Singapore sentence 20yr old to hang
-
Originally posted by dcx:
ya..i know tat..
So then.... why are you equating cannabis to paracetamol?
And don't get me started about how paracetamol is lethal at high doses.... please, virtually any kind of medication is lethal above a certain dosage.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Did I say that it is derived from marijuana? Don't get too damn clever for yourself because frankly, it looks fucking stupid.
I'll return the insult: please don't tell me you think heroin doesn't come from a plant?
Go easy on him, Geddy.
I doubt he even realizes that ricin (one of the deadliest poisons known to man) comes from a plant as well.
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
So then.... why are you equating cannabis to paracetamol?
And don't get me started about how paracetamol is lethal at high doses.... please, virtually any kind of medication is lethal above a certain dosage.
You must have plenty of mecury in you to be the famous "magneto".
-
Seriously, theres no point quarreling over this sob. As if debating over him can bring him back to life.
Besides, by breaking the law of our land, no matter how stupid the law may be, he is disrespecting us Singaporeans. I don't give two hoots to the life of a foreigner who disrespect us.
-
.
-
break the law, get your punishment
if punishment is death
den bye bye
Laws are there for a reason.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Did I say that it is derived from marijuana? Don't get too damn clever for yourself because frankly, it looks fucking stupid.
I'll return the insult: please don't tell me you think heroin doesn't come from a plant?
Of course it does. So does ricin. Sorry, but your earlier posting really looked like you implied heroin came from marijuana. My apparent stupidity derived from your lousy wording.
-
LEGALISE MARIJUANA !
BAN ALCHOHOL AND CIGARETTES!!
-
Originally posted by webben:
Of course it does. So does ricin. Sorry, but your earlier posting really looked like you implied heroin came from marijuana. My apparent stupidity derived from your lousy wording.
Lousy wording? Did I say "heroin comes from marijuana"? If not, which orifice did you pull that absurd conclusion out of? Don't go trying to make it someone elses fault that you look like a dickhead - it was all your own doing and I'm not going to be left holding the bag for your cowardice, thank you very much.
Do yourself a favour and learn how to read instead of making things up and pretending to have any semblance of intellect.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Lousy wording? Did I say "heroin comes from marijuana"? If not, which orifice did you pull that absurd conclusion out of? Don't go trying to make it someone elses fault that you look like a dickhead - it was all your own doing and I'm not going to be left holding the bag for your cowardice, thank you very much.
Do yourself a favour and learn how to read instead of making things up and pretending to have any semblance of intellect.
Got your period? I asked you a question, 'Please don't tell me you think heroin is derived from marijuana?' You could've just answered, 'I meant it was derived from a plant'. Good day to you.
-
Originally posted by webben:
Got your period? I asked you a question, 'Please don't tell me you think heroin is derived from marijuana?' You could've just answered, 'I meant it was derived from a plant'. Good day to you.
Have you got your period? I suspect you may have, because at the rate you're babbling, you must be bleeding so badly that there cannot possibly be any supply of oxygen to anything above your neck.
It was a stupid question to ask, specifically because you chose to pluck a non-existent "implication" out of your nether regions and impose it upon my post. It would be pointless to appease your stupidity, just as it would be pointless to to wish you a good day - in your addled state, you wouldn't know if it was all fucked up anyway.
-
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
and who are you to play god to allow some bastard who do stuff to destroy other people's life to live?
what about 40 year old people? they don't have mothers? at what age is it ok than? if you want to include the age in your argument, than let's debate at what age will it be ok.
Even more evidence to support the fact that you now almost nothing about that which you are so desperately arguing against (by arguing I mean posing rhetorical questions, which although shouldn't be considered a cohesive argument, is probably the closest you'll ever get). Please explain how marijuana destroys lives. It's non-addictive, has never directly killed anyone, does not incite violence and doesn't cause cancer. So how does it destroy lives?
Please learn at least something about the drug before blindly opposing it for god knows what reason.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
and who are you to play god to allow some bastard who do stuff to destroy other people's life to live?
what about 40 year old people? they don't have mothers? at what age is it ok than? if you want to include the age in your argument, than let's debate at what age will it be ok.
You are a dumbass narrow minded cunt man.
Cheers mate :>
-
Originally posted by sand king:
Hang the bastard. If people keep asking to be spared, everyone will start doing the samething when getting caught.
They should hang, draw and quarter these bottom feeders. Never spare drug dealers the gallow.
cool man.there is a difference btw cannabis & heroin if all have to hang.. like hanging cloth wat do u think will happen?
Law is there not to be break but not eveything hang
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
Because without a trial, then it is not justice.
Even if it may seem that the man's guilt is obvious, you still need a trial to determine unambiguously that he truly is guilty. For all you know he may well have left his luggage unlocked and unattended for a while and some shady fella may slip drugs into the luggage. The trial process is there to determine whether or not that is the case.
That's the whole purpose of the trial - to truly determine the guilt or innocence of a person. So if someone chucked a pack of cannabis into your luggage, at least the trial gives you the chance to fight back on that defence!
So dude, what is justice? Sorry to get philosophical, but this is an important question.
What is justice when the punishment when the guilt has already been determined? There were precedent cases where the Judge was not totally convinced that the trafficker was truly aware that he was trafficking drugs but was hanged anyway because the "law" demanded it. In these cases, ambiguity of guilt = guilt. Not innoncence. That is justice?
Only one thing can save a person's ass when it comes to this. That is, for CNB to testify that the "purity" of the drugs carried is considered to be below the requirements for the death penalty.
-
Shotgun, what do law and justice have to do with each other?
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
Shotgun, what do law and justice have to do with each other?
You asking me that in terms of philosophy or what?
Off the top of my head, ideally speaking, the legal system should be one that serves the cause of Justice. Then that leaves only the matter interpreting Justice. The Laws should then reflect such an understanding of what Justice is, in that society.
There is a problem with the current drug laws that reverses the "innoncent until proven guilty". This to me is a double standard. It is not "fair" that trafficking cases should be met with the "guilty until proven innoncent" standard, resulting in a mandatory death penalty, regardless of circumstance.
I guess what I'm saying is that, we don't achieve Justice by just being Kantian about laws. The laws themselves ought to be fair, and not holding double standards on people. Justice cannot hold one set of scales for one type of case, and another set of scales for another type. There is something fundamentally wrong with a mandatory death penalty, coupled with a guitly until proven innoncent approach.
-
Forget philosophy, Shotgun. Let's talk reality here.
I'm not sure how many lawyers you know, but if you knew a few you could well realise that they're not the brightest creatures at the best of times. As such, courts tend to operate by a "bullshit baffles brains" policy. As H L Mencken once said, "A court of law is a place in which Jesus Christ and Judas Iscariot would be treated as equals - with betting odds slightly in favour of Judas".
That being the case, I'd recommend saving a lot of heartbreak by not trying to find and justify any association whatsoever between law and justice. To be blunt, they're simply not smart enough to be capable of handling justice. What they're reduced to is a wiggling about in a straightjacket comprising of a rigid set of rules dressed up in the pomp of the legal profession.
In this case, it comes down to answering a simple question: "Was this fellow found with a sufficient quantity of drugs for the death sentence to be passed?", and the answer is yes. Beyond that, asking a judge or a lawyer to contemplate anything to do with the case is as good as asking a housefly to perform algebra.
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:
In this case, it comes down to answering a simple question: "Was this fellow found with a sufficient quantity of drugs for the death sentence to be passed?", and the answer is yes.
Beyond that, asking a judge or a lawyer to contemplate anything to do with the case is as good as asking a housefly to perform algebra.
Sigh......think the above was lost of those who are 'speaking out' here or hoping to ignore this portion. -
Originally posted by Shotgun:
The laws themselves ought to be fair, and not holding double standards on people. Justice cannot hold one set of scales for one type of case, and another set of scales for another type. There is something fundamentally wrong with a mandatory death penalty, coupled with a guitly until proven innoncent approach.
You are confusing Humanity with Justice. Or what has to be placed on the scales with.What you are describing is putting humanity on a scale against a penalty for death.
And Justice is holding the scale weighing it out.
And since Justice is blind. And it weights out evenly for Justice. Whats errrmmm......bunching up your panties for?
-
Originally posted by viciouskitty74:
Sigh......think the above was lost of those who are 'speaking out' here or hoping to ignore this portion.Well VK, as a cop you'd probably have firsthand knowledge about how dumb the system really is. Unfortunately, television tends to portray courts as places where thinking actually takes place.
-
Oei oei.....dont mention hobbies!
-
Originally posted by gUms:
You are a dumbass narrow minded cunt man.
Cheers mate :>
and you are a stupid asshole bleeding through your vagina.
Have a nice day Faggot
-
Originally posted by jondizzle foshizzle:
Even more evidence to support the fact that you now almost nothing about that which you are so desperately arguing against (by arguing I mean posing rhetorical questions, which although shouldn't be considered a cohesive argument, is probably the closest you'll ever get). Please explain how marijuana destroys lives. It's non-addictive, has never directly killed anyone, does not incite violence and doesn't cause cancer. So how does it destroy lives?
Please learn at least something about the drug before blindly opposing it for god knows what reason.
your argument is that it does not kill anyone directly. Did my argument include it killing anyone directly? Get a grip on what the debate is about. Is the people high on drugs and jumping out of 20 storey buildings classified as dying from direct consumption of drugs?
Marijuana cost money and is addictive==> people need more of it over time==> you are stupid and cannot do your job properly ifyou are high==> you get fired==> you do harmful things to get money==>you introduce marijuana to other people.
the cycle goes on. Please learn about marijuana before posting. your blind support is making me sick.