) Guidance." Wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor helper against Allah. [2:120]

And this (He commands): Judge thou between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile thee from any of that (teaching) which Allah hath sent down to thee. And if they turn away, be assured that for some of their crime it is Allah's purpose to punish them. And truly most men are rebellious. [5:49]

Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? But who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah? [5:50]

[azc]

I'm satisfied in knowing that this really is Islamic law, or that it was at least. It's pretty much just the Salafists and the terrorists at this point. What I'm not satisfied with is the idea that this is, or ever was, a moral, just, or remotely acceptable penalty for this crime or for any other crime.

What should be the most severe punishment for theft in your opinion (You've to try to make your country crime-free or at least graph of crime should fall down)

[azc]

Are you trying to ask how people are punished for theft in my country?It depends on how much the thief stole. If you steal above a certain amount, you definitely get prison time. The amount of prison time you get depends on how severe the theft was. There is a max (also maybe a min?), I'm not sure what it is.If you steal a small amount, you may still get prison time but the sentence would be small (less than 2 years?), or you may just have to pay back pay a penalty community service (or a combo).I'm not a law expert, though. But the punishment is proportional to the severity of the crime. I find this to be quite fair.

If you were the ruler of your country how much strict laws you would implement ( so that the criminals would think ten times before comitting the crime) to make your country crime free...?

[Born_Believer]

I'm satisfied in knowing that this really is Islamic law, or that it was at least. It's pretty much just the Salafists and the terrorists at this point. What I'm not satisfied with is the idea that this is, or ever was, a moral, just, or remotely acceptable penalty for this crime or for any other crime.

Of course mister peaceful :)

[cooterhein]

If you were the ruler of your country how much strict laws you would implement ( so that the criminals would think ten times before comitting the crime) to make your country crime free...?

I would impose penalties with varying levels of severity depending on the severity of the crime and on how many times a person has been convicted of stealing previously. These penalties would range from small fines and brief sentences to longer periods of incarceration, a record, and in some specific instances deportation might also be in play.

Rather than have onerously strict laws that cause people to live in constant fear, I would prefer to do without those laws and explore ways to make my country a better place, where people don't have to and/or don't want to steal. There are more ways to reduce theft than by scaring people. And there are many ways to make a country a better place, but maiming people- on purpose- does not accomplish that.

On a related note, I, as the ruler of any hypothetical country, would very much want my country to be the kind of place that people want to live in. I would not want to turn it into a place that everyone wants to leave, and nobody wants to go to. Eliminating the prospect of hand-chopping is a fairly basic part of that goal, and it really ought to be taken for granted.

[aamirsaab]

The hand cutting only applies in certain, and very explicit circumstances - the item has to be a certain amount and type (I.e not food), the criminal must have been of sound mind and not say intoxicated or have any mental issues like say kleptomania. The hudud punishments (the ones you guys cry about) ONLY apply to Muslim criminals anyway...and with any law system, the punishment should fit the severity of the crime. Sharia law is no different.

Bottom line is, 9/10, the judge will ask the perpetrator to either give the item back or pay the victim the value of it and possibly some severance pay/fee on top. Done sorted. No clogging up of the legal system, no prison sentence required, no prison/profit centre required so that no corrupt government officials can abuse both it and their people to line their back pockets...and some of you folk have the absolute nerve to lecture Muslim's about their lack of morality...

P.s this thread is from 2008....WHO FINDS THESE ANCIENT RELICS OF OLD?!?

[Serinity]

:salam:

When it comes to understanding the laws of Allah, it is pertinent to not be ruled by one's desires, assumptions and preconceptions.

To the disbeliever, morals are just opinions. The laws of the Kuffar change just like the heart change. I.e. they rule by their opinions.

The disbeliever does not adhere to a specific code, it swifts like the heart swifts (if you understand what I mean), as far as I see.

Allahu alam.

[cooterhein]

The hand cutting only applies in certain, and very explicit circumstances - the item has to be a certain amount and type (I.e not food), the criminal must have been of sound mind and not say intoxicated or have any mental issues like say kleptomania. The hudud punishments (the ones you guys cry about) ONLY apply to Muslim criminals anyway...

That's good to hear, because the less it happens, the better. I can't recall that I've ever cried about this, though.

and with any law system, the punishment should fit the severity of the crime. Sharia law is no different.

Well yes it is different, actually, because it includes punishments that involve maiming people. That's the main difference that we're looking at here. And that's a punishment that doesn't fit any crime.

Bottom line is, 9/10, the judge will ask the perpetrator to either give the item back or pay the victim the value of it and possibly some severance pay/fee on top. Done sorted. No clogging up of the legal system, no prison sentence required, no prison/profit centre required so that no corrupt government officials can abuse both it and their people to line their back pockets...and some of you folk have the absolute nerve to lecture Muslim's about their lack of morality...

What exactly is your idea of what a global assessment of corruption would look like? This is what I'm looking at.

http://fortune.com/2016/01/27/transp...ruption-index/

Islam is fairly well represented at the bottom of this list, and not so well represented at the very top. Some Muslim countries are in the upper half, and they're doing fairly well by this and any other available measurement, but no Islamic countries are in elite territory when it comes to this. And a good handful of them are the absolute worst- and some of those countries have the strictest and most hardline application of Shariah.

Do you have some other global ranking with a different methodology that shows very different results? I'd like to see that, if you have it.

P.s this thread is from 2008....WHO FINDS THESE ANCIENT RELICS OF OLD?!?

Scroll to the bottom of this page, or the bottom of the page on pretty much any thread you may be looking at. See the category that says "Similar threads" to this one? On mine, I'm looking at 3 threads from 2009 and two from 2007. On the other tab I have open (which has a far more recent creation date), there's suggested threads from 2009, 2007, 2007, and 2006.

That's how this happens. So who does this? My guess would be, people who scroll to the bottom of a page and don't look at the date.

[aamirsaab]

That's good to hear, because the less it happens, the better. I can't recall that I've ever cried about this, though.

Well wouldn't you believe it, the sharia also agrees. There's no enjoyment to be had in carrying out hudud - if anything, the judge in such cases should be finding ways around it and trying to find some other form of reconciliation. In fact part of being a judge in any court, sharia or otherwise, is that your decision must be just and even handed.

Well yes it is different, actually, because it includes punishments that involve maiming people. That's the main difference that we're looking at here. And that's a punishment that doesn't fit any crime

Neither are dropping bombs on 3rd world countries, colonizing half the planet through brutality, legalization and institutionalized racism and sexism, torture, oh and how can one possibly forget death row. But here we are, discussing the morality of maiming criminals who actively seek to hurt and negatively impact their fellow country men. Oh no, what a crime - how dare a criminal justice system do such a thing?! In the context of everything, yeah this counts as minutiae.

(snip) Islam is fairly well represented at the bottom of this list, and not so well represented at the very top. Some Muslim countries are in the upper half, and they're doing fairly well by this and any other available measurement, but no Islamic countries are in elite territory when it comes to this. And a good handful of them are the absolute worst- and some of those countries have the strictest and most hardline application of Shariah.

Do you have some other global ranking with a different methodology that shows very different results? I'd like to see that, if you have it.

Not sure why are you conflating Islam with Muslim countries - to cut the story short, there are many non-muslim countries that are actually more Islamic than certain Muslim countries and many non-muslims who are more Islamic in their behavior than Muslims (the irony isn't lost on me either, I can assure you!). Moreover, conflating religion, specifically Islam with corruption - the index you gave (thanks for that by the way, genuinely) makes no distinction, not sure how you came to that conclusion - seems a little disingenuous. For the record, I think corruption in any country it has more to do with gaps between rich and poor continually widening as well as the constant fear-mongering and xenophobia. And as far as non western countries go, we can thank multiple outside interference.

I'm not particularly interested in a blow by blow discussion, those days are long gone I'm afraid. But this whole Islam is barbaric because (insert a billion projected and ignorant comments here/ I-read-a-meme-on-the-internet-about-islam-and-now-I'm-an-expert-so-can-turn-my-brain-off-when-discussing-it) shtick is getting real old. Real fast.

[fromelsewhere]

I would impose penalties with varying levels of severity depending on the severity of the crime and on how many times a person has been convicted of stealing previously. These penalties would range from small fines and brief sentences to longer periods of incarceration, a record, and in some specific instances deportation might also be in play.

Rather than have onerously strict laws that cause people to live in constant fear, I would prefer to do without those laws and explore ways to make my country a better place, where people don't have to and/or don't want to steal. There are more ways to reduce theft than by scaring people. And there are many ways to make a country a better place, but maiming people- on purpose- does not accomplish that.

On a related note, I, as the ruler of any hypothetical country, would very much want my country to be the kind of place that people want to live in. I would not want to turn it into a place that everyone wants to leave, and nobody wants to go to. Eliminating the prospect of hand-chopping is a fairly basic part of that goal, and it really ought to be taken for granted.

Let me add that there's quite a bit of data to show that countries that have severe penalties, such as flogging, cutting of hands, death penalty, don't have lower crime rates. To the contrary, they often have ironically higher crime rates... food for thought.

[azc]

Let me add that there's quite a bit of data to show that countries that have severe penalties, such as flogging, cutting of hands, death penalty, don't have lower crime rates. To the contrary, they often have ironically higher crime rates... food for thought.

which countries have severe punishments for criminals....?

[Muslim Woman]

Let me add that there's quite a bit of data to show that countries that have severe penalties, such as flogging, cutting of hands, death penalty, don't have lower crime rates. To the contrary, they often have ironically higher crime rates... food for thought.

Please give more info.

[Imran520]

This punishment is necessary to reduce crimes from society.

[#HAMMAD#]

I agree because the thief is going to do it again and if he does not have hands he can't steel.

[cooterhein]

Let me add that there's quite a bit of data to show that countries that have severe penalties, such as flogging, cutting of hands, death penalty, don't have lower crime rates. To the contrary, they often have ironically higher crime rates... food for thought.

I agree with the other two people, I'd be interested in a link or two as well. I think I've vaguely heard this type of claim, in a general sense, but I can't recall ever having seen any data driven links to this point.

[cooterhein]

This punishment is necessary to reduce crimes from society.

It really is not necessary, as there are plenty of other ways to reduce crime that can be quite effective in the absence of hand chopping.

That may not have been exactly what you meant, but that is exactly what you wrote. You said it was necessary in order to get a certain result, and that is clearly not true. It is absolutely not necessary in order to achieve the result of crime reduction and/or deterrence.

What you probably meant to say was, cutting people's hands off is effective in achieving the desired result....which is not the same thing as being necessary in order to achieve that result....and, stated in this way, the claim would not be obviously false on the face of it. It would still be in need of some data, some links maybe, some type of evidence, but it's a workable starting point.

[noraina]

Assalamu alaykum

Look, countries where Shariah law is implemented aren't (surprisingly) filled with one-handed people - contrary to popular opinion, Shariah isn't a mob force which goes around lynching sinners and cutting off their limbs, it is an organised, functional justice system based upon solid evidence and looking at each individual case.

As has been said, there are certain conditions to be met before the punishment is meted out - the item has to be of a particular value, it must have been within an enclosed space where theft would have had to be very deliberate, and I also remember reading if the particular thief is suffering from extreme poverty and stealing for basic necessities, they are waived from that punishment. There are a variety of conditions, for which reason this punishment is only implemented rarely.

Also, if that person repents (which most people would probably do if they had to choose between that or having their hand cut off!) and does not reoffend, they will not be punished. From this point of view, it is actually made extremely difficult to go ahead and amputate someone's hand for theft, whatever they have stolen. As Muslims we don't know the state of someone's heart, and so if they say they have repented and will not reoffend, we can't punish them on the assumption of knowing what goes on in their minds.

As to the thief, Male or female, cut off his or her hands: a punishment by way of example, from Allah, for their crime: and Allah is Exalted in power. But if the thief repents after his crime, and amends his conduct, Allah turns to him in forgiveness; for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
Qur'an 5:38-39

Certainly, there can be a miscarriage of justice - but that happens within every justice system, even the UK's, and doesn't mean that the actual system is inherently corrupt, rather the people who are implementing it are.

[Scimitar]

I'm satisfied in knowing that this really is Islamic law, or that it was at least. It's pretty much just the Salafists and the terrorists at this point. What I'm not satisfied with is the idea that this is, or ever was, a moral, just, or remotely acceptable penalty for this crime or for any other crime.

Cooterhein,

you're the type of person who feeds his bias. There is no getting through to you. You will ignore context and cotext as well as the actual anthropological and social factors of the period in question, which I find wholly dishonest of you and thus, conversing with you on this topic while knowing full well your ears are deaf, is not something which I think is a good use of my time.

So, I'll just humour you with the above instead.

Scimi

[Born_Believer]

Let me add that there's quite a bit of data to show that countries that have severe penalties, such as flogging, cutting of hands, death penalty, don't have lower crime rates. To the contrary, they often have ironically higher crime rates... food for thought.

which countries with these punishments (in a society where the police and teh criminal courts actually do their jobs to investigate and then apply such laws) actually have really high crime rates? Saudi Arabia and the UAE certainly don't have very high crime rates.

[cooterhein]

Cooterhein,

you're the type of person who feeds his bias. There is no getting through to you. You will ignore context and cotext as well as the actual anthropological and social factors of the period in question, which I find wholly dishonest of you and thus, conversing with you on this topic while knowing full well your ears are deaf, is not something which I think is a good use of my time.

So, I'll just humour you with the above instead.

Scimi

You may want to familiarize yourself with the concept of Natural Law. Here is a helpful link. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/n...-law-theories/

If you are inclined to peruse some of this information, it should give you a general idea of where I'm coming from as I approach this sort of thing.

[fromelsewhere]

I agree with the other two people, I'd be interested in a link or two as well. I think I've vaguely heard this type of claim, in a general sense, but I can't recall ever having seen any data driven links to this point.

I decided to look at murder rate per capita and countries with death penalty. It turns out that there isn't a clear correlation either way between death penalty and murder rates. So I humbly concede that I talked a bit through my hat.

Some links:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-...million-people
https://fullfact.org/news/do-countri...omicide-rates/

This one compares states in the U.S. with death penalty vs states in the U.S. without:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dete...r-murder-rates

In terms of murder per capita, Latin America and parts of Africa are the worst. Sudan is unsurprisingly very high up at 294.59 per 100,000. Pakistan is relatively high up with a murder rate of ~78.68 per 100,000 (death penalty country). Not too far off is the US with 42.01 per 100,000 (relatively high murder rate for a 'developed' country). Iran is midway with 30.12. Saudi Arabia does quite well actually at 10.23.

All in all, to be objective, the death penalty does not seem to reduce murder rates, but it does not make the murder rates go up neither. There seems to be a slight correlation between higher murder rates per capita and then death penalty, especially when we compare murder rates within the Unites States between states that have the death penalty vs states that don't.

As fullfact.org concludes:

"So it seems that those using global homicide rates to support either side of the death penalty debate need to justify why their findings are statistically significant. Our calculations suggest there isn't enough proof that capital punishment is or isn't an effective deterrent to murder."