The rape and murder cases highlighted by the media recently had produced reactions which call for the amputation, open flogging or killing of the perpetrators.

But for what? If harsh punishments are to make people respect the law, what about the many other things which cause people's disrespect for the laws - from bad laws to highly selective law enforcement, from corrupt enforcers to even more corrupt law makers.

This is not an apology for perpetrators of rape-cum-murder crimes, heinous as they are, but to point out there are other crimes in the country which we need to consider with even more urgency and attention!

We needn't look further. Look at those developers who abandon their housings projects, running away with millions of hard earned ringgit belonging to house buyers. Have any such big shots been prosecuted for criminal breach of trust?

Many crony projects go through the privatisation and renationalisation process, costing the tax payers billions of ringgit. Has anyone been prosecuted for blatant theft of state coffers, if not criminal management? The list of seeming lawlessness goes on!

The loss and anguish experienced by citizens should not be downplayed in relation to victims to the rape-cum-murder crimes. If we create the worst punishments for rapist-cum-murderers, what do we do proportionally to those best described as rapists of laws?

If the harsh punishments are not expected to end the crimes, then rationally, we as a society should not hide behind those punishments and refuse to look into more relevant but complex means to contain such crimes.

Harsh punishments reflect at least two things: the first is desperation on the part of the government and society who lost sight of what to do with such crimes. It can be fairly said that the solutions - like how to improve rape laws and its enforcement, public education to challenge sexism - have been placed in the `too hard basket', and that has been the excuse against change.

Secondly, it reflects an authoritarian mind. Harsh punishments are used not because they are effective. It is in fact irrespective to reducing crimes - witness how drug trades flourish despite legal prohibitions and death penalties in many countries.

It does not escape observers that it is usually authoritarian governments who resort to the harshest punishments. As though to support this observation, China, Singapore, some some US states and some West Asian regimes frequently resort to the death penalty, while more rational and arguably more humanitarian European countries are increasingly doing away with the death penalty.

The idea, I suspect, is simply to instill fear into society in general, so as to produce compliant citizens. Would real rapists/murderers who had made up their mind be so deterred?

If an extra cut or blow to the criminal's physical body not effective in stopping crime, then have we as a society been repressing ourselves to far, not indulging in escapism and take opportunity to let loose our 'darker' instincts ?

There is more to stopping crime than imposing punishments. And there is only so much you can do with a caught criminal you can never catch up with the crime unless factors other than punishment is looked at open-mindedly, rationally, humanely and exhaustively.

Are Malaysians addressing gender crimes rationally, for the long run, or are we into simply satisfying our (quite selective) moral outrage, while irresponsibly leaving the society in its increasingly unsafe state for women?

And even more irresponsibly, are we letting in an even more repressive regime through the back door? This question is also for our new Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to answer, as he has a liberal and moderate image to upkeep.