Send Ram Tiwary back to Singapore to hang
-
What wrong with the fear factor. I do believe it work well.Originally posted by pikamaster:Nelstar, there is always a problem with scaring tactics: do those obstacles provide challenges or obstacles? And unfortunately, this is a question not easily answered.
the pikamaster
How are u going to teach people to stop commitiing crime? there bond to be black sheep everything... in the end. i still believe Fear factor and the proper education help.
Like for the example of canning. many country say that it inhuman and it against the right of a human. but look at this way, we seldom see singapore begin vadalism as compare to american.. i do believe fear factor work in reducing crime rate.. -
Just because something is effective, it doesn't mean it's moral. Morality and humanness exist on different scales from effectiveness. And anyway we are talking about murder, not vandalismOriginally posted by zheshi:What wrong with the fear factor. I do believe it work well.
How are u going to teach people to stop commitiing crime? there bond to be black sheep everything... in the end. i still believe Fear factor and the proper education help.
Like for the example of canning. many country say that it inhuman and it against the right of a human. but look at this way, we seldom see singapore begin vadalism as compare to american.. i do believe fear factor work in reducing crime rate..
As for your Singapore-American example, perhaps it's also because Singaporeans treat face as more important than Americans. Always look for the hidden factors before concluding.
the pikamaster -
I have no objection to caning since it only inflicts physical pain. Hanging is questionable because the person who makes the journey to the scaffold has a 1% chance of being the wrong guy.Originally posted by zheshi:Like for the example of canning. many country say that it inhuman and it against the right of a human. but look at this way, we seldom see singapore begin vadalism as compare to american.. i do believe fear factor work in reducing crime rate.. -
The case is about appropriate punishment after the accused is convicted, it is not about the legal process. Proper justice must prevail before a judgement is made. Whether the accused is finally sentenced to death, life imprisonment, or aquitted, the process of justice must be the same.Originally posted by LazerLordz:It is a case of proper justice to be seen in the process of being done, not like the fast assumptions of guilt our "efficient" police force seem to trumpet so much.
That fine line of process and procedure distinguishes us from the monkeys.
Efficiency of the police is partly determined by the final verdict of the court that ascertain if the suspect is indeed guilty. any fast assumptions of guilt by police will become a waste of tax payers money if the wrong persons were prosecuted. An inefficient police force is a weak link in the whole process of justice.
It is not the fine line of process and procedure, but the absence of the whole process and procedure that distinguishes the monkeys from us. -
Who are the monkeys, in that case?Originally posted by sgdiehard:It is not the fine line of process and procedure, but the absence of the whole process and procedure that distinguishes the monkeys from us.
-
pikamaster,Originally posted by pikamaster:sgdiehard,
1) In order to say this, the elders have to be able to understand what the statement is saying, so ya they can understand "the Death Penalty is immoral; we need to scrap it." I'm talking about mere understanding, not about appreciation of the concept.
2) I have simply no idea where the idea of respect for elders comes in to this issue, so I'll try my best to make an educated guess. If you claim abolishing the Death Penalty is being disrespectful to Elders since they support the retentionist side, (and besides how sure are you that they support it?) then this argument is flawed. Because Respect does not equal concurring with everything the opposite party says.
the pikamaster
1) I believe the elders cannot understand and they will not appreciate the concept. To many of them who lived throught the 50s and the 60s where triads and gangs were ruling the ground, death penalty was certainly useful. Their question is whether the person deserves to be hanged. To them death penalty is the only deterant to gangsterism. What is so immoral about a law that protect the citizens from gangsters? Putting those convicted in jail for life, JIAK LIAO BI.
2) "What is so hard about telling our elders, "the Death Penalty is immoral, we should scrap it from our law" "- you dont tell the elders, you explain why is this immoral and why it should be scrapped. you don't give a statement and just expect them to understand.
"Do they require a uni degree in order to understand the statement?" - There were few uni degree holders in those days and a cambridge grade 9 is very lawa liao. Talking to them like that is a show of disrespect and you are likely to get this kind of answer, NIN PEH SI BO TAK CE, BEI HIAO, LI BE AN ZHUA? KNN.
In reality, do you talk to elders like that?
sgdiehard -
I know I am not, are you?Originally posted by iveco:Who are the monkeys, in that case? -
zheshi,Originally posted by zheshi:No i did not bother to read it.
anyway i just read it.what are u talking about? u are saying that the death sentence should be abolish..while i'm saying that it should stay..it do justice to the victim..
i refer to your above post as u say to get my ans, and i did not get the reply i wanted. so what with the let me refer you to my post above? Have u read your own post before replying to my?
I gave you ur answer.... I gave you the opinions of murder victims in that post which you "did not bother to read". The victims themselves feel it does not do justice, even if the person executed happened to be a terrorist.
Of course, if you are expecting an affirmation of your stand, then you won't get it.
the pikamaster -
ya lor moral and law are two different things wat. prostitution and gambling are immoral but we still got Singapore pools and Geylang wat. morality apply to individual while law protect the public and society.Originally posted by sgdiehard:pikamaster,
1) I believe the elders cannot understand and they will not appreciate the concept. To many of them who lived throught the 50s and the 60s where triads and gangs were ruling the ground, death penalty was certainly useful. Their question is whether the person deserves to be hanged. To them death penalty is the only deterant to gangsterism. What is so immoral about a law that protect the citizens from gangsters? Putting those convicted in jail for life, JIAK LIAO BI.
2) "What is so hard about telling our elders, "the Death Penalty is immoral, we should scrap it from our law" "- you dont tell the elders, you explain why is this immoral and why it should be scrapped. you don't give a statement and just expect them to understand.
"Do they require a uni degree in order to understand the statement?" - There were few uni degree holders in those days and a cambridge grade 9 is very lawa liao. Talking to them like that is a show of disrespect and you are likely to get this kind of answer, NIN PEH SI BO TAK CE, BEI HIAO, LI BE AN ZHUA? KNN.
In reality, do you talk to elders like that?
sgdiehard -
wtf singapore laws bended for murderer
Michael McCrea brought back to Singapore to face murder charges
Fugitive Michael McCrea, wanted for a double murder, was brought back to Singapore on Tuesday night.
Channel NewsAsia understands Singapore police officers had gone to Melbourne to bring him back.
The 46-year-old British businessman fled to Australia after the death of his driver Kho Nai Guan and the driver's girlfriend Laan Yah Ming in 2002.
McCrea is alleged to have strangled both of them.
Their decomposed bodies were found in an Orchard Towers car park five days later.
McCrae, who spent the last three years in a Melbourne jail, will face trial in Singapore, after he lost his fourth and final appeal against extradition to Singapore two weeks ago.
McCrea was extradited to Singapore on the condition he does not face the death penalty, if found guilty. - CNA/ir -
Heard of something called public morality? If there is no such thing, why is pornography banned?Originally posted by crazy monkey:ya lor moral and law are two different things wat. prostitution and gambling are immoral but we still got Singapore pools and Geylang wat. morality apply to individual while law protect the public and society. -
ya lor why har shd allow wat. we got RA movie oredi. i think they shd sell playboy in 7-Eleven as well.Originally posted by pikamaster:Heard of something called public morality? If there is no such thing, why is pornography banned?
-
sgdiehard,Originally posted by sgdiehard:pikamaster,
1) I believe the elders cannot understand and they will not appreciate the concept. To many of them who lived throught the 50s and the 60s where triads and gangs were ruling the ground, death penalty was certainly useful. Their question is whether the person deserves to be hanged. To them death penalty is the only deterant to gangsterism. What is so immoral about a law that protect the citizens from gangsters? Putting those convicted in jail for life, JIAK LIAO BI.
2) "What is so hard about telling our elders, "the Death Penalty is immoral, we should scrap it from our law" "- you dont tell the elders, you explain why is this immoral and why it should be scrapped. you don't give a statement and just expect them to understand.
"Do they require a uni degree in order to understand the statement?" - There were few uni degree holders in those days and a cambridge grade 9 is very lawa liao. Talking to them like that is a show of disrespect and you are likely to get this kind of answer, NIN PEH SI BO TAK CE, BEI HIAO, LI BE AN ZHUA? KNN.
In reality, do you talk to elders like that?
sgdiehard
1) I see, then tell them that there is this problem: We can never be 100% sure that the person deserves to be hanged i.e. that we got the right person or not. REN BU SHI SHI QUAN SHI MEI.
2) Tell them that, scrap it, then give the full explanation afterwards. That's btw how govt operate, don't u noe tt?
If you don't know it, u don't know how politics works.
3) My intention is not to be rude - and I'm talking to you, not them. What I'm merely saying is: you make it seem like they need to know abstract philosophies in order to understand the words " Down with the Death Penalty!" (or the like), and that is clearly not true. I'm basically saying that the vocabulary is simple enough for any commoner to understand, even an ITE graduate.
the pikamaster -
if not 100% sure then dun hang,Originally posted by pikamaster:sgdiehard,
1) I see, then tell them that there is this problem: We can never be 100% sure that the person deserves to be hanged i.e. that we got the right person or not. REN BU SHI SHI QUAN SHI MEI.
the pikamaster
if not 100% sure then dun cane,
if not 100% sure then dun jail,
if not 100% sure then dun fine,
then the law kumlan one -
pikamaster
runningismylife,
So we are allowed to manipulate animals since they're considered on a lower rung than man? Food for thought. Hmm
2) Animals are considered on a lower rung than man.
On a slightly different note, we distinguish animals from man by our greater cognitive ability, which can encompass our endowment of understanding morality and emotions. However, Ram Tiwary in his murder of the two Singaporeans have shown that he has knowingly forsaken this gift of nature. Can we then say he is
"no worst than an animal"? Going by your argument, he is on a lower rung than man, and hence we are allowed to do whatever we want with him? Maybe cook him? BBQ him? -
I think pikamaster meant that death is not a reversible state and the death penalty itself is irreversible.Originally posted by crazy monkey:if not 100% sure then dun hang,
if not 100% sure then dun cane,
if not 100% sure then dun jail,
if not 100% sure then dun fine,
then the law kumlan one
I only believe that people who were caught with drugs should not be hanged. It's not like they can't be framed. -
if cane there will be a scar also. if jail a person for 20 yrs how are you going to return his youth to him. i think pikamonster point is tat must be 100 % sure before carrying out a punishment.Originally posted by Nelstar:I think pikamaster meant that death is not a reversible state and the death penalty itself is irreversible.
I only believe that people who were caught with drugs should not be hanged. It's not like they can't be framed. -
Pikamaster,Originally posted by pikamaster:sgdiehard,
1) I see, then tell them that there is this problem: We can never be 100% sure that the person deserves to be hanged i.e. that we got the right person or not. REN BU SHI SHI QUAN SHI MEI.
2) Tell them that, scrap it, then give the full explanation afterwards. That's btw how govt operate, don't u noe tt? If you don't know it, u don't know how politics works.
3) My intention is not to be rude - and I'm talking to you, not them. What I'm merely saying is: you make it seem like they need to know abstract philosophies in order to understand the words " Down with the Death Penalty!" (or the like), and that is clearly not true. I'm basically saying that the vocabulary is simple enough for any commoner to understand, even an ITE graduate.
the pikamaster
1)It is not about 100% sure, if there is a little doubt, be it 0.1% that he did not kill with intention, the court would not sentence a suspect to death. It is not uncommon that many murder accused were convicted with manslaughter and escape death.
There is no SHI QUAN SHI MEI de ren in this world, but it doesn't mean that everybody can go around killing people. A better argument for them would be zhi cuo neng gai, shan mo da yan, give those who repent another chance, but do you see any sign of remorse in the smiling face of M McCrea?
2)You should tell the government people to scrape, not the elders, that's why they are paid their phenomenal salaries! Isn't that how singaporean respond? if you don't know, then you don't know the singaporean way then.
3)You are insulting the ITE graduate now!! With different upbringing and life style, words have different meaning to different people or may be to them death penalty may even be an acceptable evil for the good of the general society. Afterall, if you don't kill people, why worry about death penalty?
Sgdiehard -
LOL pikamaster got owned, n00b.
-
Hmm, the way you put it gives the impression of the comatose grandma from Goodbye Lenin. Wonder if you have seen the movie. I haven't but I read its review.Originally posted by sgdiehard:pikamaster,
1) I believe the elders cannot understand and they will not appreciate the concept. To many of them who lived throught the 50s and the 60s where triads and gangs were ruling the ground, death penalty was certainly useful. Their question is whether the person deserves to be hanged. To them death penalty is the only deterant to gangsterism. What is so immoral about a law that protect the citizens from gangsters? Putting those convicted in jail for life, JIAK LIAO BI.
The thing that matters is being forward-looking rather than nostalgic should be the way to go. -
Moderators,Originally posted by sgdiehard:Pikamaster,
1)It is not about 100% sure, if there is a little doubt, be it 0.1% that he did not kill with intention, the court would not sentence a suspect to death. It is not uncommon that many murder accused were convicted with manslaughter and escape death.
There is no SHI QUAN SHI MEI de ren in this world, but it doesn't mean that everybody can go around killing people. A better argument for them would be zhi cuo neng gai, shan mo da yan, give those who repent another chance, but do you see any sign of remorse in the smiling face of M McCrea?
2)You should tell the government people to scrape, not the elders, that's why they are paid their phenomenal salaries! Isn't that how singaporean respond? if you don't know, then you don't know the singaporean way then.
3)You are insulting the ITE graduate now!! With different upbringing and life style, words have different meaning to different people or may be to them death penalty may even be an acceptable evil for the good of the general society. Afterall, if you don't kill people, why worry about death penalty?
Sgdiehard
what the hell is wrong with the layout methods the site is using now. Suddenly, every page is shifted doen by half a page and the reply box has shrunk to 1/4 of a page, with the textbox that I typed this post in shrinking to less than 5% the total screen space. Has your CSS gone out of sync, or is this some mysterious bug with Firefox?
the irate pikamaster
Sgdiehard,
(it is very hard to type in a micro-sized textbox so bear with me if I make some typos or mis-quotations)
1) Mr McCrea might be happy for his extradition to Australia, but that doesn't mean he doesn't feel remorse for what he's done. He just don't show it on camera, tt's all.
2) Ya, I agree with you on your point. I think you misunderstood me.
3) I am? Oh, I did not intend to, sorry to any ITE grads out there.
However, it is true that the education system does not give ITE grads much chance to acquire academic knowledge - even under the recent reforms - so I'm merely speaking an objective truth. As far as I know, ITE is technical education.
No, I don't kill people, but I still dislike the Death Penalty because our practice of it hurts our public morality, something which is supposed to be part of our international image.
the (still abolitionist) pikamaster -
Come to think of it, Mike McCrea scored a victory over the Singapore justice system because we are unable to put him on the noose due to our undertaking to the Howard government in Canberra. It sent a message to would-be killers that they should come to Perth if they have killed someone in Singapore (or Malaysia) to avoid getting the full punishment from the legal systems back home. Precisely why Took Leng How is a retard.Originally posted by pikamaster:1) Mr McCrea might be happy for his extradition to Australia, but that doesn't mean he doesn't feel remorse for what he's done. He just don't show it on camera, tt's all. -
Originally posted by Nelstar:I think pikamaster meant that death is not a reversible state and the death penalty itself is irreversible.
I only believe that people who were caught with drugs should not be hanged. It's not like they can't be framed. 
Yay! Finally sth we both agree on!! -
if fine, can pay back money,Originally posted by crazy monkey:if not 100% sure then dun hang,
if not 100% sure then dun cane,
if not 100% sure then dun jail,
if not 100% sure then dun fine,
then the law kumlan one
if jail, can free man from jail and help him find job again, and physical scars remain permanently
Caning is cruel and unjudicial,
Death cannot be reversed if it is wrong. -
runningismylife,Originally posted by runningismylife:pikamaster
So we are allowed to manipulate animals since they're considered on a lower rung than man? Food for thought. Hmm
On a slightly different note, we distinguish animals from man by our greater cognitive ability, which can encompass our endowment of understanding morality and emotions. However, Ram Tiwary in his murder of the two Singaporeans have shown that he has knowingly forsaken this gift of nature. Can we then say he is
"no worst than an animal"? Going by your argument, he is on a lower rung than man, and hence we are allowed to do whatever we want with him? Maybe cook him? BBQ him?
you misunderstand my argument. It was purely about animals, not man. Ram Tiwary may not have forsaken his cognitive ability; he merely forgot about it in the heat of his anger.
the pikamaster