cheesemonster2005 Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 BBC News He's to be hanged on Friday for smuggling heroin into Singapore. He was found with some 400g of heroine and under Singaporean law he received a mandatory death sentence. Is this a jutifiable use of the death sentence? I don't support the death sentence for any purpose as I think it makes the government who carry it to be guilty of murder but I especially don't see why it's used for crimes other than murder. What do yez think? I'm sure some will say that if it's the law of Singapore then they can do what they like but the only way to change barbaric sentences in other countries is to voice opposition. On a similar topic, the USA is due to execute their 1000th prisoner since they started capital punishment again on Friday. The USA come third for the number of executions after China and Iran. They have a history of hanging people later considered to be innocent, executing minors and executing mainly black americans. I would like to see the US death sentence stopped once they've hung Bush for crimes against humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kite Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 other countries can do what they like,its not the place of anyone else to decide how they run there justice system. although i would agree that executing someone for importing heroin in extreme, I support the USA in all they do to rid the world of their sickos i support capital punishment 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 I have ambiguous feelings about this. I have never been in favour of capital punishment and, therefore, do not approve of the Singaporean view. At the same time, I can't help feeling that this man's case has become a cause celebre simply because he is an Australian citizen. The same article declares that, 'According to Amnesty International, about 420 people have been hanged in Singapore since 1991, mostly for drugs offences,' but I honestly can't recall the same degree of international condemnation surrounding any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 I have ambiguous feelings about this. I have never been in favour of capital punishment and, therefore, do not approve of the Singaporean view.At the same time, I can't help feeling that this man's case has become a cause celebre simply because he is an Australian citizen. The same article declares that, 'According to Amnesty International, about 420 people have been hanged in Singapore since 1991, mostly for drugs offences,' but I honestly can't recall the same degree of international condemnation surrounding any of them. True. He'll be the third Australian to hang in Singapore (also for drug offences). Many more of other nationalities have gone to the gallows before him. All of these people should be treated in the same way regardless of their nationality. I guess Australia has more clout politically and economically to make her voice heard. Some other countries would be less vocal because they support capital punishment. Britain will always make very strong objections if one of her citizens is given the death sentence - has the USA executed any Britons in recent years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 the USA is due to execute their 1000th prisoner since they started capital punishment again on Friday. Christ, a thousand in less than a week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 I'm guessing he knew the laws and risks before he entered the country. I am not in favour of the death penalty generally, but..... I have little sympathy in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Survivor Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 i'm with Bill on this one - if you know the law of the country you're going to, then you can't quibble when getting caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 i'm with Bill on this one - if you know the law of the country you're going to, then you can't quibble when getting caught. That's just another way of saying people aren't bothered. Unless people make their voices heard from inside the country and outside nothing will change. If the island hadn't been pressurised years ago homosexuality would still be illegal, hanging would still be OK and kids and adults would still be abused/birched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 That's just another way of saying people aren't bothered. Unless people make their voices heard from inside the country and outside nothing will change. If the island hadn't been pressurised years ago homosexuality would still be illegal, hanging would still be OK and kids and adults would still be abused/birched. That's just what Bush and Blair did, shouted far to loud and got mixed up in other peoples business and it seems lots of people were against them for doing that and getting involved in Iraq. As for hanging on the Isle Of Man, it should never of been abolished for child killers and molesters. They should be hung. As for the birch that was another "deterrent" that should never of been abolished. I don't see how you can call it abuse. They didn't birch people for nothing y'know, they got birched for breaking the law, just the same as getting the cane in School for misbehaving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 I'm with Cheese on this one. I would fully support the death penalty for certain crimes, we can all name them (individual drug smuggling would not be one of them, but organised drug traders may be), but ONLY if there was an absolute way the guilt of the offender could be established. I don't think there is a legal system in the world which can guarantee that and so with that uncertainty I can't support, in practice, the death penalty. The British causes celebre (Ruth Ellis, Craig & Bentley, Evans) have revolved around the fact that perhaps there was a miscarriage of justice. Sadly, too late to do anything about it and a posthumous pardon is almost cynical. Perhaps I am a bit of bleeding heart liberal, but one wrongly executed person, to my mind, undermines the credibility of the legal system. However, if there was a foolproof way of establishing guilt, I would have no compunction in sending paedophiles, serial killers, child murderers and other warts on the underbelly of society to the gallows. They bring nothing for the greater good and just prey upon society! But I would truly hate to get it wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheesemonster2005 Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 That's just what Bush and Blair did, shouted far to loud and got mixed up in other peoples business and it seems lots of people were against them for doing that and getting involved in Iraq.As for hanging on the Isle Of Man, it should never of been abolished for child killers and molesters. They should be hung. As for the birch that was another "deterrent" that should never of been abolished. I don't see how you can call it abuse. They didn't birch people for nothing y'know, they got birched for breaking the law, just the same as getting the cane in School for misbehaving. Bush and Blair invaded another country against the wishes of the vast majority of the UN. They also lied about their motives and would have had more support from their people if they'd told the truth. The birch is barbaric because like capital punishment you can't take it away if they are later found innocent. It encourages more coverups. Assault is assault no matter who does it - criminal or police officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 The birch is barbaric because like capital punishment you can't take it away if they are later found innocent. It encourages more coverups. Assault is assault no matter who does it - criminal or police officer. I think you'll find that anyone who was birched deserved it. It may of been barbaric but it certainly worked as a deterrent to others. The youth of today run rings around teachers and the police because they know whatever they do, they're untouchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 How a country treats it's criminals shows how civilised it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 How a country treats it's criminals shows how civilised it is. Well the Isle of Man will be at the top of the list when the new prison is finished, what with its running track and football pitch, sky TV, radiators in every room, (umm sorry cell). There'll be people banging on the door to get in. Give em the birch instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCMR Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 How a country treats it's criminals shows how civilised it is. Just give them all a Grant or two Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.