singapore No.1 in EXECUTIONS
-
Originally posted by pikamaster:
always using sweeping labels to generalise things u do not adequately understand... is it possible, that one is able to embrace several different set of ideals because no one set is comprehensive or adequate in explaining the world around us? and your blind advocacy of one fixed set of ideals against all other alternatives in fact, blinds u to all other possibilities?
...THOSE, you are influenced by teh worst "ism" of all- CONSERVATISM.
i approve of the death penalty. but that doesn't mean that i take the conservative stance on other issues. and since u don't know my stance on other issues, what basis do u have to apply this label unconditionally to me?n no, i'm not going to take it out on the rest of the 3 million SIngaporeans... i am talking about the (cold) structures that rule our lives and the all-too pervasive mindsets. n I am saying that these have to change in order to better society.
the "cold structures" that rules our lives seems a very vague and general term to use. what exactly are u talking about??
change "all too pervasive mindsets" ? easier said then done... especially when u don't even hard an argument compelling enough to sway us bunch of idle chatters here.b4 you judge pple, think carefully. in what way are you justified to say that my readings are shallow? U don't even know what I read! n you say I have "no tangible experience". n you have any? r u a police officer, a spy or ISD agent or a policeman or a judge? If you are neither, i suggest u dun make such grand assertions.
u should know that if i was any of the latter, i can't reveal that in a public forum but what i do is inconsequential. i don't care what u are either.
but u wanna argue your point? be prepared to have them dissected and scrutinised. don't stomp your feet and complain that u're being bullied when pple find your arguments inadequate, which they are.My! when did I ever say that I tolerate a murderer's bahviour? .....
i find your "method of punishment" soft and unsuitable for this context. punishment is punishment. what is "humane" punishment anyway? the very notion that the state enforces its authority by inflicting pain, or having mastery over an individual's physical self is one that is as old as human civilization itself.
some will undoubtably find such state sponsored violence repulsive and u want change? u're not fighting me for change. u are fighting against a very fundamental aspect of human civilization.
u are fighting against the perception that punishment is inflicted as as retribution for an unlawful act. the forms of punishment as we now know of: incarceration, flogging, death. this perception also implies that: it only happens if u're a crook and u had it coming and it deters crime.
this is probably part of what u mean by "all too pervasive mindset" and it won't change overnight. not because u say so anyway. so why get personal with me? problem's not with me... its with the other half of the world that doesn't think like you.
sure, there's an emerging alternative... but can u sell it? i sure don't buy it...its like the difference between "gainfully unemployed" and "retrenched". Call a spade a spade. Don't come up with fancy nicknames for this things.
who's giving fancy names now? punishment is punishment. "humane" punishment? please... call a noose a noose.and, do you know the song, "Heal teh World"? I think it is a good song, whether or n0ot the singer is now in jail or not. You should download it and listen. There is much injustice in the world. We must strive our best to remove it.
i know the singer's a suspected child molester. won't even go into the legality of downloading music...
"remove injustice" ... and what is justice to you? a state of affairs where a convicted murderer escapes corporal punishment isn't justice to me.
if we're afraid that we might've gotten the wrong guy, then like i said before, it makes it all the more important that police work be effectively undertaken. nothing is foolproof. would u put your arm in a cast just 'cos u cut your finger? and u want to remove the death penalty and replace it with something that has no deterrent value, no certainty of success and very likely, serve no purpose other than to ease a few bleeding hearts' conscience? i'm not buying that... -
One of the many weaknesses of the Singapore Law is the legislated mandatory 4 stroke of the cane and 6 months jail to any House Owner - (a non-criminal), who dare fail to check clearly the correctness of immigration papers offered by any foreigners intending to be a tenant.
I am interested in the act u said above... where can i find more info about it ? -
Originally posted by Atobe:
while i do agree that the mandatory sentance is harsh, it should also be noted that since its implementation, it is indeed, VERY easy to check on a foreigner's immigration status through VERIFI
One of the many weaknesses of the Singapore Law is the legislated mandatory 4 stroke of the cane and 6 months jail to any House Owner - (a non-criminal), who dare fail to check clearly the correctness of immigration papers offered by any foreigners intending to be a tenant.
It could be you next, or me.
http://app.ica.gov.sg/index.asp
and i am a little sympathetic to this law because with the massive influx of foreign labour into Sg, it does raise certain social problems as well... not to be racist or over-generalise, but illegal immigrants can be a rather thorny issue to deal with... more so if they were to be involved in illegal activities.
Singaporeans need to be responsible and careful so that they don't end up sheltering individuals that might end up endangering themselves and their neighbours.
while the use of harsh laws to force HDB dwellers to undertake proper background check seems typical of gov't heavy handedness, i prefer to take a more constructive take on this issue: saving the skin on your buttocks is only a mouse click away...
so not to worry... won't kena beat backside as long as u cover it properly.
but overall, i'm with u on this... this law is overkill. -
Try reading from this site, and then research on the Law that require the Singapore Judge to perform his duty according to Legilsations, and not according to his training in dispensing of Justice.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I am interested in the act u said above... where can i find more info about it ?
Another robot in Singapore's well structed society.
The following is an extract from the Immigration Act - Chapter 133
You may wish to be directed to the third last paragraph from the bottom - which deals with the Employer of Illegal Immigrants, and not the Landlord.
Offences
57. —(1) Any person who —
(a) attempts unlawfully to enter Singapore in contravention of any provision of this Act, other than section 6 (1), or the regulations;
(aa) abets any person to enter Singapore in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the regulations;
(b) abets any person to leave Singapore in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the regulations;
(c) engages in the business or trade of conveying to Singapore in or on any vehicle, vessel, aircraft or train any person whom he knows or has reasonable grounds for believing is a prohibited immigrant;
(d) harbours any person who has acted in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the regulations;
(e) employs any person who has acted in contravention of section 6 (1), 15 or 36 or the regulations;
(f) makes or causes to be made any false report, false statement or false representation in connection with any obligation imposed by the provisions of this Act or the regulations;
(g) resists or obstructs, actively or passively, any immigration officer in the execution of his duty;
(h) without lawful excuse hinders or obstructs any removal under the provisions of this Act;
(i) gives, sells or parts with possession of any entry or re-entry permit, pass or certificate in order that it may be used in contravention of paragraph (j);
(j) uses any entry or re-entry permit, pass or certificate issued to any other person as if it had been lawfully issued to himself;
(k) by making a false statement obtains or attempts to obtain an entry or re-entry permit, pass or certificate for himself or for any other person;
(l) uses or without lawful authority has in his possession any forged, unlawfully altered or irregular entry or re-entry permit, pass or certificate or other document issued under this Act or the regulations, or any permit, pass or certificate or other document so issued on which any endorsement has been forged or unlawfully altered; or
(m) fails to comply with any order made under section 31A (1) or (4),
shall be guilty of an offence and —
(i) in the case of an offence under paragraph (a), shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years and shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding $4,000;
(ia) in the case of an offence under paragraph (aa), shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 6 months and not more than 2 years, and —
(A) where the offence is abetted within the meaning of section 107(b) or (c) of the Penal Code (Cap.224) and the offence abetted is punishable with caning, shall also, subject to section 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.68 ), be punished with canning with not less than 3 strokes; or
(B) in any other case, shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding $6,000;
(ii) subject to subsection (1A), in the case of an offence under paragraph (b), (d) or (e), shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 6 months and not more than 2 years and shall also be liable to a fine not exceeding $6,000;
(iii) in the case of an offence under paragraph (c), shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than 2 years and not more than 5 years and shall also be punished, subject to section 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68 ), with caning with not less than 3 strokes;
(iv) in the case of an offence under paragraph (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k) or (l), shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $4,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both; and
(v) in the case of an offence under paragraph (m), shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.
[12/70; 60/73; 13/77; 35/84; 34/89; 38/93; S 22/89; S 227/95;41/95]
(1A) Where, in the case of any offence under subsection (1) (e), it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant has at the same time employed more than 5 immigration offenders, the defendant shall be punished, subject to section 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap. 68 ), with caning in addition to the punishment prescribed for that offence .
[41/95]
(1B) Where, by virtue of section 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap.68 ), the defendant referred to in subsection (1A) is not punishable with caning, he shall, in lieu of caning, be punished with a fine not exceeding $10,000.
(2) Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) (e) and that offence is proved to have been committed with the authority, consent or connivance of any director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate or any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
[35/84]
(2A) Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this Act for which a period of mandatory imprisonment or mandatory caning is prescribed, the body corporate shall, in lieu of imprisonment or caning, be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than $100,000 and not more than $200,000. -
Immigration Act: Guilty unless proven innocent
------------------------------------------------------------
Straits Times. April 7, 2000
By TAN OOI BOON
THE Immigration Act, which deals with the crime of harbouring and employing illegal immigrants, is tough because it presumes that an accused is already guilty unless he proves that he is innocent.
This is contrary to the criminal-law principle, which states that a person is normally presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
Such legal presumption is also applied to other laws. In the Misuse of Drugs Act, a person is presumed to be a trafficker if he is caught with the equivalent of 2 g of pure heroin or more.
In immigration cases, once an illegal immigrant is caught staying in a flat, the owner is deemed to have harboured the immigrant knowing that the tenant has no entry permit.
In previous cases, Chief Justice Yong Pung How had said that for the owner to prove his innocence, he had to show that he had actually checked the tenant's documents diligently.
This includes examining the tenants' passports and comparing the particulars with their work permits. The owners must also check with the tenants' employers if the documents are in order.
If such checks are carried out, lawyers say, the courts are less likely to find the owners guilty as they would have rebutted the presumption. "Even if the documents later turn out to be fake ones, the owners can escape if they have done the necessary checks because it could be that the forgery is so good that even the employers are fooled," said a lawyer.
But he noted that in most cases, the offenders either did not check the documents at all or conducted only a cursory check.
CJ Yong has ruled that when employers or landlords make such checks, they must verify the documents personally and cannot ask others, such as employees or housing agents, to do it on their behalf.
If they are caught, they will go to jail, not the negligent employee or agent.
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000407s1.htm
Sorry, you must go to jail: Judge to deacon
------------------------------------------------------------
Straits Times. April 7, 2000
By ELENA CHONG
Mandatory penalty means deacon can't be spared jail even though he rented flat to illegal immigrants unwittingly
VERY sorry, but nothing can be done. You have to go to jail.
This was Chief Justice Yong Pung How's message yesterday to a church deacon who had broken Singapore's tough laws on harbouring illegal immigrants.
A jail term is mandatory, and the minimum period is six months.
Seow Boon Wah, 43, from the Baptist Fellowship Church in Serangoon Gardens, had rented out a flat in Tiong Bahru to immigration offenders unwittingly.
Last October, a district court heard that in March last year, he had used a housing agent, Mr Desmond Chia, to get three tenants for his mother's flat in Bo Bo Tan Gardens in Chay Yan Street.
He had then met the trio and Mr Chia had asked for their permits. One of the would-be tenants showed a high-quality forged work permit; the other, an employment pass without a photograph; and the third, a valid pass without a photograph.
In April, when Seow went to collect rent, he was handed photocopies of two work permits, which he glanced at before leaving.
When the flat was raided in May, the immigration offenders were arrested.
Seow, who has three children, was convicted in November of harbouring them and sentenced to seven months' jail.
In appealing against both the conviction and sentence, Seow's lawyer, Mr Kirpal Singh, said a proper tenancy agreement had been signed.
But the CJ felt this was irrelevant: "The main point is -- was there sufficient diligence in determining the characters of the tenants?
"That is the entire case. Parliament has been very strict on this."
For instance, people must make several checks on prospective tenants, such as their original passes or permits -- these must be genuine and must be compared with their passports.
The would-be tenants' employers and the authorities must also be contacted for checks.
In Seow's case, he checked only the permit and passes.
"I think it is necessary for them to show that they took every precaution," said the CJ.
"I know it is very very strict. It pains me to have to dismiss the appeal on this basis, but the law there is so strict."
He noted that once someone employs or shelters an immigration offender, he would have to go to "the ends of the earth" to prove his innocence.
"There is almost absolute liability. The law is so strict. I feel sorry for the people who are charged and convicted," he said.
Mr Kirpal Singh said that in Seow's case, there were no aggravating factors to justify seven months' jail.
But the CJ said that unless it was "manifestly excessive", he could not cut it to six months.
"I will make myself a laughing stock. I am very sorry," he said.
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw00/000407st.htm -
So much for justice... as if we had any to begin with.
-
Haiz..
>shake head< -
why is it "justice" to you? and why don't we have any? were u the victim of a gov't sponsored abduction? we u brutally beaten and left for dead in a ditch? did u find yourself framed for a crime u didn't commit upon your return? did u find yourself placed before a compliant court and convicted based on facricated evidence? were u hanged as a result???Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:So much for justice... as if we had any to begin with.
this place isn't perfect, but do people think before they make sweeping judgements like the one above, or do they just say it because its fun to diss everything about this country?
but u know what's real? security. u don't get mugged when u go out, you don't have to worry about pple noticing that u're wearing an expensive watch, u don't have to pay off thugs to operate a business (haha... well, ok... income tax... but thats not quite the same...) -
before justice , i would like to have the right to walk around without getting stabOriginally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:So much for justice... as if we had any to begin with.
-
fine, i'll agree with you on the security bit.we dun haf to worry abt pple noticing you wear an expensive watch because fo our strict laws that stop theft. and yet, SIgnaporeans are always reminded byt eh police to walk with their bags and handbags facing away from teh roads, students are advised not to bring "branded" stuff to school. If there's nothing to worry, then why always this incessant pratling?Originally posted by CX:why is it "justice" to you? and why don't we have any? were u the victim of a gov't sponsored abduction? we u brutally beaten and left for dead in a ditch? did u find yourself framed for a crime u didn't commit upon your return? did u find yourself placed before a compliant court and convicted based on facricated evidence? were u hanged as a result???
this place isn't perfect, but do people think before they make sweeping judgements like the one above, or do they just say it because its fun to diss everything about this country?
but u know what's real? security. u don't get mugged when u go out, you don't have to worry about pple noticing that u're wearing an expensive watch, u don't have to pay off thugs to operate a business (haha... well, ok... income tax... but thats not quite the same...)
fine, you dun need to pay off thugs to operate a business, that one i'll give you.
you do have to worry however, about what you say despite what govt officials say about society being open and blablabla. that's right, we have security in Signapore, where a great large portion of the "security" goes to our ministers :financial security, social security (WHs get to transfer schools if they cannot cope with Sg's education system), health security (remmeber the mi.litary Whs?) etc. on the other hand, civilians don't have THAT . if what you say happens to rub the wrong way, ur in BIG trouble. oh, n u have to worry abt making money if u do business.
the pikamaster -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
a car is obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross the road when approaching a zebra crossing. does that mean that u shouldn't look both ways before crossing the road?
..... If there's nothing to worry, then why always this incessant pratling?
law and order exists because of a sustained effort by all levels of society at large: to keep ourselves safe, to follow rules, as well as to enforce penalties. how many times do u have to piss all over yourself before someone tells u to hold your prick out when u pee?fine, you dun need to pay off thugs to operate a business, that one i'll give you.
do u get hanged for talking?
you do have to worry however, about what you say despite what govt officials say about society being open and blablabla. that's right, we have security in Signapore, where a great large portion of the "security" goes to our ministers :financial security, social security (WHs get to transfer schools if they cannot cope with Sg's education system), health security (remmeber the mi.litary Whs?) etc. on the other hand, civilians don't have THAT . if what you say happens to rub the wrong way, ur in BIG trouble. oh, n u have to worry abt making money if u do business. -
hey, im deviating a bit, ok? not juz talking abt the Death penalty...Originally posted by CX:do u get hanged for talking? -
CX,
I see it is futile for me to carry on my effort in persuading you that teh Death penalty for urderers is wrong. BUT I will not give up in persuading you that the Death penalty for Drug Trafficking is wrong. and now , i have some evidence, since you claim i make sweeping generalizations:;
"The eradication of the supply of drugs is important but equally important is the alleviation of social conditions that encourage would-be traffickers or addicts. The socially excluded young and poor school dropouts are the most affected and drug addictions are disproportionately high among males with poor education... Are we assisting the socially excluded to reintegrate into society or are we disposing them off [sic] as rejects?" (3
"You would no doubt appreciate the harm to society that is brought about by the activities of these drug traffickers whose actions, more often than not, lead to the indiscriminate loss of life. In that sense, they are no better than murderers and serial killers." Letter to an Amnesty International member from the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Singapore in March 1997.
"It is never the real traffickers who are caught. The ones who are caught and hanged are often poor, desperate people, who are being made use of. By hanging them, we are helping to perpetuate the plan of the real traffickers who are very smart. They use people they can afford to lose to carry the drugs for them. So if we carry on with the death penalty, they will get away and the root of the problem is never really solved." A Singaporean lawyer, quoted in the New Paper, 17 June 2001.
remember the scenario i described to you?
Shop assistant executed for drug trafficking: Poon Yuen-chung from Hong Kong
the hopeful pikamaster
Poon Yuen-chung, a shop assistant from Hong Kong, was only 18 years old when she and her 17-year-old friend, Lam Hoi-ka were arrested at Changi Airport, Singapore, after arriving from Bangkok. The two girls had gone on holiday to Bangkok after telling their parents they were going on a local camping trip. Airport officials found heroin hidden in a secret compartment in their luggage. Both girls denied any prior knowledge of the drugs and said they had been befriended by a Chinese couple in Bangkok who had taken them out to dinner and on sightseeing tours, and later bought suitcases for them. "My sister is a simple and naïve girl who can do foolish things sometimes", Poon Yuen-chung's sister later told the Sunday Morning Post, a Hong Kong newspaper. Despite appeals for clemency, Poon Yuen-chung was executed in April 1995. Her friend Lam Hoi-ka, however, was sentenced to life imprisonment as she was under 18 at the time of the offence. -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
then next time remember to keep your bags with you haven't anyone taught them to never to trust strangers easily, and who knows whether they're faking that excuse or not
CX,
I see it is futile for me to carry on my effort in persuading you that teh Death penalty for urderers is wrong. BUT I will not give up in persuading you that the Death penalty for Drug Trafficking is wrong. and now , i have some evidence, since you claim i make sweeping generalizations:;
"The eradication of the supply of drugs is important but equally important is the alleviation of social conditions that encourage would-be traffickers or addicts. The socially excluded young and poor school dropouts are the most affected and drug addictions are disproportionately high among males with poor education... Are we assisting the socially excluded to reintegrate into society or are we disposing them off [sic] as rejects?" (3
"You would no doubt appreciate the harm to society that is brought about by the activities of these drug traffickers whose actions, more often than not, lead to the indiscriminate loss of life. In that sense, they are no better than murderers and serial killers." Letter to an Amnesty International member from the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Singapore in March 1997.
"It is never the real traffickers who are caught. The ones who are caught and hanged are often poor, desperate people, who are being made use of. By hanging them, we are helping to perpetuate the plan of the real traffickers who are very smart. They use people they can afford to lose to carry the drugs for them. So if we carry on with the death penalty, they will get away and the root of the problem is never really solved." A Singaporean lawyer, quoted in the New Paper, 17 June 2001.
remember the scenario i described to you?
[b]Shop assistant executed for drug trafficking: Poon Yuen-chung from Hong Kong
the hopeful pikamaster[/b] -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
it is not futile if u can make me believe... and like many in the world, i long to, WANT to belive... but u need very compelling reasons...
[quote] I see it is futile for me to carry on my effort in persuading you that teh Death penalty for urderers is wrong. BUT I will not give up in persuading you that the Death penalty for Drug Trafficking is wrong. and now , i have some evidence, since you claim i make sweeping generalizations:;"It is never the real traffickers who are caught. The ones who are caught and hanged are often poor, desperate people, who are being made use of. By hanging them, we are helping to perpetuate the plan of the real traffickers who are very smart. They use people they can afford to lose to carry the drugs for them. So if we carry on with the death penalty, they will get away and the root of the problem is never really solved." A Singaporean lawyer, quoted in the New Paper, 17 June 2001.
that is not exactly accurate... u can afford to lose "people"... but every shipment of heroin, marijuana or whatever drug captured is a big blow to the pockets of the traffickers... don't pretend that 1, 5, or 10 million dollars worth of drugs in street value means nothing to the druglords and that they can "afford to lose" that kind of money over the long run.
let us not forget also, that these traffickers, be they desperate or made use of, or otherwise, are willing collaborators well acquainted with the risks involved. we've set the penalties, we should stand by them and enforce them as a solid gesture of our resolve.
druglords know these "mules" are dispensable, but are we going to send them the message that we're going to go easy on the "mules"? so they can send more our way? oh please...
and it is pure urban wisdom to know that u do not help pple bring stuff past customs... and u do not leave your baggage unattended so that they can be doctored. and u least of all, DO NOT want to pick up a "lost" item across the immigration...
my previous job required me to fly at least once, or twice a year... and believe me... u DO make a conscious effort to guard your bags... cos u don't wanna lose it, and u don't wanna "gain" anything extra... -
unless i recall wrongly, the paragraph mentioned nothing about the drugs not having value. Seizing teh drugs is different from executing the trafficker. As long as you seize the drugs, whether or not you execute the traffickers, the druglord still loses money. And remeber, every traffciker left alive gives you one more chance to locate the druglord.Originally posted by CX:that is not exactly accurate... u can afford to lose "people"... but every shipment of heroin, marijuana or whatever drug captured is a big blow to the pockets of the traffickers... don't pretend that 1, 5, or 10 million dollars worth of drugs in street value means nothing to the druglords and that they can "afford to lose" that kind of money over the long run.
let us not forget also, that these traffickers, be they desperate or made use of, or otherwise, are willing collaborators well acquainted with the risks involved. we've set the penalties, we should stand by them and enforce them as a solid gesture of our resolve.
druglords know these "mules" are dispensable, but are we going to send them the message that we're going to go easy on the "mules"? so they can send more our way? oh please...
and it is pure urban wisdom to know that u do not help pple bring stuff past customs... and u do not leave your baggage unattended so that they can be doctored. and u least of all, DO NOT want to pick up a "lost" item across the immigration...
my previous job required me to fly at least once, or twice a year... and believe me... u DO make a conscious effort to guard your bags... cos u don't wanna lose it, and u don't wanna "gain" anything extra...
also remember that willingness out of desperation and willingness in a normal sense are two different things. Imagine a poor person in Cambodia who steals food because he or she is desperately hungry. surely, they are "well-acquainted with teh risks involved" but food outweighs all other concerns. SImilarly, drug addicts in THailand. Sure, they know they can get shot if they are caught with teh drugs, but to them the desire for teh drugs is too strong, and it pulls them on to get the drugs no matter the cost. These addicts are desperate for the drugs. of course, they are also "well-acquainted with the risk involved", since Thailand has made great publicity campaigns on the new penalty, but sheer desperation overrides desperation. oh, and the druglords can still snd more our way, whether or not we execute their little henchmen. After all, they ar enot getting hurt in any way. What happens to the traffickers is of no concern to teh lord- there is a limitless supply of recruits available.
I hate it when pple try to be smart-alecky and start throwing out things like "urban wisdom". SO you think that just because Ms Poon lacked this so-called "urban wisdom", she should be killed by the state for possessing some item she did not even know was possesed by her? You are beginning to sound even more cruel. THe world is unfair, so we should try to make it more fair.
If i had added in that Ms Poon was a down-syndrome girl (this is juz hypothetical), would you still harbour this same opinion?
you really seem to believe in injustice.
the dissappointed pikamaster -
Originally posted by pikamaster:
u mentioned before that the druglords are smart enough NOT to get caught and will use dispensable individuals to do their dirty work... and since the dispensable individuals won't know who the big boss is, but have wilfully brought in dope fully aware of the consequences, u're willing to just let it pass and give them a slap on the wrist?
... And remeber, every traffciker left alive gives you one more chance to locate the druglord.
so we won't get any useful info, and we if don't show our resolve against such "acts of desperation", u will see a lot more "desperate individuals" coming in with packets tied to their calf, their back, in packets wrapped in condoms and swallowed, etc etc... in whatever creative ways they can think of.also remember that willingness out of desperation and willingness in a normal sense are two different things. Imagine a poor person in Cambodia who steals food because he or she is desperately hungry. surely, they are "well-acquainted with teh risks involved" but food outweighs all other concerns. SImilarly, drug addicts in THailand. Sure, they know they can get shot if they are caught with teh drugs, but to them the desire for teh drugs is too strong, and it pulls them on to get the drugs no matter the cost.
i told u before. your refusal to understand the full complexity of the situation is sickening. an addict is an addict by choice. u can't force them to quit. they'll go right back to it. so the people who are taking part in this evil trade, are those who do it for profits, or to fuel their sickening addiction at the expense of a hundred, if not thousands who may die or suffer fates worse than deaths because of the noxious substance they smuggle in. i have no sympathy for this.These addicts are desperate for the drugs. of course, they are also "well-acquainted with the risk involved", since Thailand has made great publicity campaigns on the new penalty, but sheer desperation overrides desperation. oh, and the druglords can still snd more our way, whether or not we execute their little henchmen. After all, they ar enot getting hurt in any way. What happens to the traffickers is of no concern to teh lord- there is a limitless supply of recruits available.
if the druglords can afford to keep sending several kgs at a time to get captured since u acknowledged earlier that the drugs have value, but not the henchmen. my point is still that the position of the henchmen do not deserve sympathy.I hate it when pple try to be smart-alecky and start throwing out things like "urban wisdom". SO you think that just because Ms Poon lacked this so-called "urban wisdom", she should be killed by the state for possessing some item she did not even know was possesed by her? You are beginning to sound even more cruel. THe world is unfair, so we should try to make it more fair.
i do not have ALL the facts relating to this incident, but i kid u not when i tell u, that if u're on a guided tour, the tour guides are at pains to tell u NEVER carry things for pple past customs. carry your OWN luggage. don't offer to help, don't accept payment in exchange for helping, etc etc...
If i had added in that Ms Poon was a down-syndrome girl (this is juz hypothetical), would you still harbour this same opinion?
incidentally, if your subject was a retard, there would've been a stronger case for proving that the drugs do not belong to her. but because she isn't bringing it up serves no purpose. hypothetically, there is a simple solution for all of the world's problems. unfortunately, thats not how it works in reality.
and like i said, if u've flown around, you DO consciously take care of your own things... so u don't lose them and so u don't "gain" something.
i've heard stories of friends who've gone to moscow for a business trip... they brought laptops and a portable projector to give a presentation... those were designated hand luggage because they were expensive and fragile.
they left their stuff unattended for a few minutes and when they got back to Sg, they found a nice laptop-sized (and laptop weight) brick instead of their laptops... the projector fortunately was not stolen.
smart thieves... if the bags had just disappeared, there would've been a big fuss and they might've gotten caught... this way, u were halfway across the world before u realised your stuff was stolen...
but instead of focusing on a few cases of exceptional nature, why not focus on those that are more characteristic: mules engaged by traffickers to bring it... in the circumstances described above. addicts, greedy profiteers, irresponsible individuals getting rich and feeding their addiction at the expense of society.you really seem to believe in injustice.
on the contrary... i believe in no nonsense justice. -
ever wonder where the traffickers would go after they're released?Originally posted by pikamaster:unless i recall wrongly, the paragraph mentioned nothing about the drugs not having value. Seizing teh drugs is different from executing the trafficker. As long as you seize the drugs, whether or not you execute the traffickers, the druglord still loses money. And remeber, every traffciker left alive gives you one more chance to locate the druglord.
also remember that willingness out of desperation and willingness in a normal sense are two different things. Imagine a poor person in Cambodia who steals food because he or she is desperately hungry. surely, they are "well-acquainted with teh risks involved" but food outweighs all other concerns. SImilarly, drug addicts in THailand. Sure, they know they can get shot if they are caught with teh drugs, but to them the desire for teh drugs is too strong, and it pulls them on to get the drugs no matter the cost. These addicts are desperate for the drugs. of course, they are also "well-acquainted with the risk involved", since Thailand has made great publicity campaigns on the new penalty, but sheer desperation overrides desperation. oh, and the druglords can still snd more our way, whether or not we execute their little henchmen. After all, they ar enot getting hurt in any way. What happens to the traffickers is of no concern to teh lord- there is a limitless supply of recruits available.
most probably not to mac'donalds to work, what do you think are the chances of them going back to the same trade. since you have people who knows how strict singapore is and still wants to attempt this sort of stuff, there isn't really any reason not to hang them, since they cant control their own desire, why not we "control" it for them with death.
since you know the risk
you should pay the price
and as for catching druglords, if they would be that easy to catch they wouldn't have become druglords, all they would be are henchmen
u hate it when people try to be smart-alecky and start throwing out things like "urban wisdom"Originally posted by pikamaster:I hate it when pple try to be smart-alecky and start throwing out things like "urban wisdom". SO you think that just because Ms Poon lacked this so-called "urban wisdom", she should be killed by the state for possessing some item she did not even know was possesed by her? You are beginning to sound even more cruel. THe world is unfair, so we should try to make it more fair.
If i had added in that Ms Poon was a down-syndrome girl (this is juz hypothetical), would you still harbour this same opinion?
you really seem to believe in injustice.
the dissappointed pikamaster
and i hate idealistic idiots,god knows how many times i've gotten pissed off or messed up because of them.
do you know what would happen if you let people like poon go?
firstly we don't know if she's lying
secondly
how many people do you think would use the same stunt to escape,
and how many more would try to get their drugs in without the death penalty ?
as for your down-syndrome theory
ever heard of the phrase kill "one to warn a hundred"?
if you think this is unfair and reeks of injustice remember this
this world is unfair and it would never be fair
not all of us are born with a silver spoon in our mouths ,some don't even have parents to grow up with, if life's fair, we would all be flying around faster than a speeding bullet and richer than bill gates or we're all just equally poor -
Firstly, we don't know if she is lying. if you phrase it another way, we don't know if she is tellin gthe truth. I notice a common tendency for Asians to believe in hte "guilty till proven innocent" statement. ANyway, what are the police there for? They can investigate, try to find out details of this CHinese COuple and get the foreign government to hep them capture the trafficker or give them visas or sth.Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:u hate it when people try to be smart-alecky and start throwing out things like "urban wisdom"
and i hate idealistic idiots,god knows how many times i've gotten pissed off or messed up because of them.
do you know what would happen if you let people like poon go?
firstly we don't know if she's lying
secondly
how many people do you think would use the same stunt to escape,
and how many more would try to get their drugs in without the death penalty ?
as for your down-syndrome theory
ever heard of the phrase kill "one to warn a hundred"?
if you think this is unfair and reeks of injustice remember this
this world is unfair and it would never be fair
not all of us are born with a silver spoon in our mouths ,some don't even have parents to grow up with, if life's fair, we would all be flying around faster than a speeding bullet and richer than bill gates or we're all just equally poor
if i'm not wrong, the last time i heard the phrase "kill one to warn a hundred" was from the Communist manner, u noe, Stalin's Purges. It smacks much of cruelty. n the "down-syndrome" isn't a theory, i clearly stated it is hypothetical.
I also hate the statement: the world is unfair and it will never be fair. If CX calls my statments sweeping generalizations, then the above statement is the mother of all hasty generalizations, which makes it a fallacy. oF course, the world is unfair, but if we don't act to make it fairer, then it will never be fair. So our job as humans residing on this Earth is to make the unfair world fairer. In fact, this is one of the main aims of the UN. the UN would NEVER have been formed if nobody believed in teh concept of making an unfair world fairer, and that is also the premise for the UDHR.
Old food stinks, and from the look of it, rottting bread stinks the most!
the pikamaster -
it seems to be human nature to take the easy way out. As many prominent parties have pointed out, there is sth called reformative therapy, which nobody seems to take. Earlier in this thread, when i tried to suggest a method, i was laughed at and mocked at...but funnily nobody went on to suggest another method. Instead, all of you conservatives zoomed straight back at bootlicking the Death penalty.
ever wonder where the traffickers would go after they're released?
most probably not to mac'donalds to work, what do you think are the chances of them going back to the same trade. since you have people who knows how strict singapore is and still wants to attempt this sort of stuff, there isn't really any reason not to hang them, since they cant control their own desire, why not we "control" it for them with death.
since you know the risk
you should pay the price
and as for catching druglords, if they would be that easy to catch they wouldn't have become druglords, all they would be are henchmen
Anyway, like I said before, the druglords don't care a hoot about their henchmen, but they DO care about their drugs. So you hurt them as long as you take away their source of revenue. Whether you kill the henchmen or not is of no concern and probably won't raise any alarm bells in the Druglord.
Of course, it is not easy to catch the druglord. But that's the point of the police right? TO protect national security, no matter how hard it is to protect? SO the police should be responsible for hunting down the druglord.
the pikamaster -
I'm sure you have ehard of "Alcoholics ANonymous". How does one become an alcoholic? He/she becomes addicted to alcohol. Yes, you can say tha toriginally, it is he'she who wants to consume large amounts of alcohol and so on, but eventually ADDICTION IS NEVER BY CHOICE! they go right back to it, because the urge for teh drugs is too strong for their will to overcome. Since you like focusing on the general thing, i'll tell you that addiction is a demon that posseses a person (I read that out from a book) and possession is never by choice. Have sympathy for the addict, because he/she is a possesed freak!
told u before. your refusal to understand the full complexity of the situation is sickening. an addict is an addict by choice. u can't force them to quit. they'll go right back to it. so the people who are taking part in this evil trade, are those who do it for profits, or to fuel their sickening addiction at the expense of a hundred, if not thousands who may die or suffer fates worse than deaths because of the noxious substance they smuggle in. i have no sympathy for this.
the sympathetic pikamaster
an excerpt from a story of a member of aa...
Liquor ceased tob e a luxury; it became a necessity
http://www.aa.org/bigbookonline/en_BigBook_chapt1.pdf -
Oh dear. Never knew we have such idealist in this world. Nice to know that such naive ideas exist.Well, dun want to bother answering him. But his ideas certainly looks entertaining.lol.Oh dear, if only i can live in a world like his.
-
your problem is you belong to the generation that have this idea in your head that everything can be done with the press of a buttonOriginally posted by pikamaster:Firstly, we don't know if she is lying. if you phrase it another way, we don't know if she is tellin gthe truth. I notice a common tendency for Asians to believe in hte "guilty till proven innocent" statement. ANyway, what are the police there for? They can investigate, try to find out details of this CHinese COuple and get the foreign government to hep them capture the trafficker or give them visas or sth.
do you have any idea how the police works? let me tell you, this world is bigger than singapore, your man is not waiting next door for you to catch him, and what if its countries behind the drug supply? oh yeah , i suppose you can talk to them to make them give up all the money
let me ask you, in your whole life, have you ever known a friend who has never spoken one single lie to you, no matter how big or small?
if you don't know if anyone is lying , i suppose you would say, "what if they're not lying?" sorry to inform you this world doesn't work this way , its time to wake up, this isn't paradise
you can create your own utopia when its your turn to play god
UN? ha, do you know what the UN is doing right now? judging from past records which country did you see turning rich and powerful due to the UN? all they do is ask for money to support their officials who only know how to play tennis at 5 star hotels and the rest of the money is used to dump aid anyhow w\o making full use of itOriginally posted by pikamaster:if i'm not wrong, the last time i heard the phrase "kill one to warn a hundred" was from the Communist manner, u noe, Stalin's Purges. It smacks much of cruelty. n the "down-syndrome" isn't a theory, i clearly stated it is hypothetical.
I also hate the statement: the world is unfair and it will never be fair. If CX calls my statments sweeping generalizations, then the above statement is the mother of all hasty generalizations, which makes it a fallacy. oF course, the world is unfair, but if we don't act to make it fairer, then it will never be fair. So our job as humans residing on this Earth is to make the unfair world fairer. In fact, this is one of the main aims of the UN. the UN would NEVER have been formed if nobody believed in teh concept of making an unfair world fairer, and that is also the premise for the UDHR.
the pikamaster
and i've even heard of un officials who were suppose to stop human smuggling, helping the smugglers instead of stopping them
this is what the UN is ,a sprawling, bureaucracy-choked morass
UDHR? thats why you get protests with michael fay's situation ,even though that dic.khead got what he deserved
human rights can only go up to a certain extent, and not to the point where it goes beyond the individual and spilling all over the place
today you'll have people going for no executions, tomorrow gay marriages, next polygamy's ok, guns ok,this is all human nature its never going to change, you'll never have everything , when you let a man go, its not the man himself thats the problem,its the people who noticed what happened, i'm sure you would realised what would have happened if people actually get the idea that they can do it, can you imagine the floodgates that would open if we actually get rid of the death penalty?Old food stinks, and from the look of it, rottting bread stinks the most!
wow do rotting bread really stink the most!? [/b] -
oh, hi MR MOderator. Juz because you happen to have such "low" ideals doesn't mean everyone has to follow suit. unlike cold pragmatists, idealists at least give pple sth to work towards. my ideas are not naive. Your perception of thing are. Seen the newest post by M9orapOpinion? I agree with him fully that secularism has turned us all into cold, hard moral pragmatists, with morals based upon $$$, under the ubiquitious disguise of "security".Originally posted by CenturionMBT:Oh dear. Never knew we have such idealist in this world. Nice to know that such naive ideas exist.Well, dun want to bother answering him. But his ideas certainly looks entertaining.lol.Oh dear, if only i can live in a world like his.
the angered pikamaster -
the angered pikamaster<<----- i think he's angry?Originally posted by pikamaster:oh, hi MR MOderator. Juz because you happen to have such "low" ideals doesn't mean everyone has to follow suit. unlike cold pragmatists, idealists at least give pple sth to work towards. my ideas are not naive. Your perception of thing are. Seen the newest post by M9orapOpinion? I agree with him fully that secularism has turned us all into cold, hard moral pragmatists, with morals based upon $$$, under the ubiquitious disguise of "security".
the angered pikamaster
