Let me play the devil’s advocate.

Although there’s no evidence to prove that death penalty deters serious crimes more effectively,

1. Releasing these criminals back into the society pose a threat to the general public.
2. Keeping them in jail is a waste of resources and tax payer’s money.
3. Life sentence deprives the quality of life totally, why not put them out of their misery?

Life sentence and caning should be a more appropriate deterrent. Death sentence is so 18th century. We should stop the eye for and eye, tooth for a tooth kind of mindset. Every crime is a sin, however redemption and seeking forgiveness is a more humane way to punish someone. I support the abolition of the death sentence. It is really so 18th century. Singaporeans, lets move on !!!

look if you want our streets to be awash with junkies go ahead sign it..

I support the death penalty as it stands. Unless, he is being coerced or tricked into transporting the drugs, he should jolly well know the consequences of drug trafficking. Sure, they have nice family photos together and that kinders the compassion in our heart. But how about all the people whose lives are destroyed by an availibility of drugs in the market? We all have choices. Dun go down on the wrong path.

Let those who wish to die, die – not the other way round.

Why can’t Singapore have death penalty only for those who attempt suicide?

There are 2 issues here that could be discussed separately:

1. Does drug trafficking deserve a death penalty?
2. Should we abolish death penalty?

#6 commentator

I see your point: Euthanasia is illegal because we argue that life is precious. At the same time, we carry out death penalty without a flinch.

Carry on with the death penalty…one drug trafficker’s loss is nothing to what he has been ‘feeding’ the drug abusers…..God gives us brain to think,energy to work but not to destroy other people’s lives.Probably,he wanted ez money…nobody knows. And he is definitely aware the consequences of being a drug trafficker,be it in Singapore or in Malaysia.

Should the people in our government hang as well then, since they are such ardent supporters and investors of the Burmese junta, who are one of the world’s major producers and exporter of heroin and opium? I mean, why go after the runners when you can get the big fish?

http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1076&Itemid=168

http://www.singapore-window.org/804caq9.htm

Before you support the death penalty, read this very good article by Sylvia Lim, Workers’ Party Chairman on the criminal justice system in Singapore – and particularly about the legal process which sends someone to the gallows.

http://www.wp.org.sg/news/hammer_online/07_death_penalty_debate.htm

“In this regard, the law and order debate must move beyond the rhetorical level. We may not like foreign agencies criticizing us; at the same time, we had better be sure we have a system where there are sufficient safeguards against wrongful convictions, especially if the outcome is an execution.”

i think if you kill people you should get death penalty
if it is drugs then it will have to depend

Generally speaking,I am in favor of capital punishment.Had Mr.Yong’s age was over
25 yrs old,I would be glad to volunteer myself to pull the lever.But in this case,I would
ask for mercy on his life,simply because he was too young when he commit the
crime and should be given a 2nd chance.Perhaps,20 yrs jail sentence should be
sufficed.

I strongly support the death penalty. it makes these people think thrice before dealing with drugs or murders.

I oppose the death penalty esp in the Singapore context. There are too many presumptions of guilt in our legal system. How can we have a law that presumes an accused person to be a trafficker rather than a drug addict solely on the quantum of drugs found on him?

David Marshall described the death penalty as “barbaric”. I agree. It is time that this topic be debated in our society and I commend the organisers for the coming event.

What happened to the other sides of the scales in justice? Equity?

I firmly support the death penalty for drug traffickers!

These traffickers were given ample warnings not to bring or traffic drugs in Singapore, they know the consequences, they decided to take the risk, and they made their personal choice in challenging the law. SERVE THEM RIGHT!

Before we even talk about petitioing for an unscrupulous drug trafficker, maybe we should first consider and think about the kind of harm it had caused to the society, and the many hearts and lives that it had broken. ALL DRUG TRAFFICKERS SHOULD GO TO HELL!

I wonder what if one of these days, M. Ravi’s children, brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews or close relatives’ lives have been devastated by drugs, will he still make such a petition for the very drug trafficker that had sold the drugs to them? I WONDER…

Anyway, I personally think M Ravi was simply trying to gain publicity for himself, as he is well aware that petition of such nature will not work with Singapore’s court of laws!

Death To Yong Vui Kong!!!!

No mercy should be shown to a drug trafficker like him. We should not accord any sympathy at all to someone who tries to make a living by wretching another person’s life!

There are only a handful of states in the world that hang, execute, shoot people because of drugs. Singapore is one of them.

Singapore is in good company; China and a handful of Confucian states and some others practice it with great gusto. And, we are the only country in the world where the burden of proof is pushed on to the defense. What a cock-up justice system

We truly don’t know how many innocent people have gone to the gallows here.
Anybody can set anybody up for drug-trafficking, and to the gallows. Its truly frightening

Because LKY has set- up this barbarious law does not mean that justice is well-served
There is no place for Capital Punishment in the modern world

Drugs are not the only thing that wreck people’s lives. Cigarettes damage more lives than drugs. How come no one press for death penalty for traders of cigarettes?

Old enough to hang but not old enough to vote.
What screwed-up laws we have in SIN–gapore.

The Premise that just by possession someone is guilty of TRAFFIKING is not only FALSE but EVIL.

The whole premise is ‘INJUSTICE’ to begin with. The LAW in this case ties the hands of the JUSTICE System ALTOGETHER. The HEARING thus becomes a sham, as the JUDGEMENT is a FOREGONE CONCLUSION!

I call it EVIL because one can be tricked into possession of drugs and be ‘FRAMED’ for TRAFFIKING, where there’s virtually NO DEFENCE at all except the GALLOWS.

Such a Flawed System only helps the POLICE to be less thorough in their INVESTIGATIONS and makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the JUDGES to be TRUE to their CONSCIENCE !

Its so UNJUST to everybody involved from the Police to the BENCH to the ACCUSED finally . ITS BLOODY WRONG!

Just imagine if one of you here very unfortunately face such a predicament of being ‘framed’ by the very JUSTICE System that is supposed to protect the INNOCENT.

Unless of course you call those ‘tricked’ into possession to be deserving to be GUILTY.

Just imagine if people like Hangmen, Yuni and the gang of supporters of this policy were to be ‘framed’ for drug possession, how would they plead?

Would they say “Oh yea, Im so stupid to allow myself to be falsely accused for traffiking, therefore i must die, because i stupidly supportd such a stupid policy”

Hey Yuni, what about those that support the drug trade knowingly? I don’t mean the small runners but those who operate large opium and heroin production facilities? Should they be held accountable too?

It is not a matter of support or opposition to DEATH PENALTY !

It is a matter of having a PROPER RECOURSE for any ACCUSED Party
in the SYSTEM OF JUSTICE.

In Singapore, the death sentence is decided by one judge when in alot of other countries, serious cases that carry the death penalty must be presided by three judges and a jury. How can one man decide that another is to die simply by his ‘knowledge of the law’? While we scorn upon suicides and make personal decisions to end life due to critical health reasons (voluntary euthanasia) illegal, how can we allow for state murder to take place right here under our very noses? While we are sentencing drug mules, we are letting the drug lords off and supporting them by the way of business ties (google Steven Law and Lo Hsing Han).

M. Ravi is not trying to gain fame here. Fighting against the death penalty and appealing for clemency has been a tough and emotional journey, he could have given everything up a long time ago but he is still working hard on it. What is fame compared to a simple and easy life? He is a lawyer and an activist, he fights for what he believes in with passion and while we respect the right of everyone to choose a stand and come with a totally different believe or perspective on the issue, we should never attempt to slander a cause by going personal. Stay focussed on the issue please.

“Bao Zheng (999-1062), a household name in China, was an outstanding government official and statesman in the Northern Song Dynasty (960-1127). He was born of a scholar family in Luzhou, now renamed Hefei, in Anhui Province. At the age of 29, he passed the highest-level imperial examinations under the direct invigilation of the emperor and qualified himself as a Jinshi. …………………….

……………..Bao Zheng’s personality was closely related to his early life. Though his parents could afford to send Bao Zheng to school, their life was not so rich. His mother had to climb up the mountain to collect firewood just before she gave birth to him. Before Bao became county magistrate, he had lived among the low working class, which helped him understand their trouble and hardships. He hated corruption and strongly desired for justice and probity. ……………..”

Waht would BAO say of our Judicial System, especially when it comes to conviction of drug crimes by a simplistic assumption that possession of
x amount warrants a death penalty ?

You have my vote, Rachel,

Very Well Said ! =)

Its takes those with backbone to stand up for their beliefs
Those without backbone would slither about Slandering
others !

Thanks Trevor :)

Here are some links for further reading (hope it is ok to share links here on TOC for the benefit of readers):

Suspected Drug Trafficker Free to do Business (an old article by the Think Centre written in 2001)
http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=1173

Lo Hsing Han (wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lo_Hsing_Han

Dirty Money in Singapore: Perception or Reality? (the part about Lo, Law and wife Cecilia Ng is somewhere in the middle of the write up)
http://singaporeuncletrader.wordpress.com/2009/09/23/dirty-money-in-singapore-perception-or-reality/

Singapore’s Blood Money (another old piece of article)
http://www.singapore-window.org/1020naus.htm

Thank you M Ravi for once again putting the issue of the barbarism inherent in he death penalty in the spotlight..

I’ll write this comment specifically on the death sentence for drug ‘trafficking’.

I believe the issue of drug trafficking can be better understood if we are first understand that there are three drug-related offences:

1) consumption;

2) trafficking, which is (or should be) defined as the regularized (or habitual) buying of drugs from a supplier and its selling to laypersons for the purposes of profit, and which also forms a significant part of a person’s lifelihood – to be charged with trafficking, one must be actually be caught in the act of either buying or selling of drugs; and,

3) possession, which can be further subdivided into:

a) possession for the purposes of consumption – this is usually when a person is caught with a small quantity of drugs, and is assumed to want the drugs for his (and perhaps his friends’) recreational purposes; and,

b) possession for the purposes of trafficking, usually presumed to be the case when the amounts are large, and exacerbated if the person already has a previous record of actual traffficking.

In either case, the charge should be one of possession with the only diffference between the two being in the sentencing.

However, in Singapore, a person caught for what is really the POSSESSSION of the equivalent of 15g of heroin – which by all accounts is already too small an amount to constitute ‘possession for the purposes of trafficking’ – is instead IMAGINED to be ALREADY trafficking – ie. buying and selling which is not the case – and charged with trafiicking.

Not only is that a seriously wrongful charge – it’s a deliberate mischarge, if there’s such a thing – because the offense was one of possession and not trafficking, it is also assumed quite unreasonably that he is in possesion of the drugs to make a profit.

Worse, it plays on every one of people’s irrational fears at their crassest.

Does possession – not trafficking – of a small amount of drugs warrant a person being put to death?

Not only has the fundamental legal principle of the presumption of innocence before establishing guilt been flouted, as Teo Suh Lung has already pointed out, there is also the other important legal principle in sentencing, namely the proportinality of crime to punishment.

Separate the question of injustice from the penalty.

The question is whether should there be dealth penaly? I guess it depends on the society you lived in. Moral right and wrong is all relative. I think it is most fair if majority of citizens support it. If majority is against it, then dispense with it.

Stretching the logic further. Smokers are poisoning me with their smokes. Are they giving me a slow death sentence?

When one goes to war, you have to “kill”. Why is this more morally right than death penalty?

I totally agree with ToDieOrNotToDie, just look at how the Americans had discriminately murdered thousands of innocent Iraqis citizens through their indiscriminate bombings, then claimed that it is an unavoidable war collateral. Yet, they are at the very forefront of advocating against death penalty.

I personally think that those movements, organizations (especially from the west) or individuals who opposed death penalty are simply and highly hypocritical, and hold double-standards in their so-called moral outlook and perspective!

Are they barking up the wrong tree, or are they simply only capable of putting their tails between their legs because they dare not to antagonize a super power like USA, whereas it is OK to always pick on issues happening in a small little red-dot whenever they like it?

War is Cruel. Innocent people do get killed. Even innocent USA soldiers, including Iraqi Civilians lost their lives unnecessarily due to the indiscriminate
acts of Iraqi suicide bombers.

These things cant be avoided but can only be managed in the most humane way as far as possible combining aggression in combat , compassion for Humanity, and Justice in the form of trial for those responsible for War Crimes.

Lets not get too emotional and end up actually barking the wrong tree, albeit with good intent.

The chief perpetrator for all Iraqi sufferings (before and now), the psychopath dictator Saddam Hussein was hanged.

I do understand that this thread is about the Death Penalty, whether we want to keep it or abolish it.

For extreme crime like torture inflicted on innocent people and cold blooded murders and War crime perpetraitors like Saddam, Hitler, Tojo, Stalin, and such cruel people I would prefer them to be hung by their own balls if that is allowable.

For such SADISTIC Villains we have to have the Death Penalty with Proper Trial as in proper process of the justice.

It is JUSTICE SERVED to put to death those who WILLFULLY and FATALLY harm innocent Lives.

It is UNJUST to make Death Mandatory just for a mere possession of drugs.

It is Very Unjust, Hypocritical, and CRIMINAL to do Business with the Drug Lords when the LAW IS HARSH on ALL kinds of Drug Traffikers.

TRUE Justice would be served if these Drug Lords are brought for trial for the Actual Trafficking of Drugs and the sad death of countless drug addicts.

It is for such EXTREMELY CRUEL people like the DRUG LORDS that I say that the Death Penalty should stay ..

Well crafted arguments, Robox !

I am actually a fan of your insightful messages,

and i do hope to meet guys like you, Mr. Ravi and Rachel.

Rachel, thanks for all those links for us to read.

God bless and my love to all of you,

and the many battle hardened and wise
Warriors in this forum who’s postings woke me up
to the actual truth behind the many lies.

Thank you. TTFN

To Trevors Scores,

I think the question is whether “drug trafficking” should carry the death penalty. It is not about drug possession. Whether Yong Vui Kong is guilty of drug trafficking is not of debate here. In fact, the petition is about presidency leniency not that there is injustice done.

In history, there is the “opium war” that marked a critical turning point in the history of China. It effectively ended China’s supremacy in China itself for many years. See wikipedia about opium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium.

A quote from the page “After 1860, opium use continued to increase with widespread domestic production in China, until more than a quarter of the male population was addicted by 1905.”

The question is then this, knowing that drugs can be addictive, should we then prevent the spread of drugs into society by imposing death sentence for drug traffickers.

As I said earlier, morality is personal. You don’t think drug trafficking deserves the death penalty, but 10 others may feel otherwise. What makes you more right than the other 10? The 10 is just figurative. It could also be the other way round.

So, perhaps, the best way forward is have a referendum about death penalty. Go with what the majority wants. Frankly, this also sucks, not everyone can be bothered to put in their votes.

Hi Trevor, thanks for the encouraging words as well as your comments supporting what we do. Hope to see you at the forum! You can also contact me by clicking on my name… contact details can be found there. :)

Cheers!

I am against death penalty, he is too young not an adult yet, he may be mislead or he has a broken family. The judge should not penalise him blindly, it should be on case by case basis.

I have a request to make of the organizers.

I may be jumping the gun here if TOC already has plans to do this,Would it be possible to film the above event and then publish it as a report here in TOC.? Perhaps invite bloggers etc. as well as part of the media crew so that we can see a range of perpespectives on the issue.

Obviously, my intention is for those unable to attend to be able to see it anyway, as well as that this issue gets as much publicity as possible.

M Ravi is really a kind hearted person fighting for justice. Better than those yes man MPs, doing estate work or just writing letters for residents to help apply PR. visas… useless !!!

36) Moe Gan Thai on September 28th, 2009 9.59 am,

I don’t get you. You say it should be ‘case by case’, and yet you support a blanket ban of death sentence? which is it? Or were you referring to a specific case where you are against the death penalty, but support it if the ‘case’ warrants it?

Hi Robox,

it is up to TOC if they want to cover the event on video, we will definitelty welcome it as it will certainly benefit those who may not be able to make it. We do have plans to have it documented on video but with limited resources, we cannot confirm that as yet. :)

why must advocates always choose an example to champion their cause when the law have much wider implications than that one case in point?

39) lobo 76,
what I mean is I am against death penalty, but our law is for death penalty so Yong should be spare the death sentence considering he is still not adult and still unmature, he may be manipulated by others, that is what i mean case by case if the president can grant clemency. Of course I will support M Ravi and others to protest against this rule.

dear Mice

I think the reason for championing a cause is not only an attempt to save a life but also gives a concrete example of who can suffer the death penalty. I am an opponent of the death penalty and I have no problem signing any petition against the death penalty.

To Trveor Scores:

Belated thanks for your post; very flattering.

Hey, Rachel, thank you as well. I understand about the constraints but hope for the best anyway.

For all you death penalty supporters who think that drug trafikkers should be executed because drugs destroy lives, i ask you to do the following:

1 ) make a distinction between the different kinds of drugs that are available and do research on the documented effects on users.

2) compare it with our governments classification system and punishments

i think its only fair that if we are willing to hang someone who brings in enough pot, we should also hang alcohol importers, since the effects and social cost though not identical, are comparable. IF not then it just seems like the govrnment is killing people cos they cant tax marijuana.

Also if drugs cause hardship and death overseas and singaopore wants tio wash its hand clean from that kind of thing , its only fair that the same thing is done with regards to laundered burmese billions sitting in our banks.

dear teo soh lung

post #43 on September 29th, 2009 11.07 am

////I think the reason for championing a cause is not only an attempt to save a life but also gives a concrete example of who can suffer the death penalty. I am an opponent of the death penalty and I have no problem signing any petition against the death penalty////

will your attempt to save a life cause others to suffer? in petitioning to abolish death penalty across the board, you have chosen to ignore other examples where death penalty may be a “reasonable” (this is a debate in itself) punishment.

when you say “I have no problem signing any petition against the death penalty”, it comes across as self righteous.

42) Moe Gan Thai on September 28th, 2009 9.50 pm

So your case by case is in context to current law/case, and your stand is to remove even this ‘case by case’ scenario. Did i get it correct?

Anyway I am FOR death penalty. That is not to say that the way it is implemented currently cannot be improved.

—————–
45) lifeisprecious on September 29th, 2009 1.17 pm
“i think its only fair that if we are willing to hang someone who brings in enough pot, we should also hang alcohol importers, since the effects and social cost though not identical, are comparable.”

It seems that you have already done the research. Why not just share it here?

<>

Like the CHILI and CRAB we eat, INSEPARABLE !

<> by ToDieOrNotToDie

Like the CHILI and CRAB we eat, INSEPARABLE !

I dont understand the change of font and the missing quote of one the forummers that I wanted to indicate ………………in s/no :49

Disappointed !

To lifeisprecious on September 29th, 2009 1.17 pm:

Re: “..i think its only fair that if we are willing to hang someone who brings in enough pot, we should also hang alcohol importers, since the effects and social cost though not identical, are comparable.”

I support the death penalty for one case and one case only: for crimes against humanity, which is usually committed by governments. Many of singapore’s overnment’s wuld be hisory by now if we had this in Singapore.

None of the anti-death penalty arguments apply in the case of this crime.

To allow or not to allow the death penalty. It all boils down to what we each think of the human capacity to change.

Very briefly;

Proponents of the death penalty cannot possibly argue, that the criminal being served the death penalty, has no hope ever of showing remorse, learning from his crime and change for the better. Until and unless such proponents can show concrete proof that such a criminal has no chance ever of changing for the better – even with prolonged rehabilitation – the death penalty cannot stand.

Take for example a murderer. The intent, or motive, the circumstances leading to the murder, whether premeditated or spur-of-the-moment; these are some key points being used to consider when a death penalty should or should not be served.

We may think that chances of, say, a serial killer ever changing for the better is very remote. Do we take away his life based on this remote chance to change? Or do we lock him away for life and give him the chance to change?

Some have used financial cost in sustaining such a useless life as a reason why we should end it rather than using tax-payers’ money to sustain it. Well, if this criminal is your son, daughter, father or mother; you would surely want every minutest chance to be accorded to them in the hope that they can realize their folly and change for the better, no matter how long it takes. Take this into consideration before you jump onto the bandwagon calling for the death penalty to be enforced.

Now, even after such consideration is met, the next question lies with the manner in which the decision is derived at. Is it a one-person (a judge) consideration or should it be a group (a jury) decision instead. It is dangerous to place such a decision on one person, for should an error in judgment arise, there is no way to return a life that is already taken away.

Returning to YVK’s case, he was all of 19 when he was caught. Considering the surrounding evidence, that suggest that his mental capacity to reason was hampered, by the conflicts within his family; all the more we should extend our hands of forgiveness and pardon him for the crime he committed. This is not to say that he should get away scot-free. By all means, keep him in prison for as long as it takes to rehabilitate him.

Death should not be the consideration for one too young to die; and one, who with proper guidance, can still contribute positively to the country and human kind.

hi gemami

post #52 on September 30th, 2009 8.42 am

agree with your post on most parts, except that personally my opinion that it shuld be used only in the most severe case.

for example, mass murderers, drug kingpins, dictators,

////Now, even after such consideration is met, the next question lies with the manner in which the decision is derived at. Is it a one-person (a judge) consideration or should it be a group (a jury) decision instead. It is dangerous to place such a decision on one person, for should an error in judgment arise, there is no way to return a life that is already taken away////

as for this, i believe that even the best judges err from time to time. personally, my opinion that a agroup like a jury should decide on such a serious matter that there is no U-turn option for misjudgement.

53) mice is nice

///// i believe that even the best judges err from time to time. personally, my opinion that a agroup like a jury should decide on such a serious matter that there is no U-turn option for misjudgement. /////

There are 2 things for certain here.
1.Error of judgement do and will occur.
Having a group of judges, or a jury will not eliminate the probability of error of judgement.

2.There is no u-turn once you hang someone.

Unless and until the possibility of error of judgenment can be totally eliminated, (which is inconceivable in today’s context), then (2) can not and should not be done

post #54 on September 30th, 2009 4.00 pm

////There are 2 things for certain here.
1.Error of judgement do and will occur.
Having a group of judges, or a jury will not eliminate the probability of error of judgement.////

even if errors do occur & that there will always be a possibility it can, it does not mean that no sentences can be handed down. the point that having a jury like system will go some way to minimise such errors arising.

i realise my previous post did give an impression that the jury system is without flaws, that was a mistake on my part. i do believe its a better system.

////2.There is no u-turn once you hang someone.////

agree there is no U-turn in ending someone’s life.

////Unless and until the possibility of error of judgenment can be totally eliminated, (which is inconceivable in today’s context), then (2) can not and should not be done////

do you imply that its ok for other sentences? lol…

55) mice is nice

////do you imply that its ok for other sentences? lol… /////

This man made system whereby one man (or a group of them) is able to judge another comes with all its inherent flaws.

Many in the past were burn at stakes in witchhunts, also because some are put in poistion to judge others.

it is an imperfect system, but non death sentence have at least a chance of u-turn. (albeit sometimes sadly after unpteen years of being wrongly jailed)

Dear Mice
#46
will your attempt to save a life cause others to suffer?

How? The classification of which offence carries the death penalty is done by parliament which is supposed to be the voice of the people. As years go by, more and more offences carry the death penalty. Also, more and more offences carry the legal presumptions of guilt. Why? Is our society deteriorating so rapidly that more people deserve to be hanged and punished? Or do we have such a poor police force that they cannot investigate a crime properly but must be aided by the law?

when you say “I have no problem signing any petition against the death penalty”, it comes across as self righteous.

What do you mean? Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Of course you are entitled to call me self righteous but that is pretty irrelevant because the debate here is on the death penalty and not about me.

57) teo soh lung

//////// As years go by, more and more offences carry the death penalty.//////

I am not so sure that is true. As far as I know, drug trafficking, homocide and arm robbery carries the death sentence, and these laws have been around for quite a while.

/// Also, more and more offences carry the legal presumptions ///

For this, aI agree. It makes life easier for the law enforcers, at the risk of miscarriage of justice.

There is the scary story that drug traffickers from across the causeway will stick a package of drugs on the undercarriage of some unwary Singaporean’s car parked in some shopping centres etc in our neighbouring country.. Because he/she is unaware, therefore there will be no suspicious behavourial patterns to for the customs to detect, so higher chance to pass thru. Once across, they will tail you to where you park your car. And since 85% will end up in a HDB carpark, they patiently wait till you are a safe distance from your car on you way back to your flat, and they will pick up the package and mission accomplished.
You do not even know you helped them.
But what if you get caught? Hang? That is the scary part of the story.

teo soh lung

post #57 on September 30th, 2009 5.08 pm

////How? The classification of which offence carries the death penalty is done by parliament which is supposed to be the voice of the people. As years go by, more and more offences carry the death penalty. Also, more and more offences carry the legal presumptions of guilt. Why? Is our society deteriorating so rapidly that more people deserve to be hanged and punished? Or do we have such a poor police force that they cannot investigate a crime properly but must be aided by the law?////

substance abuse (or any drug) is a social ill, it affects people socially. its not like the impact is mostly a positive 1.

as for “more and more offences carry the death penalty”, let’s not mix this up with death penalty. i hope you are not implying that there should not be death penalty just because more and more offences carry the death penalty.

societal trends & the professionalism of our police force themselves is a topic on their own, not that they are not relevent, but there may well be a number of other issues that may be related to death penalty, but it may more ideal to discuss in-depth in their respective articles with links provided.

////What do you mean? Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Of course you are entitled to call me self righteous but that is pretty irrelevant because the debate here is on the death penalty and not about me////

if you want to sound self righteous while sharing your personal opinion its your choice. why is it not relevent? it sets your tone on posts down the line.

how would others percieve a reply if i were to state “i have no problems putting stray cats & dogs to sleep”.

KopitiamApek

post #56 on September 30th, 2009 5.00 pm 55) mice is nice

////This man made system whereby one man (or a group of them) is able to judge another comes with all its inherent flaws.

Many in the past were burn at stakes in witchhunts, also because some are put in poistion to judge others.

it is an imperfect system, but non death sentence have at least a chance of u-turn. (albeit sometimes sadly after unpteen years of being wrongly jailed)////

so how does this post square off with the previous post
#54 on September 30th, 2009 4.00 pm
////Unless and until the possibility of error of judgenment can be totally eliminated, (which is inconceivable in today’s context), then (2) can not and should not be done////

i am rather confused….

Personally, I am not against the death penalty per se.

People who committed the most heinous crimes should be put to death.

Unfortunately, the argument will be what constitute heinous crimes. My own view is they are the following.

1.) Willingly caused multiple deaths to others, committed during a single act or over multiple acts. (serial killer, terrorism, falls into this)
2.) Involved in (either doing or planning) in torture, imprisonment, slavery or trafficking of multiple human beings…where the end result of victims is severe physical or mental impairment and/or trauma
3.) Lead or involved in armed rebellion against the legally elected government, in which the said rebellion causes widespread destruction and loss of life.

Also, the system involved in convicting a person to death penalty also need to be strengthen. Either introduce a panel of judges or a panel of jury. A single judge alone should not sentence someone to death penalty.

Persons convicted of death sentence should be imprisoned for min of 10 years or so. 10 years should be sufficient to flush out wrongful conviction cases.

Death penalties should not be met out trivially. We should have the death penalty but conviction should be rare. (How many terrorist cases or mass murderer or rebellion do we have anyway?)

Crimes like drug trafficking should not have death penalty. Drug traffickers are motivated by money, hence something like life imprisonment or canning should be sufficient. It is alleged that the drug traffickers caught are red herrings and designed to create a mask so that the REAL drug traffickers can escape undetected. Meaning, those caught are the small fishes while the big fishes are uncaught.

It is ironic we catch and hang traffickers but our govt deal with the Myanmar junta who is one of the main providers of drugs.

Even a single murder case should not have death penalty but should be life imprisonment instead. As mentioned, death penalty should be reserved for serial killer or mass murderers.

So in summary, we should not blindly oppose the death penalty just for the sake of opposing but we also need to limit it’s usage. Think of death penalty as nuclear weapon. Have it but don’t use it unless it is absolutely necessary.

61) mice is nice

It’s crystal clear to me. Maybe because a positive mind is needed.

“As years go by, more and more offences carry the death penalty;
I am not so sure that is true.” : KopitiamApek.

The law was amended to carry the death penalty for anyone in possession of a firearm – regardless whether he has bullets or not.

KopitiamApek

post #62 on October 1st, 2009 8.36 pm

////It’s crystal clear to me. Maybe because a positive mind is needed.////

i am not you.

earlier stance of zero tolerance on errors, then a flip-flop or change in stance in such a short time?

if you so positive why dun you just clear the air?

64) gemami

/////The law was amended to carry the death penalty for anyone in possession of a firearm – regardless whether he has bullets or not. //////////

Really? I was not aware of that. When did that happen? That’s how sneaky these laws get enacted. Like the CPF changes caught me unaware until it hurts.

Hitler said these words:

“If you win, you do not have to explain
If you did not win, you should not be there to explain”

65) mice is nice

Same answer. it’s crystal clear with a positive mind.

64) gemami

The presumption of guilt in law is a dangerous thing. In the interest of so called “efficiency” in enforcement, such presumptions are put in place. And quite a number of amendment to our laws It is entirely dependant on the law enforcer doing the right thing to prevent someone being convict based on a wrong presumption.

If the “with or without bullets” thingy can be enacted, then one day in if they cannot bring down the shoplifting crime rate, they may as well arrest someone for shoplifting regradless he/she is caught with the unpaid goods, and claim that the intend was there by his/her behaviour in the shop.

This is already true in the parking laws. I had the misfortune of being fined for not displaying a coupon when I did. I parked my car only a few lots next to the car park attendance booth. It was at night and quite pooly lit. The attendance probably could not see the coupon.I took the ticket to the booth and brought my coupon as evidence. The attendance spoke to her colleague on the talkie in Malay (probably thinking I do not understand), asking her is she sure there was no coupon displayed? )

I explained that if I wanted to cheat, would I be so dumb to park so close to her booth. I ask her if her colleague made a mistake, then please retract the ticket. She insisted if I can appeal at their main office. I told her if I walk from there, I am as good as having to pay the fine. Then she treatened that she will call the police if I do not leave the booth. I welcomed her to go t the nearest station with me to explain. And she just walked away.

So I paid for her colleague mistake.

If a carpark attend stick a fine on your screen by mistake or malice, you have no way of proving your innocence.

KopitiamApek

It is scary to have all these presumptions. I recall reading an article by Prof Tommy Koh in the 1970s. At that time the government enacted the Misuse of Drugs Act (1973) which introduced the presumption of guilt. Koh said that that would be the beginning of more presumptions of guilt. He was absolutely right.

The Misuse of Drugs Act has been amended many times. More offences carry the death penalty today than when it was first enacted in 1973. I counted 17 offences which carry the death penalty.

After the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Arms Offences Act was passed in 1974. Presumption is again used in this Act. I recall reading a case of a young man (I think he AWOL) who fired a shot in the night injuring no one. He was high. He was convicted and hanged under this Act.

@ comment 69: Similarly, if someone stashes a bag of drugs into your bag and you’re caught in possession, you’ll be surely hanged because of the MANDATORY death penalty for drug trafficking in Singapore. Even if you’re completely innocent and the judge knows it, you’ll still be hanged because of the rigid and unjust law.

To Fr,
In this case it is difficult to prove the drugs do not belong to you, so the only way is death sentence. That is unjust, we have to campaign to abolish DEATH PENALTY.

I think we can have a compromise.

We SHOULD have a mandatory death sentence for drugs trafficking.

At the same time, we SHOULD make it mandatory for those in support of death penalty to turn up and watch everytime there’s an execution.

Boleh? Good idea?

72) Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang) on October 7th, 2009 1.19 pm
At the same time, we SHOULD make it mandatory for those in support of death penalty to turn up and watch everytime there’s an execution.

Sure. I would go.

But would that mean if I don’t go to ALL sentencing, I am not supporting the general application of Law and justice? e.g if I don’t go to the court when Ris Low was convict edand her sentence of probation was given, I am in opposition to that punishment?

so.. how many court trials have you attended? is the total cases minus those you attended = the punishments that you do not agree with?

@72) Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang) on October 7th, 2009 1.19 pm

[[I think we can have a compromise.

We SHOULD have a mandatory death sentence for drugs trafficking.

At the same time, we SHOULD make it mandatory for those in support of death penalty to turn up and watch everytime there’s an execution.

Boleh? Good idea?]]

I agree if those who support the abolishment of death penalty will agree to attend the funeral of murder victims and, if the police permit, look at the photographs of the murder victims at the crime scene.

Deal?

Death penalty does not equate only to drug trafficking (which I don’t support)

@6) Lop on September 25th, 2009 11.03 pm

[[There are 2 issues here that could be discussed separately:

1. Does drug trafficking deserve a death penalty?]]

Drug trafficking does NOT deserve a death penalty sentence.

Drug trafficking, as defined by the law, is a serious crime but it does not warrant a death penalty. Because the traffickers are motivated by financial gains, a hefty fine and heavy jail sentence is sufficient. Worse case can give 12 rotans is good enough for deterrence.

[[2. Should we abolish death penalty? ]]

We should NOT abolish death penalty.

Death penalty should be reserved for heinous crimes like terrorism (causing death of innocents), serial murder and rebellion (causing deaths and destruction)

Something that makes me wonder….you all have heard of the chinese saying ” when you pull a weed, you must also kill off its roots”

Now in the case of this death sentence for drug trafficking, it can be said that the death sentence is a deterrence to kill of the “weed”….however, this death sentence doesn’t kill off the root, which is in fact the more serious problem…

after the weed is executed, the root brush it off and look for another carrier. and the cycle will repeat again….does it solves the problem? no it doesn’t…the druggies still get away with it

How does one measure the severity of a crime? Drug trafficking is the crime it is because of the spot-light it attracts? There is no denying that there is certainly a degree of damage drugs can do to a person and society, but are we jumping too fast to the conclusion that it is a crime that warrants the death penalty?

It is a serious crime because of the emphasis we place on the damages it can bring. Just like murder; it shatters the lives of the victim’s family and friends – and yes – the severity of the punishment must meet the crime committed. But surely, taking a life for a life is not the most civilized form of punishment or repayment?

Death penalty must only be meted out to the one who does not have the remotest chance of rehabilitation and making amends for his crime.

there is a problem here.

advocates using 1 specific (sometimes subjective) example to champion against death penalty across the board.

if so, then maybe its only fair to review the death sentence for a specific case, rather than abolish it for good across the board.

Rape in my opinion is a more grievous crime than drug trafficking. As it cause direct physical suffering contrary to drug trafficking which is like causing indirect suffering. In any case the person purchasing the drug is often a “willing victim”.

The charge for rape and drug trafficking opt to be swop instead.

Sigh, while young men hang, we do business with the drug barons. Singapore will never be a drug free country for many reasons.

1> We do business with the drug lords of Myanmar. Everywhere else in the world, the most abused drug (apart from alcohol and nicotine) is marijuana, a relatively “harmless” drug, but in Singapore, it is heroin, a deadly killer.

2> We only hang the mules. This drives the street value of drugs through the roof, making some people filthy rich. There will always be people who want to abuse drugs and coupled with the fact that the most abused drug here, heroin is also the most addictive people who are hooked will do anything to get the drug. With the street value at ridiculous levels, they will often resort to crime to fuel their addiction, before turning into mules themselves.

3> DRCs have not worked. Drug addicts are sick people, not criminals. By turning them into criminals instead of looking at them as sick people who need help we are only helping in the marginalisation of this group, fueling a vicious cycle of addiction and crime.

4> This will drive more and more people to do more desperate things like deal in drugs, and possibly trafficking.

5> It is sad that those who frame drug laws have no idea what goes through the mind of an addict. As someone once said, “There, but for the grace of god, go I”. The person facing the gallows could have been anyone. All it takes is the right (or wrong) combination of companions, circumstances and upbringing.

6> As the case of Iwuchukwu (google his name) showed, we are also perfectly willing to execute people who are fundamentally innocent but only guilty on technicalities. What kind of society are we protecting then from drugs? A violent, uncaring and vindictive one.

7> The argument “Oh if we don’t hang them we will have drugs on the street” is spurious at best. In Singapore there are drugs available if you know where to go. All one has to do is look at the DRC and SANA statistics. This is a reality. We are not deterring anything. In 2002, close to 4000 people were arrested on drug related charges. That is not a small number. The drug lords in Myanmar and other places are also not stupid. They send an insane cache of drugs with one person who becomes the decoy. While police attention is focused on him, ten others get through with smaller amounts. He hangs, the drugs enter the market place and because of the smaller amounts, demand higher prices. It’s simple economics.

80) Hades

Which is why Hades, they are trying to kill the weed but not bothering about the roots…

Oh, now is more clear.
TOC is against PAP
TOC is against MM Lee
TOC is for same sex marriage
TOC is against FT
TOC is against death penalty

Is TOC for Marijuana? What more TOC?

Singaporekia, I don’t think the TOC is “for” marijuana, or any other drug for that matter. It is a matter of simple human decency. We are hanging young boys while funding the drug barons with money and M16s. Does that seem right to you?

The death penalty for drug trafficking has its origin from the need to met out severe deterent to stamp out the drug menace in the 70s when the drug culture was literally killing the Western societies, a side effect of the Vietnam War, imported back home by returning US soldiers. Some say it is IndoChina’s revenge on the US. Others say its retribution.

But keeping that law in today’s context is an overkill. And like many here rightfully pointed out, it is the ikan bilis of drug thugs that get hanged, while the whales swim on.

And unlike armed robbery and kidnapping where you have to do it yourself to commit the crime, someone can stash the drug in your bag and you are in deep sh*t.

And bachk to the drug trade, the way the legal drug (medicine) trade operates can be as much a crime as what these drug thugs do.

82) Singaporekia

Wah I envy you. When I write like that it gets moderated from cyberspace into deep space.

82) Singaporekia

The mind boggles.

Just a crazy idea.

Have a state-owned drug supply centre. All existing drug addicts who register with the centre will get FREE (or dirt cheap) supply of drug (limit supply to single use each time)

1. The drug trade will find no incentive to traffick drugs here, so there will virtually be no new drug addict.
2. Exisitng drug addicts are less likely to resort to crime to fund their addiction.
3. Keep a good tab of the drug addicts, put in rehabilitation where possible.

Lop

post #87 on October 7th, 2009 10.11 pm

for once i agree with you. ;)

your idea should be trial tested for smokers 1st. the legally sanctioned drug that youths can more easily get their hands on.

#88 mice is nice

Heh, good to know no 2 persons totally agree or disagree on everything!

Doesn’t work for tobacco addiction because firstly it’s already legalised and secondly the level of addiction is different. Also the number of smokers is many many times that of drug addicts.

Personally, I never really approved of death sentence from drug trafficking.

It only makes sense if a murderer were to be given the death sentence than sentencing that murderer to life in prison.

Lop

post #89 on October 7th, 2009 10.50 pm

////Heh, good to know no 2 persons totally agree or disagree on everything!////

true, & i try not to typecaste or label anyone here.

////Doesn’t work for tobacco addiction because firstly it’s already legalised and secondly the level of addiction is different. Also the number of smokers is many many times that of drug addicts.////

maybe… but having a large number of “addicts” to deal with may make this project a more urgent 1? as the lack of “critical mass can be easily brushed aside…

& maybe more people to tax (to make this project a viable 1)?!

lol… :)

I am for keeping the Death Penalty.

However, it must not be mandatory. It should be applied with discretion.

“….Have a state-owned drug supply centre….” : Lop.

Fantastic idea! This way the government can openly do business with Burma without having to fend off brickbats from its accusers. Maybe it can also hire some of the Burmese, as foreign talents, to run these drug centres.

Not bad, not bad …. keep it coming.

there are various issues which the various posts seek to address. I am somewhat baffled by some of the arguments…

Are we talking about death penalty in general as a punishment on drug traffickers?

Are we talking about this specific case of hanging of a 19-year old ?

Or are we talking about drug trafficking being a crime punishment by dealth penalyt ?

We cannot have a general consensus unless we are clear which specific issue are commenting..

My view is on the crime of drug trafficking. It is undisputed that drugs addiction leads to a plethora of other crimes. In other countries where drug trafficking is rampant, it is not uncommon to see prostitiution, gangs, burglary, murders also ravaging the streets of the cities.

I think Singapore government realises this and wants to nip this in the bud. It is unfortunate that in this specific case, it involves a teenager. But remember, i am not commenting on the age limit of dealth penalty or whether dealth penalty is appropriate punishment or not. If the penalty for drug trafficking is say something light (eg. a $100,000 fine), the drug warlords will laugh in the face and just pay and continue to traffick drugs.

So the punishment must be harsh or severe enough to cut of the supply of drugs. Whether it is the runners themselves (such as the 19 year kid) or the warlords, the intention is to cut off the source.

Some of you are sympathetic to the plight of the 19-yr old. But if you look a the macro-social level (which is basically what governance is), the system was put in place for the society good.

Go to the streets of brazil, chile and some other southern american countries, and you will see how devastating it would be to let drugs take control of the city

94) joe

You made many valid points.
I agree totally with you that the system was put in place for the society good.

/// the macro-social level (which is basically what governance is), ///
that is one disadvantage when state has to intervene on an issue, oftentime the tools will be blunt, like taking antibiotics or carpet bombing, kill the good guys and the bad guys in one swoop,

whereas kidnapping and armed robbery crimes were almost decimated by the harsh hang them all rule (which is good) it seems like it had not worked too well for the drug problem.

94) joe on October 8th, 2009 9.06 am

It is good that you spelled out the different issues that surround this 1 topic.

In the case of Singapore, it is not to weed out the source of the drugs, but (an attempt) to weed the source of the runners. It will be harder for the Source to find runners, when the runners themselves know the consequence of such acts.

With regards to South American societies, the one you want to highlight may be Mexico. Specifically, maybe the city of Ciudad Juarez.

Death Penalty is sucks!

Dealth penalty sucks!

“….Have a state-owned drug supply centre….” : Lop.

This may work, although it may sound morbid feeding the addicts at first thought.

The same principle had worked with Tote Board taking control of 4D and Toto bettings. Better in their hands that that of bookies. (I shall not dwell into the oft repeated view that govt then makan all the takings from citizens)

And as this “pow tarn” biz generates huge returns, easy access to outlets have quite successfully channeled the public (who will die die buy lottery, legal or not) to patronised the “legal” oulets rather than the underground bookles.

The reverse has happened to the cigarette trade. There were hardly any incidents of cig smuggling in the past, as the monetary incentive was just not there. With the custom duty on cigs going sky high (the intend was good, to make it costly for smokers, so a disincentive to smoke the health away, which leads to higher health care cost to the country) this blunt tool’s side effect is cig smuggling. And as long as there are smokers, (and there will always be) the smuggling will persist. Unfortunately, it is going the way of the drug smuugling trade.

Back to state-owned drug supply drug, all this years of pushing drug supply underground has driven up the price (and profits/ incentive to fuel the smuggling trade, and the crime committed to feed the habit). But how do we justify such move morally? Quite a challenging moral dilenma.

Addiction comes in many forms – gambling, womanising, tobacco, alcohol, drug and substance abuse. And how about compulsive shopping, credit card debts and overeating.

Yeah, we can abolish the death penalty if you donate money to build a facility that’s as secure as Changi Prison and as high as Pinnacle@Duxton.

99) PrincessBambyee

Not unlike “puttng to sleep” unwanted pets which is cheaper than housing them?
The fact that we have to conjure up the term “putting to sleep” tells a lot.

The sad story of an addict

A kid gets curious and try the drug, Often time the introducer is desperate to get another abuser to feed his habit.
The kid gets caught and end up in an DRC and his/her network of drug abusers increased hundredfold.
So does his supply network.
And the sad story goes on until he gets caught and is hanged.

Kids in the vulnerable social strata will always be targetted by the trade and they are the one end up caught.

The well to do ones can pay for their habit without resorting to trafficking. Including some famed newsreader.

Yah, come to think of it…

Why do we ‘execute’ criminals, instead of ‘putting them to sleep’? or maybe ‘euthanize without consent’, or ‘prepone the afterlife’?

102) Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang)

How about “terminate” (as Arnie does),

“delete’ might be good. So that it won’t conjure up images of suffering.

X-out,
annul,
black out,
bleep,
blot out,
cancel,
clean up,
cross out,
cut out,
destroy,
efface,
eliminate,
exclude,
expunge,
obliterate,
omit,
pass up,
anitize,
squash,
squelch,
sterilize,
strike out,
wipe out

I am against death penalty for offences like drug trafficking.

I do not have much faith in the investigation process and jury system.
If you are wrongly accuse of a minor offence,the most is that you are jailed or fined,even though you do not commit it or it is not your fault,or someone just want to get you involve.You can just plead leniency just to get this case over .(I had done that and I believe many had)
But this is a matter of life or death if you are wrongly accused ,”wan ong” or traffick without your knowledge etc etc.

If drug trafficking is punishable by death ,then those who consume or possess it should also face the same consequense.Without buyer,there will be no seller.

If Yong is born into a happy family,he may not be in this mess.

104) KopitiamApek

Send the person to meet his maker
End his suffering
Enter afterlife in advanced

104) KopitiamApek

Zap him

106) agongkia

Your last para hit the nail on the head.

Family is everything.
And some say it takes a viilage to raise a child.

107) Yamamoto

Will his maker be displeased?
Will his afterlife be downgraded?
Will his suffering transcent to his afterlife?
Like reborn as a poppy plant?

108) joe

Martian speaks “ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ack ”
(English translation: Zappin’ good idea)

An evil is only as big as you make it out to be.

In some countries, corruption alone can send you to an early meeting with your Maker.

Who is it who decides which crime deserves death?

precisely. the law of the land.

112) gemami

Wonder how their Maker will view those who took role of Maker to decide who should die.
They only will know when they meet their Maker, I suppose.

Scene from “Independence Day”
US President: “What do you want us to do?”
Alien: “Die”

113) KopitiamApek

Surely you are not advocating that there should be no judiciary system whatsoever in any country.

115) joe

I think TOC’s post ref number need some finetuning.

anyway, answer to your question is no, I am not advocating such. It will then be a law of jungle.
But having 2-in-1 death penalty and presumption of guilt in the drug trafficking law is dangerously prone to hanging the wrong person.
Maybe we do not have a perfect way of proving guilt yet, but we have gone ahead with the perfect kill.
I am not terribly comfortable with that.

KopitiamApek

That depends on which religious view ;-) lol

and with regards to hanging the wrong person…well, we hang the person who bring in the drugs, but nothing seems to happen to the mastermind?!

With the hanging of druggies in sgp, how many and traffickers and how many are the one who sit back, push the drugs and earn big money

to those who are the druglords and masterminds of the drug trafficking trade, i will not recommend a quick hanging.

They deserve the slow death of gas chamber…..

jokes aside, i can understand the sentiments of those against dealth penalty. Particularly for

106) agongkia .

////////Without buyer,there will be no seller.///////

You made a salient point here.
Cutting off the demand could be the solution to this sticky problem.
As it is, the rehabitation programme for addicts does not seem awfully effective. A deterrent sentence to to keep them away from society and “contaminating” the rest may be one way. But there is really no easy solution to prevent people from destroying their own life.

to those who are the druglords and masterminds of the drug trafficking trade, i will not recommend a quick hanging.

They deserve the slow death of gas chamber…..

jokes aside, i can understand the sentiments of those against dealth penalty. Particularly for a teenager.. unfortunately, the age limit for capital punishment is 18 years old.

but at the same time, i am outraged by the fact that the lives of many teenagers have been destroyed (or killed) by the dangers of drugs.

118) joe .

////They deserve the slow death of gas chamber…..//////////

You are too kind already : )
May I recommend 50 years to life (whichever longer) of watching 24/7 (of course, we will be kind, there will be toilet breaks) same episode of this year’s F1 live telecast.

the depravity of the mind knows no limits !!!

lol !!

I’d strongly recommend everyone to read Amnesty International’s FAQ on the Death Penalty because it answers a lot of the doubts and questions you’ve all raised: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ACT50/010/2007/en/f45ed09c-d3a2-11dd-a329-2f46302a8cc6/act500102007en.html

Please go and read it.

Sorry, i am not convinced by amnesty’s arguments.

to say that capital punishment is a denial of human rights for the offender is forgetting the fact that those who are victims of the crime also have their rights to live (victims who are killed) or drug-free lives.

in the case of heinous crimes, the very act of acknowleging the rights of the offender denies the same human rights of the victims.

I am not supporting or opposing capital punishment here. I am just saying their arguments are flawed.

You’re right that the victims have their right to life and Amnesty never said that the victims do not have their rights to live either.

I don’t see how their arguments are flawed. They are actually quite sound and rational.

another campaign that is heading nowhere with debateable values, morals & a subjective example to champion it….

123) L

Thank you for sharing.

////What do you say to those countries which claim that calling for a worldwide moratorium on capital punishment is in effect another attempt by the West to “impose their cultural values on us”?

Amnesty International welcomes the multiplicity of discourses on human rights grounded in different cultures and religions and believes that different visions contribute to our understanding of human rights. At the same time, the organization believes that human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. Although they may have been often developed in a Western context, they are not Western in content but derive from many different traditions and are acknowledged by all the members of the United Nations as the standards by which they have agreed to abide.///////

UN is still a very much “Western Organisation” by all counts by the stark reality that the economic powers tilts towards the West. And the most powerful of the West selectively choose what it wishes to follow on “human right” issues.

When someone robs another of their right, they have no claim to the same rights for for themselves.

121) KopitiamApek

Might I recommend that while having toilet break a monitor will continue to display the race.

129) joe

Yep.

130) Yamamoto

Your proposal seconded.

Dear Singapore Elites,

Possession of drugs is punishable with death penalty?! OMG!

Only drugs man! Not a single intent to kill/murder and still get death penalty?!!

Commoners do not have body guards and tight security like VIPs enjoy. Many commoners could be easily framed or exploited by the real criminals. Many innocent lives would be lost with this law, without unfolding the truths!

Please abolish the law.

Love
Maria

“…precisely. the law of the land…” : Joe.

I am still not convinced. What about the law of humanity?

(btw, how come there’s porn in TOC … Maria Ozawa would be stoned to death in some neighbouring states).

132) Maria Ozawa on October 9th, 2009 1.13 am

you know

… in wars, it is better to maim and hurt than to kill. It adds burden for the opposing army as well as having a demoralizing effect.

… when you really want to hurt someone, you don’t kill. You make him 生不如死。i.e make him/her wish s/he was dead.

Well, drugs have the same effect… it not only make a person wishing s/he was dead, but it also add burden to others around him/her. Death penalty is letting him/her off easy.

“What about the law of humanity” gemami

Well, i guess that is essentially the same as human rights…

I have no problem with the concept of human rights and tully respect the notion of treating human with dignity and respect (afterall, that’s what makes us different from animals). My problem is when people use human rights to justify a crime or something that is wrong. Often the adovcates of human rights fail to recognise that the very people whom they are championing are the same people who violated the rights of others in the first place.

My children have every right to live in a drug-free society. I have every right to live in a neighbourhood that is safe from the perils of drug addiction. You have the right to justice, free speech, etc, etc.

That said, i do agree that capital punishment is a blunt tool and is not an ideal solution to fighting drugs and crime. Education, religion, family, economy, etc are some that should be advocated as well.

Turth be said, I am not really a big fan of what singapore government does. But in the aspect of capital punishment for drug trafficking, i am quite supportive of it.

why isn’t there a discussion thread on the Miss Singapore episode.

i have got tons of thing to comment on her !!

Warning signs of the legal minefields of almost guaranteed death are all there to be seen when entering Singapore. Walk the straight path, toe the line demarcated and policed by the Government in Singapore. Choose to walk through the minefield to enjoyed a shorter route to an easier harvest, do not cry when made to pay the ultimate penalty. Does the death penalty deters? That’s the question that have never been pushed for an answer.

As for the young man who will soon remain so, forever, having the surname Yong tells me that he is a Hakka. That’s too bad. In Hakkaland, the top Hakka dog have no qualms about making use of another lump of Hakka dirt to serve as example to those who dare go against his Heavenly Mandate! If fact the very act is a gesture of ruthlessness that is meant as a warning to the miserable masses.

Hi Joe,

I do understand your reasoning and will concede to you on the account that one has the right to protect his own and to live in a drug-free environment.

Unfortunately, we have to accept what is real and what is not. Society is never going to be rid of drugs and the trafficking of it. It has been around for hundreds of years and nothing has been able to eradicate it.

Many are taken in by drugs and its many influences. We have to understand why. For the traffickers, it is the lure of money. For the user, it is the addiction.

We mete out the death penalty based on the drug quantity one possesses when caught – whether you are the trafficker or the user. Some have argued that trafficking deserves death because of the trail of destruction it brings along with it. Which crime does not bring a trail of destruction?

What about the user. His is a case of addiction. He needs help more than persecution. Do we end it for him thinking it is the easy way out for him and his addiction? I think not.

You’ve answered it yourself. When a punishment is not ideal, the more we should not consider punishment by death. We are civilized enough to work something out. We need the intelligence of human beings, not animals.

Hi Gemami

I guess the common ground we can come to an agreement is that nothing good comes out of drug abuse.

The message to all will be how circumstances drives us, stay out of drugs. and that is what i will educate my kids

The message to all will be no matter how dire circumstances drives us, stay out of drugs. and that is what i will educate my kids

Maybe we should also have a “World Day Against Drug Trafficking”…people need to be protected from these unscrupuous and despicable drug traffickers out to destroy other people’s life!

It is the rights of people to lead and live a drug-free life, and anyone who violates the rights of others in this aspect should be punished!

Will TOC take the lead in organizing a “World Day Against Drug Trafficking”?

How do you handle adversity?

Like the CARROT, the EGG, OR the COFFEE BEAN?

Think of this: Which are you?

three pots with water. In the first pot, placed carrots, in the second placed eggs and the last placed coffee beans. let them sit and boil

the carrot that seems strong, but with pain and adversity, but become soft and lose strength?

the egg that changes with the heat? the shell look the same, but on the inside, bitter and tough with a stiff spirit and a hardened heart?

Or, are you like the coffee bean? The bean actually changes the hot water, very circumstance that brings the pain. When the water gets hot, it releases the fragrance and flavor. If you are like the bean, when things are at their worst, you become better and change the situation around you.

When the hours are the darkest and trials are their greatest do you elevate to another level?

If one can be like coffee, you will change the addict to a better person rather be influnce by him/her.

gemami

post #139 on October 9th, 2009 4.19 pm

//// Some have argued that trafficking deserves death because of the trail of destruction it brings along with it. Which crime does not bring a trail of destruction?

What about the user. His is a case of addiction. He needs help more than persecution. Do we end it for him thinking it is the easy way out for him and his addiction? I think not.////

very well said.

////When a punishment is not ideal, the more we should not consider punishment by death.////

agree, but this petition is using just 1 narrow wxample to champion a cause with wider implications, which i think its not the right way forward. why not champion it on a law by law basis? say no to death penalty for specific cause/s…?

being more specific may garner more support & also be easier to push forth?

To 142) Petrus:

Oh then will you sign a petition to put the Singapore government on international trial for colluding with drug trafficking mafia lords as well? http://www.singapore-window.org/1020naus.htm

Thank you everyone who attended, we had a very good turnout and the atmosphere was very motivating.

All the speakers shared with us their opinions, coming from different perspectives and I am sure that everyone who were there, whether or not they support the death penalty, have learned alot from what was shared.

For those who were not there/ couldn’t make it, please stay tuned for our video. As we have our day jobs as well, kindly give us some time to edit and release the video. :)

He had done something that is very wrong but he should be given a chance.

Death Penalty for the trafficking of drugs is against the core principle of justice ,Eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, and against the religious beliefs of most singaporeans. In islam, forgiveness or a pardon is encouraged more unless the crime committed is severe( intentional murder, serial killings,genocide, terrorism etc)

The justification given for this non-violent crime is that if a person smuggle in drugs to singapore in the amounts ranging from 15g to 1.2 kg, it would “destroy” 1000 lives in singapore which makes him worser than a murderer . Its kind of like the movie ‘collateral’ ,but without psychics to be able to foresee the future. This is UNACCEPTABLE. The burden of proof is with the court for not being able to prove that the illegal drugs brought by the drug traffickers WILL, with absolute certainty, that it will destroy/kill a person in the future. Even if the drugs do destroy a person’s life as proven by a supernatural psychic ,drug traffickers would not be responsible for the death/addiction of a person but rather the person himself for taking drugs. Does it make sense for alcohol or cigarette traders to be responsible to the death/addiction of the people who consume it? Education is the key to completely eradicate the drug problem, not death to drug traffickers.

Latest scientific study by ‘The Lancet’ had shown that Cigarettes and alcohol do more harm than many illegal drugs like cannabis, LSD, ketamine & estasy. Yet we are murdering people who smuggled these drugs while the import of cigarettes and alcohol is perfectly acceptable . The laws that we have now with regards to drugs are criminally outdated.

http://biopsychiatry.com/tobacco/risks.html

The other justification is that it deters drug trafficking. There are plenty of countries that doesn’t punish drug traffickers by death yet are able to maintain a low drug crime rates (Turkey,greece,france).
Furthermore, there are plenty of studies that show no corellation between the death penalty and murder rates. Don’t get me wrong, i’m not against the death denalty for murder and that the accused has been proven to be guilty. Just ask yourself, who in their right minds would smuggle in drugs to singapore while knowing that he/she could be punished by death if caught?

1) Dumb people who were exploited by a drug lord to smuggle drugs, either aware or unaware that he is smuggling drugs

( It is sad how people are duped into becoming drug mules and thus had to die due to the criminal judicial countries that penalized drug trafficking by death. There are singaporean women on death row in countries like china right now for such cases. Unfortunately the government has made no intention of protesting against it : (

2) Desperate people who are coerced to smuggle drugs in order to pay off debts to a violent loan shark, or a drug lord
3) People who are in desperate need of money and was influenced by the drug lord’s sweet talk

That’s all i have to say ,

Peace

Maybe next year, we’ll decide that it was a terrible mistake to have hanged all those people. Just like it was a terrible mistake to ram Mandarin down every child’s throat?

I wonder if this mistake will be any more reversible?

Mandatory pennalty means no judicial discretion to order a lesser sentence (for over age 18). Legally speaking, this a paradox where it self conflicts with “the Right to be Considered Innocent until Proven Guilty”.

So, let me ask you: Do you support KILLING people who could be unaware that their bag has 16grams of heroin at custom checkpoint?

If you support mandatory death penalty, don’t regret that the capital punishment could fall onto your friends or family, who could have been conned/framed/deceived/blackmailed/mistaken identity/unintellectual. If you support mandatory death penalty, you also like the idea of having the power to murder someone simply by implanting 16grams of heroin inside anybody’s bag.

Now, do you, as a human being, support mandatory death penalty?

http://thecrunchtime.blogspot.com/2010/01/do-you-support-mandatory-death-penalty.html