i dont disagree. i just think its hard to convince me at least that allowing this guy to be hugged by his mother before his hanging is somehow detrimental to the message they'd send. but overall its their business. perhaps australia can have some say. but aside from them its their thing.
The key questions are 1) whether the capital punishment serves an absolute deterrent on drug trafficking in Singapore, 2) does the crime fit the punishment? The answer to 1) is obviously no. The law has been in effect for decades, but there are still plenty of people trying to sneak in with drugs. A country can always resort to applying death penalty to every kind of crime it deems punishable. It's one thing to hand out ultimate penalties to repeated offenders (which is understandable but still regrettable), it's a whole different matter to deprive the chance of a young first-timer to redeem himself to become a better citizen of the world. The indisputable fact still remains that up to this date the young man has not harmed anyone, yet the government decides to act as God to take the life away from him preemptively. The lack of humanity in its simplistic approach by the government is truly astounding. Next time you visit that sorry city-state, be fully aware the blood of many hapless souls flowing underneath the squeaky clean image that impresses you.
That's my motto as well, and although I am conflicted as to what is an "appropriate" punishment for dealing drugs, I do think that some type of harsh punishment will go a long way in deterring future criminals, although it won't stop it completely, but still worth a try if it reduces drug trafficking somewhat. Drugs are incredibly destructive, I am not sure if most people fully appreciate that. The only drug I am in favor of legalizing is mar1juana because it does not have a similar effect to heroin or cocaine and has medicinal purposes, and is a cheap alternative in some cases to legalized drugs being pushed by pharmaceuticals. I am not sure if the death penalty is appropriate, however, and probably a combination of a prolonged jail term and community service would get the job done for the most part. Also, there needs to be a different standard for first-time versus repeat offenders. Anyways, what serious alternatives -- in y'all's opinion -- should be considered by those SE Asian countries in combating drug trafficking?
It's a hypothetical, and a scenario that will never materialize, however, I would imagine that 'brutal' crackdowns do tend to work, that's why many dictators take that approach in other venues. The bottom line is that most drug users and many of those who deal them are amateurs and would likely be deterred by tough punishments, however, that will result in organized crime taking over the operations and monopolizing the whole thing; it happened with alcohol during prohibition here in the US. If you kill every drug-related convict in the US prison system it would save taxpayers billions of dollars long-term, but that doesn't mean that it's doable or even ethical or even a realistic solution to the problem.
With all due respect, "some type of harsh punishment will go a long way in deterring future criminals, although it won't stop it completely, but still worth a try if it reduces drug trafficking somewhat," has been tried. Our penal system is stuffed to the gills from those attempts, and it has had no appreciable impact. I am for decriminalization of both hard and soft drugs, with hard drugs being made available to those who have become addicted, under strict controls that make the addiction of the individuals obvious to the community. Better to take the crime out of an impossible task... preventing drug use, and hope for shame to have an impact. You take the money out of the underclass, away from the gangs and big traffickers, and have it out in the open and under some sort of control. Hell, I'm going to quit carrying andy's water for him. I agree with wnes's posts regarding Singapore. It is tragic, hypocritical, and more than enough to keep that little authoritarian state off my travel itinerary. They don't deserve my money. I'm glad Australia is speaking out, but they haven't gone far enough, imo. Are the people of Singapore allowed to chew gum? Last I heard, that was a criminal act as well. Dammit, I'm going to ask my two kids if they want some Doublemint, and a big, "Up yours!!" to Singapore. Keep D&D Civil.
Just a nit-picky little point... Decriminalization does none of that....decriminalization just makes for much more sane treatment of users. The gangs/ traffickers/ underground money remains. Legalize.
wnes, I support eliminating the Drug War and decriminalizing mar1juana. I also support eliminating mandatory 10 year sentences on non-violent drug offenders and counting that among a person's Three Strikes. So IMO, moral outrage from an American viewpoint is considered suspect and arbitrary. Everyone has the right to feel passionately in this case, as this is an extreme form of the death penalty, but there should be some introspection from a country that still allows the death penalty. To respond to your questions, does capital punishment serve as an absolute deterrent to any crime? If not, should enlightened wealthy countries allow it? I've already said I'd accept the death penalty under some circumstances. Even with those qualifiers, I'd still be walking over seas of hapless souls. If Singaporeans and their trade partners aren't outraged to the point of action, then are they truly wrong for keeping their standards? What gives the US a free pass when other countries and organizations criticize our foreign policy to no avail? The US has Americans to protect and support...
That's hilarious! But wait... won't p*rnography actually act as a substitution to good ol' fashion copulation? The dumbasses! Shoulda banned contraception instead!!! In all seriousness. RIP to the poor sod that's getting put down for being the mule. He's either too ignorant about his employers to strike a deal or too afraid for his family (you don't mess with asian kingpins!) to squeal. As for the policy debate. I think the difference between Singapore's death penalty on drug trafficking vs. Malaysia's death penealty, is that the laws are actually enforced! It isn't that Singapore's death penalty laws apply to much more crimes than their neighbors, but rather that in Singapore, customs/police cannot be bribed, the officials/judges aren't kingpin cronies, and their system of law enforcement actually WORKS. If Malaysia and the countries in the Golden Triangle all lived up to their anti-drug laws, they'd be executing millions every year (cuz uh don't like a bunch of their economies live off this stuff?)... Don't diss Singapore because their system works. Don't diss Singapore because they have actually have a decent, SUCCESSFUL anti-drug policy. I guarantee you if the US implemented automatic death penalty on drug trafficking, the price of drugs will SKYROCKET, and there will be a heck of a lot less addicts on the streets.
I've known people who've been to Singapore. They say that as soon as you get off the plane its extremely (I'm talking signs all over the airport) apparent that drug smuggling is a capital crime. You can argue about the severity of the punishment but the guy had to know what he was doing was both illegal and punishable by death. He still chose to do it. Blame him and not the country.
I doubt this will cause Australia or us to stop trading with Singapore. Infact there are many Americans and others who admire Singapore's get tough policies on crime. During the Michael Fay incident, the American kid who got caned, there were many Americans who supported it including a few sheriffs who wanted to institute caning as a punishment in their jurisdictions. At the same time though Singapore hasn't been hesitant to criticize the US and other Western countries for what they see as being lax on crime, decadent and wasteful. In the end money and strategic interests speaks and while both Singapore and the US will criticize each other they realize that they've got too much at stake to not trade with each other. Since Subic bay closed Singapore has quietly become one of the largest US bases in Asia and is a key ally in the War on Terror. To me this is yet another example of just how hypocritical and wrong the Wilsonian idea of forcefully imposing American values on other countries.
I'm not and I apologize if I gave that impression. I personally don't agree with the death penalty and think this case is a miscarriage of justice. It doesn't surprise me that this is happening in Singapore and I'm giving background from my own experience why. With that though I recognize this is Singapore's laws and while I don't agree with them I don't believe we should be interfering in their laws. When I go to Singapore I obey their laws and won't even do things that I might do here like jaywalking.
There's a lot of things that we would consider bizzarre in Singapore that happen because of the amount of government control in the society. Don't let their lassiez faire attitude on trade and foreign investment fool you. This country is about as Orwellian as a non-Communist country can get.
Sorry guys, but I am all for a tough penal code if it will help cut down on crimes, although I do think a death penalty for drug smuggling might be a bit too harsh (20 years or so sounds more ideal, IMO). As for the legalization of hard drugs, two words: HELL NO! I would move my family to Utah if that was to happen. I am only willing to go as far as legalizing mar1juana (might help relax people a bit and cut down on crimes, so wouldn't be a bad experiment ), but beyond that I can't really agree with you Deckard.
Hmm, whether or not we impose our values, it'd still be hypocritical to adminosh Singapore without any tangible reprecautions to back up our words. As for the last paragraph that possibly stems from a past discussion, what conditions do you believe should be met before we intervene in foreign affairs? With an increasingly interconnectd world economy, several indirect factors now play upon our public's well being. Many foreigners fault us for being policemen, yet there'd possibly be an equal reaction should we become reactionary isolationists (fortress America). We already get resentment for proportionately low foreign charity rates. China or other emerging powers haven't recieved flak for that because the US chose to put themselves in the spotlight. Therefore, they get all the attention.
