Singapore sentence 20yr old to hang
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Then who said it is justified?
History.
Look back to any ancient civilization and tell me which one don't have death penalty. It got out of hand in some cases when the authority abused the power, and thus it gained stigma as inhumane and what nots. But as long as no abuse is apparent, than it is justified.
If there is no cause to abolished it than let it be so. If there is cause to abolish stuff that have such a long history, such as slavery, than abolish it.
-
Game over for him...
-
Originally posted by webben:
I believe it would make no difference and that the personal risk to the users' lives and freedom is already an effective dampener on demand. There's just too much personal risk to even consider taking drugs in Singapore, for the vast majority of rational Singaporeans.
A fantastic first step would be stop supporting the masterminds: http://www.singapore-window.org/1020naus.htm . It's utterly pointless to hang misled 20 year-olds while doing high-level business with the source.
Who made you God? So you'd kill your child if your HDB flat was full? Does the US' war atrocities somehow justify Singapore's actions?
So you swallowed everything that is written in that biased piece of diatribe against the government? :) They should bring evidence and make their allegations instead of hiding behind the mask of anonymity.
Nobody made me God but God made me a Singaporean and I have a right to decide how our laws should be.
Singapore's location makes it convenient for drug traffickers. Continue to hang traffickers regardless of their sex, age and nationality and we will send a clear message to drug traffickers (and I agree there will always be traffickers): whatever you do, stay away from Singapore!
-
Look back to any ancient civilization and tell me which one don't have death penalty. It got out of hand in some cases when the authority abused the power, and thus it gained stigma as inhumane and what nots. But as long as no abuse is apparent, than it is justified.
If there is no cause to abolished it than let it be so. If there is cause to abolish stuff that have such a long history, such as slavery, than abolish it.
So, your reasoning is because of long practice, death penalty is justified?
What is the history of death penalty for drug offences?
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
So, your reasoning is because of long practice, death penalty is justified?
What is the history of death penalty for drug offences?
no.
the resoning is for you to say why death penalty is not justified, not for me to justified the death penalty.
-
I support death penalty.
But for drug offenses at young age, I think is too harsh.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
I support death penalty.
But for drug offenses at young age, I think is too harsh.
ok. than set your limits of how young than is not harsh.
easier to do it that way.
-
he shud have done it when he was younger.
-
they should just OD him with those drugs.
-
ok. than set your limits of how young than is not harsh.
Not sure.
Must study the issue more carefully.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Not sure.
Must study the issue more carefully.
Ok.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
so... if the death penalty is removed, the drug supply will remain the same?
you are right in the sense that getting to the root of the problem is to get the mastermind. but that is kind of hard. the other way is to make sure that everybody is damn scared to work for the mastermind, ain't it?
keeping scums in prison and waste taxpayer's money... just let them die.
maybe you will prefer a first world country like america who is more humane. like their invasion of another country, torturing of prisoner of war...
or like britain, who have too many convicts in jail, and have to release them early to make more room repeatedly...
x2. In the most ideal case, we grab the big fish and make an example out of him.
However, since it's so damn difficult to do that, we grab the small fish and scare all the other small fish away from working for the big fish.
As much as I feel that the death penalty for smugglers is harsh, I have to say that it has, for the most part, worked as a deterrent for smart people. Most people smart enough to think for themselves would be able to figure out that bringing drugs into Singapore => death penalty => not worth the risk.
Unfortunately, there are still stupid idiots out there who cannot see the logic, and are willing to risk their life for $$$. Lots of people have been in desperate situations as well, but not all of them turned to drug smuggling.
If you don't like Singapore's laws with regards to drugs, then don't bring drugs here. Simple as that.
If there is any tragedy in this story, then it is that the smuggler was just too stupid to understand something so logical.
-
I have two problems with the death penalty for drugs.
1. The mandatory death penalty ignores ALL mitigating factors. In particular, the assumption of intent. If you are caught with more than 15 grams of heroin then the law assumes that you *are* a drug courier. There is no way to argue that it's for personal use as the charge has been automatically laid. Not even the judge can over-rule this assumption.
Worse, being ignorant of what you're carrying is not taken into consideration. Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi was hanged in 2007 in spite of the judge having doubts that he even knew he was carrying heroin. That, in my personal belief, is just wrong. The law should not work on assumptions of intent.
2. I don't believe killing the couriers will solve anything. There is an endless supply of ignorant, stupid or desperate people to bring the drugs in. Hanging a person in order to keep Singapore drug-free when it doesn't actually do so is disingenuous.
-
Originally posted by webben:
I have two problems with the death penalty for drugs.
1. The mandatory death penalty ignores ALL mitigating factors. In particular, the assumption of intent. If you are caught with more than 15 grams of heroin then the law assumes that you *are* a drug courier. There is no way to argue that it's for personal use as the charge has been automatically laid. Not even the judge can over-rule this assumption.
Worse, being ignorant of what you're carrying is not taken into consideration. Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi was hanged in 2007 in spite of the judge having doubts that he even knew he was carrying heroin. That, in my personal belief, is just wrong. The law should not work on assumptions of intent.
2. I don't believe killing the couriers will solve anything. There is an endless supply of ignorant, stupid or desperate people to bring the drugs in. Hanging a person in order to keep Singapore drug-free when it doesn't actually do so is disingenuous.
1. when caught with more than 15 grams of heroin, EVERYONE will say it is for personal use.
2. killing the couriers will deter other people from becoming couriers. It cannot solve things as completely as getting the mastermind. But the deterence is there. Saying that it doesn't help is... presumptious.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
and who is god?
maybe according to poh, it's gopalan nair...and maybe according to andy-boy, it's csj...
.... just kiddin'
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
So, your reasoning is because of long practice, death penalty is justified?
What is the history of death penalty for drug offences?
so.... what's your solution, if not the death penalty????counselling????
if the majority of singaporeans feel that death penalty is justifiable, what does that make your stand????
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
1. when caught with more than 15 grams of heroin, EVERYONE will say it is for personal use.
Quite likely, but the veracity can be determined by investigations, witness testimony and judges who are free to do perform their jobs properly.
-
can we not hang him?
any other human way to end his life?
-
n1, gg.
-
Originally posted by webben:
Quite likely, but the veracity can be determined by investigations, witness testimony and judges who are free to do perform their jobs properly.
these folks.... who bring stuff into the country.... are retarded??? not aware that in many parts of the world, bringing in drugs is illegal???yeah right.....!
-
Originally posted by zaxis:
can we not hang him?
any other human way to end his life?
errrr... maybe get andrewpkyap to bore him to death..... -
I cannot tolerate this barbarism any longer. Those of you who agree with sentencing this man to death are either in support of Singapore's oppressive laws or are severely misinformed. Cannabis is a harmless drug, it is an unhealthy Big Mac compared to alcohol and tobacco. Why it is still illegal is beyond me but hopefully that would change as there have been talks about Obama possibly legalising marijuana and perhaps the rest of the world will follow suit if the U.S. takes a stand against this outdated law founded on corporatism and racism.
Drugs may ruin lives but it should be the individual's choice who he or she wishes to live his/her life. The government should have no say in it, it may not be entirely healthy but you don't see people being prosecuted for eating too much McDonald's. This goes beyond the argument of corporal punishment or the death penalty, this is an affront to individual freedom and a step towards complete totalitarianism.
-
Im very sad about how my fellow singaporeans think , u guys support the hanging of a 20yr old kid??? and for marijuana ? do you guys even know anything about marijuana and also know how young is 20 yrs old?
-
Take your chance. There is money in it.
And if you succeed once, try it again.
But if you get caught.....well...
-
Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:
I cannot tolerate this barbarism any longer. Those of you who agree with sentencing this man to death are either in support of Singapore's oppressive laws or are severely misinformed. Cannabis is a harmless drug, it is an unhealthy Big Mac compared to alcohol and tobacco. Why it is still illegal is beyond me but hopefully that would change as there have been talks about Obama possibly legalising marijuana and perhaps the rest of the world will follow suit if the U.S. takes a stand against this outdated law founded on corporatism and racism.
Drugs may ruin lives but it should be the individual's choice who he or she wishes to live his/her life. The government should have no say in it, it may not be entirely healthy but you don't see people being prosecuted for eating too much McDonald's. This goes beyond the argument of corporal punishment or the death penalty, this is an affront to individual freedom and a step towards complete totalitarianism.
Talks of Obama legalizing marijuana? so what? And I doubt it, give me some source indicating that.
It is definitely legal in Netherland, does that mean we should follow them?
drunk people are irritating. We can still deal with them as long as they don't do incredibly stupid things. Drug addicts are harmful. If they stay one corner and smoke their weed, no one will really bother with them. But more likely than not, they are unemployed because their addiction makes them very inefficient at their job, as they are very stoned.
And they are so addicted they they will do stupid and harmful things. Like rob a bank, or deal drugs to other people, in order to get some drugs.
It is evident that drugs and it's withdrawal effects is harmful to society. Very harmful, more than that of macdonald's and smoking and alcohol.
If you want to fight for individual freedom and step away from totalitarism, go fight for the rights of gay people or something. arguing in favour of drugs is not the way.