5/12/2010
Death penalty saves lives
When I posted my view on the death penalty I expect many people to disagree with me. Fair. There is a very nice young man waiting in the gallows and many are pleading that his life be spared. I too would want to plead for him as well. We are after all human beans and do understand what is compassion and what it means to take the life of someone and how their loved ones feeling the grief and pain.
Am I that ruthless and wicked? Sometimes the saints are more deadly and wicked. And in this instance this is exactly so. Saving one life may lead to more adventurers taking their chances here and destroying more innocent lives by exposing them to the destructive nature of drug addiction.
As AuntieLucia has said, we must think of the judges' position as well. It is not an easy job to put the hangman's noose on anyone. They too are human beans. The death penalty is not put up to kill. It is put up to protect our citizens. Yes, if our loved ones got into such a fix we will have to talk softly and not take such a tough stand. This is called vested interest or having a stake in the issue. But when one is a disinterested party and looking at it objectively, which is a better alternative?
I still stand to support the death penalty. As for people being fixed up, let the court find out the truth. So far death penalty is given only to those that are found guilty without an element of doubt. That is the job of the court.
What I would want the govt to do is to use a loud hailer and tell the whole world, without fear nor apologies, that drug trafficking means sure death in paradise. Make it absolutely loud and clear to make sure that no one can miss this message. And the airlines be made to made an announcement about the death sentence before touching down at Changi. And this can be followed by an advisory for those carriers or traffickers to dump their drugs into the toilet bowl before exiting the aircraft if they do not want to be hanged. Let that be their last chance.
The same procedure can be applied in all the check points. Let the whole world knows that we mean business. I think this will be a kinder thing to do. The death penalty will end up hanging no one. But once we get soft, we may end up hanging many more and seeing many of our citizens destroyed or harmed.
Our message is simple. No drugs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Yes, make it loud, make sure everyone get the message loud and clear. No drug!!!.
Ending any life is never a comfortable thing to anyone except when other live are being threatened or put in imminent danger. The why do people knowingly want to destroy others' live by trafficking or peddling drugs??? Because selling drugs is so lucrative that even doctors intentionally over prescribed 'soft drugs'. Conscience is thrown into the drain when greed overwhelms the being.
Mr Redbean had in the posts reasoned very well to justify his support for the Capital Punishment of Death for drug trafficking. The Law too has many safeguards and measures to ensure that no one be wrongly convicted of the drug trafficking offence.
As for the Court and the Judge, they too will have the most stringent scrutiny of such cases to determine and ascertain such offences.
Manufacturing of armaments and the use of the weapons for war must not be lumped with drug trafficking. However, unlawful possession of firearm and other lethal weapons should be severely dealth with. And if live are threatened or harmed, capital punishment may not be too harsh, that is; it can be justifiable.
Drug addictions had destroyed and are causing much pains to addicts and their families. They had and are affecting many others who had been harassed by the addicts and sometimes put in great danger because of the addictions and traffickings.
Indeed there is a need for the strongest deterrent and the most effective measure to counter the menace related to drugs. Capital Punishment does save live.
Just make sure that everyone is clear about it.
patriot
I wished I could share your simpleton sentiments.
Things are not as clear cut as it seems. "Let the courts find out the truth." The courts comprising the judges, the prosecutors and the defending lawyers are all not saints. They are as human as you and I. Sometimes the truth escapes even the tiniest scrutiny. What then?
I most certainly have no issue with the death penalty prescribed for drug traffickers and murderers. But the death penalty must be tempered with discretionary powers of the trial judges. After all, they are "trial judges" out to seek the truth, never mind if the processs is long and arduous. The presumption of innocence is a corner stone of justice. If the choice is about sending someone to die just to save taxpayers' money for a short "speedy gonzales" trial, then it is my view that anyone who harbours this thought is a scumbag unworthy to be part of the human race.
Now what about terrorists? They maim, bomb and is a threat not only to drug addicts but to the WHOLE population. Why don't we put them to death? Have we done so? No. We put them at a detention centre for rehabilitation and ultimately they took a hike to Johore.
Hi Wally, you said 'The courts comprising the judges, the prosecutors and the defending lawyers are all not saints. They are as human as you and I. Sometimes the truth escapes even the tiniest scrutiny. What then?' which means you don't think they are that good and reliable.
Then you want to give them more discretionary power to decide to give death penalties a miss. After all they are trial judges trying to find the truth.
I don't know to call this kind of argument simpleton or wishy washy?
Mr Bean,
Frankly, I really don't understand how you can equate the failure of the court to scrutinize for the truth vs their judicial discretion in sentencing.
I believe in erring on the side of safety.
Sending an innocent man to the gallows with a lingering doubt over his innocence or the degree of his guilt thereof is not something that a human bean would want to be saddled with. And for that matter, it concerns you and I because as citizens who indirectly appoints the judiciary, we have a right to question its conduct.
Wally, the deterrence objective of the death sentence is to make it so fearful and deadly that no one would want to play with it. Once the fear factor is removed it loses its purpose and better to remove it altogether.
It is better to make it work and it must work. It is working only when it is keeping the drug traffickers from coming in. It is not working when it has to hang people.
The deterrence must not be compromised.
Hehe,
Mr. Bean,
You're a real joker leh.
Going by your reasoning, why don't we make all crime punishable with death so that Singapore is truly a crime free paradise?
The point here is that only the little donkey (mule) is hanged but the King pins are still raking in the mullah. Little donkeys being what they are, some will do anything without questioning. They deserved to be punished severely but not hanged. Maybe a life sentence without parole is something to consider. On this matter, I am flabbergasted that some women can become drug mules for Africans for love. WTF, I think they belong in the IMH. Maybe size really does matter! Hehe.
Dear Wally:
it is hard to accept your argument that all crimes be punished with capital punishment to achieve a crime free society. Base on your logic, me may have to say pay all workers like the Parliamentarians pay themselves, then probably no one will commit crime.
There are different offences with varying degrees of severity and harm. Offenders are convicted and punished accordingly in relation to the crimes they commit. One who killed another cannot and should not be given the same punishment as one that stole a moble phone or rape another. To cut it short, there should be no overkill in meting punishment.
Drug trafficking is one of the most heinous crime as the harms cause by drugs are life threatening to the addicts and those around them. Drugs cause untold sufferings and those who have not witnessed the damages are most unlikely to understand. DRUG ADDICTION IS A LIFELONG AFFAIR IF IT IS NOT STOPPED. AND THE ADDICTS ARE UNLIKELY TO SAVE THEMSELVES FROM IT. It is one of the GREATEST MENACE to society. In most countries, drug offences are punish with the heaviest penalty and capital punishments are imposed in many countries.
Opposition to Death Sentence is to be expected, as humans, we are born to naturally love life and give it the highest sanctity. Who does not? And it is precisely that we love life that we want all those that mar and cause unending sufferings to others to be put away. Not that anyone is interested to see others hanged, remember capital punishment is for deterrent purposes, AND IT HAS TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE ONE. Redbean had offered good reasons for it and me shall not plagiarize him.
patriot
Dear Wally:
it is hard to accept your argument that all crimes be punished with capital punishment to achieve a crime free society. Base on your logic, me may have to say pay all workers like the Parliamentarians pay themselves, then probably no one will commit crime.
There are different offences with varying degrees of severity and harm. Offenders are convicted and punished accordingly in relation to the crimes they commit. One who killed another cannot and should not be given the same punishment as one that stole a moble phone or rape another. To cut it short, there should be no overkill in meting punishment.
Drug trafficking is one of the most heinous crime as the harms cause by drugs are life threatening to the addicts and those around them. Drugs cause untold sufferings and those who have not witnessed the damages are most unlikely to understand. DRUG ADDICTION IS A LIFELONG AFFAIR IF IT IS NOT STOPPED. AND THE ADDICTS ARE UNLIKELY TO SAVE THEMSELVES FROM IT. It is one of the GREATEST MENACE to society. In most countries, drug offences are punish with the heaviest penalty and capital punishments are imposed in many countries.
Opposition to Death Sentence is to be expected, as humans, we are born to naturally love life and give it the highest sanctity. Who does not? And it is precisely that we love life that we want all those that mar and cause unending sufferings to others to be put away. Not that anyone is interested to see others hanged, remember capital punishment is for deterrent purposes, AND IT HAS TO BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE ONE. Redbean had offered good reasons for it and me shall not plagiarize him.
patriot
Wally, You said, 'Going by your reasoning, why don't we make all crime punishable with death so that Singapore is truly a crime free paradise?'
Only one kind of politicians argued in this way. And they pissed off a lot of people.
Oh, kiddies also talked like dat.
Redbean, you obviously do not know the meaning of mandatory death penalty. Imagine this, if you were caught with drugs in your possession, planted by someone else, and you were brought infront of the judge, and you have no way of proving your innocence, the judge will have no choice but to pass down the death penalty. Just too bad for you. In this case which song will you be singing???
Hehe Anon @ 7:39
That's a good one.
When that happens, I think Mr. Bean would regret that he took such a rigid stance against the mules because unwittingly he became a mule and all the cries of "I am innocent, I am innocent!" would have fallen on deaf ears as he is led to the gallows.
It is always easy to decry the misfortune of others but when it happens to you, you would wished that you had sung a different tune.
Peace.
I grew up in an opium den. I have witnessed all the police raids and have seen many people I knew going in and out of prison. But opium addiction then was not so destructive.
The drug menace today is very harmful to people and society. I know.
While our hearts and compassion can go to those whose loved ones have to be hanged, one must also know the pain and sufferings of people hurt by the loved ones of the hysterical and sobbing relatives.
If the death penalty is to be effective it better be effective. Otherwise drop it completely.
As for the argument that our judges and prosecutors are flimsy in handling such cases of drugs being planted on innocent people, I think I have faith in their ability to do justice when innocent lives are in their hands.
In criminal cases, our judges are pretty good. And when the guilty is to be hanged, I am very sure that they will do their utmost best to handle the case diligently in the name of justice.
Hehe,
Mr. Bean,
I hope, touch wood, if that day ever comes, you would have the best trial judge presiding over the case and the best criminal lawyer which sadly is so rare in Singapore that you can count them on the palms of one hand. Some has got more hype than prowess. In any case, trial without a jury means one man and one man alone would decide your fate. Scary.
However, one slip and that's it. After all, the human mind and action is imperfect.
Having said that, I concur with you that our judges are better than most in other countries but the nagging question still remains, "What If....?"
My position still stands:
Death penalty should only be reserved for pre meditated murder, where the evidence and proof is established beyond all possible doubt, instead of all reasonable doubt.
Point: The arguments here fail to distinguish between what is a crime and what is a vice or a "sin".
Drug taking may be bad for you, but the human must make a choice -- a moral choice, for himself. Therefore drug taking is a vice, not a crime. It has been made criminal by at of law.
I define a crime as an act or the threat of an act of physical aggression against persons or their private property. "Aggression" here means the action is not voluntarily agreed on. Therefore murder, rape, kidnapping, theft and fraud are all non-voluntary as the victims definitely not in agreement with their aggressors and their aggressors act against the wills of the victims.
Drugs should not be criminalised. There are ways to voluntarily police any drug problem: contractually -- i.e. by using the idea of private property:
1. drug testing by employers -- "You want to work here, these are the conditions you have to agree to"
2. Parents are in charge of bringing up their kids and are in their families the absolute authority as far as the children are concerned. Parents have the right to police their children, including introducing drug testing/counselling in schools with voluntary contractual partnerships with teachers, principle and school administration.
3. Private property owners have the right to establish rules governing the use of their property: "You want to come onto/use my premises, you may not take or carry drugs"
State execution is akin to legalised murder. It's use should not be taken lightly.
Matilah, you are right to say that drug taking is a vice. You are wrong to claim that the death penalty is for drug taking.
The death penalty is for drug trafficking, which can cause harm to people, even death and destruction. For drug taking, the addicts will be sent for rehab.
I think you have wrongly accused Shanmugam for not knowing the difference and the law.
redbean,
I accept the distinction between drugg trafficking and drug consumption.
However you have made an unsubstantiated claim by assuming (without proof or logic) that drug trasfficking is responsible for harm to people. It is not. The act of trafficking is merely the act of supply.
In case you're forgetting: ALL markets are DEMAND driven. i.e. there is trafficking because there is a DEMAND for the product -- same as there is prostitution, gambling, alcohol and any other "vice" or "sin" -- or Ipods, mobile phone and condoms -- demand driven.
The minister is full of shit. It is up to him to back up his assumptions with proof -- he hasn't. The onus is not on me to prove the negative case -- the burden of proof is solely the responsibility of the agent making the positive claim.
Drug trafficking is not just a crime. It leads to drug taking and addiction unlike prostitution. Gambling and drinking could also lead to addiction but generally not as severe and destructive in scale than drug addicts.
redbean you are tying yourself into rhetorical knots by playing stupid word games.
Vices are vices. If they are a “problem” the only way to treat them properly is to consider them as disorders -- like addiction. But the problems only occur when the habit is done to excess. There is nothing wrong with smoking a cigar occasionally or having a few drinks. This applies to any drug. Heroin and cocaine were once available legally and there was very little abuse at the time.
There’ll always be people who get into trouble with any “addictive” habit – whether it is eating excessively or playing video games. This being the case, it is illogical to jail or execute the producers of these “vices”. It makes no sense at all.
Post a Comment