On the uproar against the Juvenile assailant of Nirbhaya Murder case

On the uproar against the Juvenile assailant of Nirbhaya Murder case 

I completely agree that there needs to be radical change such that we identify when Juvenile should be treated as assault and some discretion should be given to judges to decide that. ( For example , a teenager killing another teenager in a fight should be treated differently than one killing infants ) 

However , we need to direct our wrath towards the Parliament and not the court. Parliament and the constitution decides what punishment should be given for what crime. If the Constitution defines that we treat somebody as a Juvenile if he is less than 18 years of age , then that needs to get amended. The point is Court is essentially correct in releasing the assailant , since it is following the constitution. 

Secondly , there have been more than thousand cases of Rape which either the accused or the guilty is Juvenile ( according to this link ). In most of such cases the assailant would have been given similar sentences in the recent past. The point is that just because this particular murder case got a great public attention , it is not correct to treat him more harshly than others. Public outrage should be against the system and not a particular individual , whenever such thing happens its more of a revenge than justice. 

Lastly , we can say that justice is served in Nirbhaya murder case. 

1. Most of the accused were given death sentences according to the Constitution. 

2. It took less than 2 years for the trial , this is indeed a fast track. ( Noting the notorious case of Salman Khan which took 13 years ). 

3. Various judicial committees were set up in wake of this , and which has suggested various amendments to the acts ( such as Juvenile justice act). We dont know whether those would really change anything however its a good first step.  

4. Also Juvenile was not the only assailant , and there is a good reason to argue that he would not have initiated the crime by himself. He knows what sentences have been given , had he been not lucky.  Hence , the juvenile did not get harsher sentence is no reason to cry foul.  

Although the juvenile does deserve a harsher sentence , we need to make sure that we answer the broader question. 

Other Sources : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape

Update :
Two additional great Points when the bill was "discussed" in Rajya Sabha by Mr Shashi Tharoor
1. One isolated incident cannot be used as the sole example to Pass the law
2. It tries to address consensual sex amongst teenagers which NEED has to be discussed
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153002171473167&fref=nf

Freedom of Speech is the goddamn right to offend

 Freedom of Speech is the goddamn right to offend

We will prove the contra-positive to be true  

"There is no need of any laws concerning Freedom of Speech if there is right to offend" 

Suppose you can hurt anybody's feelings , and assume there is no restriction regarding that. So long as you keep your nerves and not physically hurt anybody , you are fine to go ( just assume ). In that case , nobody would really care about what you would say , rather they have right to not take your comments / criticisms. Hence in this case both the critic and the listener protect their own right to hurt and to not get hurt respectively. Hence in this case , there is no requirement to establish any specific laws concerning freedom of speech ; since in order to pursue a legal battle the person would need to prove that somebody else's freedom of speech offends him/her. 

This is Freedom of Speech  ; this is the right to offend ! 

SuperHeros and SuperVillains

It had been a long time since i had watched a movie , so i went with my friend to Spiderman Movie ( the new one ! )

With all the areas considered and  neglecting the fact that it had the almost same story as the first Spider-man movie , it is a good movie. I liked it. One of the most important quotes of the movie ( the original ) is : "With great power comes great responsibility."  I really like that quote because it is applicable in modern world and perhaps the todays leaders , businessmen and scientists  should indeed understand the gravity of these lines.

The movie states another fact , rather unknowingly , that if we have achieved great power that can improve our lives then we are also building the antagonist  counterpart of the same. If i am not wrong Superman also has a similar story.
This is more or less the theme for all superhero movies , may be they are not rooted to the same experiment as in SpiderMan (new). So the point is , for every superhero there is a SuperVillain as well. 

Hence there is a simple question, whats so glorious when the power you have created has been efficient in saving the world from ITSELF ? That too at a cost of destruction and hazards to the environment. 
And you would find that there are analogous entities in todays world to these superheros and supervillains , which we all are well acquainted ...

About Jana Gana Mana :

The poem was composed in December 1911, precisely at the time of the Coronation Durbar of George V, and "Bharat Bhagya vidhata" and "Adhinayaka" is considered by some to be in praise of King George V and not God. The composition was first sung during a convention of the then loyalist Indian National Congress in Calcutta on Dec. 26, 1911.^[2] It was sung on the second day of the convention, and the agenda of that day devoted itself to a loyal welcome of George V on his visit to India.
"The proceedings began with the singing by Babu Rabindranath Tagore of a song specially composed by him in honour of the Emperor." (Englishman, Dec. 28, 1911)
Even the report of the annual session of the Indian National Congress of December 1911 stated this difference:
"On the first day of 28th annual session of the Congress, proceedings started after singing Vande Mataram. On the second day the work began after singing a patriotic song by Babu Ravindranath Tagore. Messages from well wishers were then read and a resolution was passed expressing loyalty to King George V.............

Another controversy is that only those provinces that were under British rule, i.e. Punjab, Sindh, Gujarat, Maratha etc. were mentioned. None of the princely states were recognized which are integral parts of India now - Kashmir, Rajasthan, Andhra, Mysore or Kerala.

Even North-East which was under British rule is not mentioned

Courtesy : Wikipedia

Personally I dont agree that a national anthem should include the parts of the country it is against the unity and integrity of country. Accepting an anthem because it was in Hindi (?) or written by a great person is not justified.

Vande Mataram on the other hand talks about the motherland and that does include essentially everything , so there is no need for separate mention of each state ! It talks about something that we have in common a respect for our land as our mother .