The verdict’s out, and so is he. He doesn’t deserve pity this time around. Salman Khan’s arrogance could do with humility. If he can’t walk on with life after snubbing Vivek Oberoi for a harmless little issue, does he expect the public to forgive him for his crime on a scale as large as this?

Having suggested that, the sympathy these stars evoke is unavoidable and often understandable. It’s not about the educated or uneducated masses who can’t understand what’s ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. It’s simply that these stars are more visible than the victims, and end up getting more publicity.

Unfortunately, the law isn’t always well equipped to make the right decision, which doesn’t give the common man a lot of affection for it, so it’s the stars’ words against the others.

Besides, there are two sides to every coin: while the likes of Khan and Dutt might use their influence to get out of a tight spot, they also invite extra wrath from the judicial system who love to present ‘brand India’ to the world, the ‘democracy’ where everyone gets equal justice - as Chacko puts it, ‘My India sees all her citizens as the same’.

It’s important to understand the difference between the Khan case and the Dutt one. Dutt was accused of conspiring with the terrorists, and he got away for reasons already known, the final verdict suggesting that he’s not a terrorist, obviously buying his argument that the weapons he possessed was for self-defence. Of course, stacking up AK-47s at home isn’t the ideal Indian common man’s self-defence approach, so he gets arrested - which is fine - in the context of which six years seems a tad too long.

On the other hand, Salman Khan deserves every bit of punishment that he gets when the poaching is proved. Khan has done his bit of community service as well, and there is an obvious reform in place, but the star has been directly involved in nothing short of murder, and that calls for strong judgment.

What ought to be common between the Dutt and Khan case, however, is to bring focus on remedial action. Personally, I care little if either of them get out on bail or get convicted in jail - it neither brings back the dead nor does anything constructively. What I’d like to see as a sentence is these guys punished to help the community, maybe in a remote location within India, and a ban from their cinematic livelihood for a few years.

When you deny an artist from performing, it hurts him and hurts him bad. Considering that this punishment comes second only to snatching his freedom to walk free, it’s a worthwhile verdict when coupled with community service. Much as everyone want India’s citizens to be treated equally, these guys are special - they’re stars, they grab attention, they create an impact, and that - if anything - should be acknowledged and exploited.

2 mg pregnancy xanax

[33] online xanax in kentucky study of 13 normal men found that significantly increasing their online xanax in kentucky use (>6 hours each day for 5 days) caused a marked short-term reduction of sperm quality.