Death Penalty in Bali

Status
Not open for further replies.
ACW said:
How is this a pointless exercise? I'm highlighting the inefficiencies within their legal system.

If you read into their system in depth, it makes it blindingly obvious these courts should not even be hosting a tea party.

My argument has progressed from the physical sentence handed out to the way in which it was handed out. Which, in my, is even more worrying.

Unfortunately I must get back to work.

However I relish coming back to this when I finish work, and don't have to type all of my replies on a mobile phone! I do like a good debate.
Click to expand...

They are not inefficient for Indonesia. Thiers is a country which will shortly have one less drug smuggler to deal with. Pretty damned efficient I'd say!
 
Gramps, a couple of links.

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/MediaNews_FactResearchGuide_DrugRelatedDeaths.htm#_Toc147131363
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...killed-up-to-five-people-as-two-arrested.html

I'm not in any way condoning the recreational use of any drugs, even if I have done so with herbs in the past (pills and powders were never my idea of a good time!) but the legal drugs (which are taxed to the hilt and beyond - probably the only reason they're still legal...) are far more dangerous and in all probability, the very illegality of the recreational drugs is a major factor in the dangers. Were they legal and regulated, they wouldn't be contaminated and dosages would be easier for (ab)users to judge - many overdoses are due to users taking their usual "fix" of a batch that's been cut less causing an overdose.
 
andy700 said:
I agree, particularly if the countries included USA, China, Saudi Arabia and many others, which certainly can not be described as "underdeveloped".
As I said before, I am against the death penalty, but I do not have the right to tell other countries how to behave - that is the height of arrogance.
Click to expand...

Andy, I have not called the USA, China or Saudi Arabia undeveloped.

I could analyse each, but feel it would be a waste of time.

Quality of those listed goes USA > China > Saudi Arabia
 
ACW said:
The cases would be tried to a far far higher standard. The likelihood of mistakes would be massively lower.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that British barristers know Indonesian law better than an Indonesian brief?
 
ACW said:
Andy, I have not called the USA, China or Saudi Arabia undeveloped.

I could analyse each, but feel it would be a waste of time.

Quality of those listed goes USA > China > Saudi Arabia
Click to expand...

Any proof? Or are you just grabbing headlines out of news agencies (or I suspect the Liberty* website) that say these particular countires should be tabled this way?


* make sure you don't click on the Liberty Department store when googling Liberty!
 
Why would you lay the blame on the smuggler or dealer for someone dying due to an overdose or misuse of drugs?
Click to expand...

Are you blaming the addicts and weak minded that try drugs and become addicts?

If the drugs and the people who make/smuggle and push are taken out then the addicted and weak would not get the drugs to do themselves harm.

Drugs will always get through but the more that are taken out circulation the less that will get through. The people behind it and the product.
 
TriggerHappy said:
In my opinion the justice system isn't about punishment, it's about seeking to protect the good of society from the few bad people we have. That means locking them up until they can convince a panel they are fit to return to society without harming others again,
Click to expand...

But in many instances that doesn't work either, they very often are released and kill again!

TriggerHappy said:
not killing them because of some self appointed right for the state to be beyond the law when it comes to murder.

And what of the individual who pulls the trigger, flicks the switch, kicks out the chair, or injects the syringe? What exempts them from being no better than any other murderer?
Click to expand...

You miss the point, it is not beyond the law, it is the law ... murder is an "unlawful killing" whereas a lawful execution is just that, "lawful" and for punitive reasons.
 
Daryl said:
Are you blaming the addicts and weak minded that try drugs and become addicts?

If the drugs and the people who make/smuggle and push are taken out then the addicted and weak would not get the drugs to do themselves harm.

Drugs will always get through but the more that are taken out circulation the less that will get through. The people behind it and the product.
Click to expand...

A very poor argument.
 
viv1969 said:
They are not inefficient for Indonesia. Thiers is a country which will shortly have one less drug smuggler to deal with. Pretty damned efficient I'd say!
Click to expand...

If she is in jail then she's not smuggling drugs and is no risk is she?
 
Laudrup said:
If she is in jail then she's not smuggling drugs and is no risk is she?
Click to expand...

And why should they pick up the cost of feeding her etc when they can just execute her under Their law?
 
I have. fun film.

Thing is i was brought up around miltary, police and prison service life and have some close experince of after math of some of these things being spoken about.

It hurts a lot of people.

Good job im not a politician, because the authorities know whos who in drug gangs. terrorists cells and Northern Ireland trouble makers are. But they all play by the book because they can't upset the beard waring sandle with socks protesters. I would have Black ops teams just go take them out and they vanish with out a trace.

Blame it on UFO abduction. Stolen by Space Chickens.
 
Daryl said:
I have. fun film.

Thing is i was brought up around miltary, police and prison service life and have some close experince of after math of some of these things being spoken about.

It hurts a lot of people.

Good job im not a politician, because the authorities know whos who in drug gangs. terrorists cells and Northern Ireland trouble makers are. But they all play by the book because they can't upset the beard waring sandle with socks protesters. I would have Black ops teams just go take them out and they vanish with out a trace.

Blame it on UFO abduction. Stolen by Space Chickens.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more!
 
tiler65 said:
If we, as a nation, are given the chance to vote on capital punishment and the vote is to allow said punishment......where would that leave us according to your statement?

Would we be backward or just come to the conclusion that this particular form of justice we have now is not working?

Someone mentioned earlier about animals are killed when they are a threat to society....why shouldn't humans have the same consequence?
Click to expand...

So the alternative to what we have now is to take a backwards step at massive expense to us in terms of money, time, life and reputation? Doesn't sound like a great idea.

As for dangerous animals and humans I see little relevance in that line of argument.
 
[QUOTEA very poor argument. ][/QUOTE]

What I have said or your comment above?

Well what is your answer to it all?

nicotine is addictive and readily available. plenty of people dont smoke.
Click to expand...

Oh yes of course..... you don't get gangs of useless knobs shooting each other and killing children caught in cross fire over a packet of B & H. Or do we?

So what is the answer?
 
Last edited:
Daryl said:
they all play by the book because they can't upset the beard waring sandle with socks protesters.
Click to expand...

Ever considered the possibility that people who disagree with you are normal, hard-working, thoughtful, sensible people who wear ordinary shoes and don't have beards?
 
Laudrup said:
If she is in jail then she's not smuggling drugs and is no risk is she?
Click to expand...

I said nothing about risk. They would still have to "deal with her" in prison.
 
Laudrup said:
Why not deport her to the UK to serve her sentence? Save money on soldiers and bullets.
Click to expand...

Why should we support her stay in prison? She committed the crime in their country she can suffer the punishment in their country. If that means death so be it.
 
Laudrup said:
Why not deport her to the UK to serve her sentence? Save money on soldiers and bullets.
Click to expand...

You willing to foot the bill for that?
 
Ever considered the possibility that people who disagree with you are normal, hard-working, thoughtful, sensible people who wear ordinary shoes and don't have beards?
Click to expand...

Funny, i had Richard Dreyfus from Jaws in my head at the time.

No apology for sandles though. Satans footware.

Why not deport her to the UK to serve her sentence? Save money on soldiers and bullets.
Click to expand...

Because we're soft and let her do 3 months and let he go.
 
Laudrup said:
So the alternative to what we have now is to take a backwards step at massive expense to us in terms of money, time, life and reputation? Doesn't sound like a great idea.

As for dangerous animals and humans I see little relevance in that line of argument.
Click to expand...

It would be your opinion that it would be a backward step, many feel it would be a return to the forward way!


As for the expense argument, pay lawyers half their current fees for any death penalty case and see how many are urged to proceed by their defence team!
 
Eight pages of die hard liberals and soft and cuddly extremists.

Oops slightly wrong, but still an example of how people in one country attempt to tell another how to apply the law to a convicted criminal, not an innocent person but a criminal.

Perhaps they should film it and show it in the check in queues?
 
Laudrup said:
Well you already have for Samantha Orobator and Sandra Gregory so why not?
Click to expand...

Because left to me they'd still be in thier respective countries of conviction. I wouldn't have spent a penny on them either.
 
Daryl said:
Oh yes of course..... you don't get gangs of useless knobs shooting each other and killing children caught in cross fire over a packet of B & H. Or do we?
Click to expand...

we might do, i know the illegal import of cigs/counterfeit cigs from the eastern european area is on the rise..

but whether we have the exact scenario you described i do not know.
 
tiler65 said:
It would be your opinion that it would be a backward step, many feel it would be a return to the forward way!


As for the expense argument, pay lawyers half their current fees for any death penalty case and see how many are urged to proceed by their defence team!
Click to expand...

So pay peanuts, get monkeys and then someone innocent is put to death for a crime they didn't commit due to a poor defence. Sounds like a real dystopian society.
 
PsiFox said:
Eight pages of die hard liberals and soft and cuddly extremists.

Oops slightly wrong, but still an example of how people in one country attempt to tell another how to apply the law to a convicted criminal, not an innocent person but a criminal.

Perhaps they should film it and show it in the check in queues?
Click to expand...

I think they should film the execution and show that in the check in queues personally.
 
Mark Anthony said:
I think they should film the execution and show that in the check in queues personally.
Click to expand...

I think that's what PsiFox meant too....and I agree.
 
viv1969 said:
Because left to me they'd still be in thier respective countries of conviction. I wouldn't have spent a penny on them either.
Click to expand...

Luckily then there are those that see past a callous act to the bigger picture.
 
Daryl said:
Oh yes of course..... you don't get gangs of useless knobs shooting each other and killing children caught in cross fire over a packet of B & H. Or do we?
Click to expand...
You've just made the case of legalisation of all controlled substances. If diamorphine can be legally bought from a corner shop or pharmacy, then no-one will be smuggling it, there won't be gang wars about territory to sell it on and HMRC can collect VAT on it (unless imported as a "toy sample", value £1 from Hong Kong). There will be no court cases about drug smugglers, millions of pounds can be saved from police and customs budgets trying to catch said smugglers and it will be a boost to the pharmacutical manufacturing industry as they will be making and selling more product.

Result. Let's do that.
 
onomatopoeia said:
You've just made the case of legalisation of all controlled substances. If diamorphine can be legally bought from a corner shop or pharmacy, then no-one will be smuggling it, there won't be gang wars about territory to sell it on and HMRC can collect VAT on it (unless imported as a "toy sample", value £1 from Hong Kong). There will be no court cases about drug smugglers, millions of pounds can be saved from police and customs budgets trying to catch said smugglers and it will be a boost to the pharmacutical manufacturing industry as they will be making and selling more product.

Result. Let's do that.
Click to expand...

Im sure everyones in agreement with that, thread closed! :thumbs:

Or maybe not....:suspect:
 
Don't think that would please the drug gangs and the South American Cartels.

You will get the next stage that Niel g mentioned above with ciggies.
e illegal import of cigs/counterfeit cigs from the eastern european area is on the rise..
Click to expand...

Under cutting and more smuggling.... Wont stop it.

And when the druggies want more than the legal quota?
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
But in many instances that doesn't work either, they very often are released and kill again!

You miss the point, it is not beyond the law, it is the law ... murder is an "unlawful killing" whereas a lawful execution is just that, "lawful" and for punitive reasons.
Click to expand...

There's three separate discussion in this:

1) Are current sentences harsh enough? No, sentences should be longer and 10 years should mean just that, not 5 if you play ball for a few years. More needs to be done to limit the harm these people can do without us sinking to the levels of the criminals.

2) Is there evidence that capital punishment actually prevents or deters crime? There's certainly nothing conclusive that I'm aware of. Sure, it stops reoffenders but we can all also point to people who have been wrongly killed (murdered) by the state for something they haven't done. I don't believe our justice system is sufficiently infallible to carry out such an irreversible sentence.

3) Of course the state can make whatever they want legal and can enforce as many double standards as they like. The law can be moulded to any means, good or bad. The 'legality' of it isn't something I mentioned so I'm not sure why you've crept this into the debate. It's the moral stance that I take issue with. I don't believe it right that someone can say "killing is wrong, so if you do it we'll kill you". It's a completely hypocritical stance and it undermines the entire premise of a 'just' society.

I appreciate you are probably coming at this with a degree of religious of belief underpinning your opinion. "An eye for an eye" etc. That probably means that neither you or I will ever convince each other to adjust our own beliefs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top