Alvin Phoon
China, one of the world’s oldest civilisations, boasting rich history, almost 10 million square kilometres of land and a 1.4 billion strong population, is destined to be a major power. Her impact on the world we know today cannot be doubted. Their economy has progressed significantly. One could argue that China is possibly only communist by name, and that within its veins runs the thick blood of capitalism. Her leaders are intelligent, making full use of the resources available to them. If we had the power to rewrite history, there is no doubt that one or two minor corrections would result in China being the most important nation in our modern society. Yet, I find myself posing the same question over and over again; what is wrong with the Chinese?
(Above: Pre-execution shaming. The signs have offenders’ names right below the offense. In the cases of these two men, they have been charged with murder. Source: thechinadebate.org. Below: Akmal Shaikh. Source: The Daily Mail )
Chinese newspapers and web users have ignored all condemnation from Britain and hailed the execution of drug trafficker Akmal Shaikh. One headline reads “ China No Longer an Amusement Park for Crimes of Foreigners“. In my last post, I wondered (out loud) if the Chinese were still feeling bitter about the Opium war. A web user from Guangxi confirms my suspicions, claiming it to be “a day that Chinese people held their heads up and it’s a day to comfort national heroes…who fought against opium smoking”.
Let me state first and foremost that I utterly condemn the execution. Even more so, I condemn these remarks. They disgust me, and it pains me to read about such ignorance and cruelty. The petulance of the Chinese, even after their government has taken the life of a man deemed to be mentally unstable for an offence that should not warrant a death sentence, sickens me.
It was previously stated that the amount of drugs found on Shaikh could have caused the deaths of over 25,000 people. This is where most people are mistaken. Drugs do not cause death. Similarly, guns do not cause deaths. The number one cause of death? Human beings.
It is downright ridiculous to suggest that such man-made, artificial entities could cause death. 
They are non-living objects, whose purpose is to be used and to function as part of modern society’s many unnecessary accessories. It is us, who are at fault.
Drugs cannot hurt us if we do not allow them to. Unless the cannabis plant suddenly grows arms and slashes you all over with its leaves.
For too long, drugs have been conveniently exploited and named as scapegoats. They have had fingers pointed at them by those who fervently refuse to admit that it is our responsibility to educate our youth on the dangers of drug use. We consistently push the blame on them for destroying the lives and minds of many. The truth is, eliminating all drugs will never work because there will always be alternative means of obtaining them. The only real way of annihilating the drug market is to educate. Inform. Teach. It is time to take responsibility.
If the Chinese think that instilling fear is the solution to crime, they are severely mistaken. There will be plenty more vandals, thieves, drug traffickers, prostitutes, robbers, murderers etc. How many are they going to kill before they realise that crime will never cease? How many have to die so that the Chinese can continue feeling proud that their nation practices such intolerance? What sort of education will it take for them to realise that reveling in the death of a mentally disturbed individual is not just cruel, but plain repulsive? And how long will it take all of us to understand that it is not our place to decide whether one’s life should end?
(Below: The cold, desolate tomb of Akmal Shaikh near Urumqi, north-west China. Source: The Daily Mail. Left: An appeal for clemency. Source: Dylan Martinez, Reuters )
Alvin also writes for his blog here.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
#42
Well Mel, according to the Chinese source, there was insufficient proof of Akmal having any mental illness. Yet according to other sources, reported by the BBC, Akmal was suffering from bipolar disorder and delusional psychosis.
The links are not there for nothing you know.
@rizal
Ahhh…now you’ve decided to change your tact…
So you chose not to have any harsh words or comments for USA with regards to their human rights violations, but when it comes to China, you feel you have all the right to be more vocal and critical?
Lynn, I can accept that both the drug addict and the drug trafficker are equally responsible…if there’s no one to first tempt, than the chances of someone falling into temptation is less likely to occur.
However, while a drug addict’s actions only caused problem to his or her own life, a drug trafficker’s activities do have a devastating impact to a whole community or a whole society, especially if they successfully offload a huge amount of drugs (like the 4kg drugs that Akmal had tried to smuggled in). So, the penalty for drug traffickers would have to be more severe!
I not against nor for the death penalty, that’s the prerogative of a country’s government as it deems fit, based on the severity of the social issues at hand with regards to drug abuse.
But if that is what the country had so decided to enforce, and had make known to all concerned, than those who still wants to risk their lives in going against the law can only blame themselves for their own foolishness.
The true reason :
Now is the 21st century, everybody is the same.
If we still live in the 19th and 20th century, we must follow what few great nations say for their benefit and face.
I fully supported the death sentence given by the chinese. Drugs kills. Period. I do not see why the writer wamted to write an article of this. The drug smuggler no matter whether mental problems or not could not have the drugs on him unless he wanted to carry out the deed and earn money out of innocent chinese who are addicted. Whose is more pitiful? The drug pusher or those innocent chinese hooked on it? I cant understand why communist has anything to do with the death sentence of the drug carrier, in singapore he would be hanged. Write something else about Singapore ploitics than writing something nonsense.
NO to DRUGS! Dont even try your LUCK! DEATH awaits all drug pusher/carrier/smugglers. No mercy!
if one cannot behave like an upright human and is worse than a beast, then one should be killed and reborn as beast. that will save one’s own sufferings adn that of others…
Anyone one who commits a crime of trying to poison hundred of thousands of human beings should be put to an end, period.
You think Akmal don’t know there’s death sentence for drug trafficking in China?
His disorder made him stupid enough not to know the death sentence but smart enough to smuggle 4kg of drugs?
Selective disorder huh?
rizal #40,
Statistics may show there’s is no correlation between death
penalty and crime, but in every crime there will always be
hardcore offenders and these are the people who will go on
to offend and so there will always be people who’be hanged
or shot and reflected back into that statistics.
The death penalty is actually aimed at those criminals
sitting on the fence, weighing the risks and rewards, and ultimately
serve as a deterant. not to carry out the offence.
In case you get me wrong, I do not support the death penalty for
drugs trafficked in very small quantity.
Singapore threshold of 15 gm of heroin for capital punishment and
a conviction based on presumption is really not justified.
How much profit can a pusher make with that amount?
I believe most who had that amount of drugs actually had it for their
own consumption.
But to bring in 4 kilos and knowing the law of that country,you’ll be
foolish not to see he’s not in it for the big time.
Think of the number of people who will be affected by this quantity
(25,000 plus their families?)
Yes, China is fair to mete out the sentence to Akamal
who actually deserve no sympathy from Alvin and you in the first
place.
Hi rizal,
“You hadn’t really explain why you think that drug traffickers are responsible for the misery brought upon drug abusers themselves. You simply emphasize that drug traffickers are hurting the innocents ,when the innocents clearly hurt themselves, without indicating any reason or rationale. Why? Because the drug traffickers made it available therefore there are hurting the innocents? Please refer back to my alcohol analogy regarding this flaw in deduction.”
Maybe I didn’t make my point clear on the previous post. Death penalty is a deterrent measure set to make would be drug traffickers THINK TWICE before committing the act. It will not stop the drug lords from trying to get people to smuggle for them but at least, it will most definitely prevent people who wants to make a quick buck but are afraid of the death sentence when caught for trying.
It is just a measure set in place to filter out these type of people.
Take for example the ban of chewing gums in Singapore or the smuggling of pirated VCDs/DVDs. Time and again, some people still try and smuggle a few each time be it for small profit or just personal consumption. These normal people still dare to try as they know that the most they ever get is a fine. They wouldn’t lose their lives. If they have money, they can pay the fines.
But IF a death sentence is impose on the smuggling of pirated movies and chewing gums, things would definitely change. The stakes are a hell lot higher now and people in their right mind will know the cons are a lot higher than the pros and definitely will think twice. Although occasionally there’s still going to be some naive and greedy people try beating the system. But at least it can deter other would be traffickers whom value their lives more from trying…
Actually, I agree that alcohol and tobacco are not any better due to the fact that they indirectly increase the cause of other problems such as drink-drive road accidents, health problems, etc. (And personally, I do wish that people will stop smoking entirely as it not only causes health problems for smokers in the long run, it also indirectly causes health problems to others working or staying with them.)
But people still do it even after campaigns after campaigns of educating the public on the hazards of smoking and drink driving.
Though alcohol and tobacco are ranked 5th and 9th respectively, the implication of eradicating them totally is not that straightforward as we all know that tobacco and alcohol are a major source of income for any country’s economy. That has been set ever since colonization started or maybe earlier. The image of people smoking and drinking during socializing has been imprinted on the minds of people for a long time doesn’t help. They’re both mega industries that no country will want to forsake as it rakes in more money than one can imagine. Also eradicating these industries probably will cause more economic problems for the country. Therefore it may be wiser to control the distribution of these two popular drugs.
Since we can’t eradicate these two drugs from our society, it also doesn’t make sense to legalize other drugs that are less dangerous as it will only add on to more social problems. Therefore laws are needed to make other drugs illegal or at least harder for the common public whom are not well verse in their medical usage from getting addicted, be it self-medication or as a relaxant.
Ideally, everyone knows that it’s best to nip the problem in the bud (catching the real drug lords that are behind the trafficking). And I believe all honest governments are trying their best in control of drugs.
We all know the laws ain’t perfect and every policy will definitely have holes where certain people are not covered or protected. What legislators can do is to minimize the damage it will cause to the majority of society as best as they see fit for their individual country. It’s not practical to exactly customized the law to fit every individual of the society. Therefore people are educated through campaigns. But even that is not enough. This is best illustrated by the fact that campaigns after campaigns of educating the public on the hazards of smoking and drink driving, people still does it.
The truth is that education is still not enough.. it has to be accompanied by tough punishments…
#49 Tony
You said:
“However, while a drug addict’s actions only caused problem to his or her own life, a drug trafficker’s activities do have a devastating impact to a whole community or a whole society, especially if they successfully offload a huge amount of drugs (like the 4kg drugs that Akmal had tried to smuggled in). So, the penalty for drug traffickers would have to be more severe!”
Studies have shown that alcohol and tobacco can be as harmful as some drugs.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17760130/
Do importers of large quantities of wine and cigarettes deserve the death sentence as well? And if not, why the double standards?
Well, what do you expect? China is a Communist nation. Everyone knows communist nations rule harshly, no human rights and no freedom of speech.
mad93,
Why should the communist ideology be blamed when Singapore, Texas, Malaysia, Indonesia, and other numerous non-communist states are holding on to the death penalty?
Your accusations against China is simply biased. If it were USA, I guess you have another set of comments for death penalty, huh? :)
Mad93 statement is racism.
Proper statement:
Well, what do you expect? China is a Communist nation. Everyone knows communist nations rule strictly, no perfect human rights like every other nation and no total freedom of speech like every other nation.
No perfect country in this world
#60 Lynn
In another word, you are proposing that drugs like heroin, morphine, marijuana etc. be legalized and made available just like alcohol and cigarettes, and drug traffickers should be treated like any cigarettes or alcohol vendors! Did we get you right?
It is so absurd to link illegal drugs with alcohol and cigarettes!
Just because someone has a mental illness does not absolve him or her of all responsibility. Most mental illnesses do not affect a person’s ability to judge right from wrong, and don’t expect the Chinese to automatically drop the charges due to the SUDDEN-insanity defense.
Moreover, Akmal’s mental illness surely didn’t affect his ability to manage a business in the UK and travel far and wide, from Pakistan to London, from London to Poland, from Poland to central Asia, and from there to China. I wonder where he got the money for his international travels, which aren’t exactly cheap; and why he had a penchant for countries that are known nodal points for the international drug trade.
Funny that Akmal’s bi-polar diagnosis came from a psychiatrist on the payroll of the human rights brigade and was made based on heresy – second hand information provided by the family members. It may interest you to know the said diagnosis of such a complex mental illness as bi-polar disorder took all of 20 MINUTES. What is the travesty here, our mental health professionals or the Chinese justice system with regards to drug peddling?
Funny that the same family members who said they had been out of touch with Akmal for YEARS were the same ones who provided the psychiatrist with the information based on which the diagnosis was made. Do you seriously think the Chinese are stupid, so stupid as to believe that this travesty of a diagnosis was good enough to reasonably prove that Akmal did not know right from wrong AT THE TIME of his committing the crime, YEARS after he lost touch with his family members?
Funny the human rights brigade never focused on the fact that Akmal had no recorded history of mental illness, no medical records attesting to his deteriorating mental state, no certificates, no hospital stay records, nothing, zilch, nada; and you expect the Chinese to believe this last-minute insanity plea, given our liberal use of mental illness as an excuse to get criminals off scot-free? We in the West have cried the mental illness wolf a few times too many to have any credibility in the eyes of the Chinese. If you want to blame the death of Akmal on someone, blame it on our bleeding-heart liberals and farcical justice system that allow criminals a free hand to terrorize the public, all on the account of the criminals’ spontaneous-insanity-just-in-time-to-commit-the-crime syndrome.
Funny also that our human rights brigade has never been too keen on protecting the human rights of the law-abiding citizens. Oh I forgot, there is no such thing as victim rights for the holy lefties; to the liberal sleaze balls, only criminals have rights, and we the victims of crime are always at fault. Never mind the kids who will almost certainly die from the poison Akmal carried his luggage. To you liberals, the link between heroin and heroin overdose is merely theoretical, as are the links between cancer and smoking cigarettes, wars and collateral damage, snow and slippery roads, putting a hand on the hot stove and getting burned, falling apples and gravity, and oh, actions and consequences.
The problem with the world today is that the West and the East do not understand each other well. When the Western court decides the East just take it at face value. It is their system and it is their responsibility.
However, the West still has that colonial attitude and do not accord China due respect as a nation. To say that Chinese Court did not recognise Shaik’s mental illness (that is if it exist at all) is slanderous. Chinese Court had ruled that Shaik was fit to stand trial and if Britain disagree, they should challenge it during the trial.
We are quite used to Western agendas and bad habits. We should not be a party to their bad behaviours.
Imagine if the drugs are aimed at drugging a group of protesters in Xinjiang or Tibet which will invariably lead to lost of lives, then, the execution of one man would be worth it.
“It is downright ridiculous to suggest that such man-made, artificial entities could cause death. They are non-living objects, whose purpose is to be used and to function as part of modern society’s many unnecessary accessories. It is us, who are at fault.”
Brilliant, Alvin, simply brilliant reasoning there! By your logic, it is also downright ridiculous to suggest that such man-made, artificial entities such as the Chinese anti-drug laws could cause death. The Chinese laws are non-living objects too, just so you know, whose purpose is to be used when a drug mule is caught. If Akmal didn’t peddle drugs in China, he would have lived.
“Maybe I didn’t make my point clear on the previous post. Death penalty is a deterrent measure set to make would be drug traffickers THINK TWICE before committing the act”
And you did not made it clear yet again. I ASKED you why you think that drug traffickers ARE RESPONSIBLE for the misery brought upon drug abusers themselves. I did not ask you why death penalty should be imposed on the drug traffickers in my recent reply. Maybe i didn’t made it clear then, but i believed this should be clear enough.
Your stance can be summarised as follows
- If we impose the death penalty, imagine the number of pirated movies and chewing gums smugglers that would be reduced
- Death penalty is a deterrent measure set to make would be drug traffickers THINK TWICE before committing the act.
- We can’t eradicate alcohol and cigarette because they are a major contribution to our economy
You are aware that alcohol and cigarette has led to many deaths and social problems yet you accepted it. But when it comes to people trafficking drugs, you believed that they should be put to death otherwise many lives would be ruined? Aren’t you being a hypocrite? I’m not saying that drug traffickers shouldn’t be punished, but the crime doesn’t deserve a death sentence unless it cost the life of an innocent.
Death penalty may have a deterrence value (though many statistics have shown exactly no correlation between death penalty and crime, but i’ll just say that it has for your sake) , but you can’t just blindly apply it to just any crime that requires a deterrence. That would be irrational and draconian, but we’re not living in the medieval society where crimes such as thievery would cost 2 arms ( god forbade, amputating the arms of the drug traffickers is better than putting them to death). But you would obviously want that sort of punishment for thievery. You would even like it if rapists get their penises tore off.
We are given the ability to think and a working conscience. It is in no way justified or morally right to take the life of a person who committed a non-violent crime, a crime which could not linked him directly to the death of a person.
Lets move on. No point debating a briton drug smuggler. Waste of time and in the first place such article should not made it into TOC. We should be all debating on local politics and issues which is more important. There is no value in having to debate over a drug smuggler who rightly should be put to death no matter what excuse can be given by the british. Remember the british conspired to put an end to our democracy? They are damn good at conspiring. I am glad their nation is on a decline.
13) theinkhorn on January 2nd, 2010 4.56 pm
Actually lobo76, a study in 2007 revealed that alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous than marijuana or ecstasy. The rankings show that alcohol and tobacco are not far behind heroine and cocaine.
Pls define ‘more dangerous’. Is it that more deaths are caused by alcohol and tobacco?
If so, then I have to ask, with one more prevalently available, why in the world will it not cause more deaths? In fact, I would speculate that cars accidents kill even more than alcohol and tobacco because there are more cars, then what?
In short, if marijuana or ecstasy are as easily available as alcohol and tobacco, which will be ‘more dangerous’?
p.s What about heroin? was it part of the study you mentioned?
46) theinkhorn on January 2nd, 2010 11.19 pm
Say we reduce demand by educating our youth and rehabilitating the addicts.
I don’t understand how education is exclusive from the death penalty. We can have both the death penalty and education at the same time, you know?
Lobo76, three factors were used to determine how harmful the drugs were: the physical harm to the user, the drug’s potential for addiction, and the impact on society of drug use. One article actually described ecstasy as being “as dangerous as riding a horse”. Its quite an interesting subject.
Now, I have been repeating myself over and over again but I’ll gladly do it one more time. Alcohol and tobacco, drugs, guns, they do not cause deaths. Cars do not cause deaths. Accidents are the reason for said death. But there is one constant variation, one consistent factor. We are that factor. As I said before, none of these things would come alive and force you to use them. We make our own decision to make these objects part of our lives. It is our fault that our car crashes because we’re on the phone while driving. It is our fault that we choose to snort cocaine and get high. It is our fault that we get lung cancer because of smoking.
But nobody likes to see it that way because we always want someone else to blame, so that we can justify our actions. Nobody likes to see it this way because it means taking responsibility. And most of all, it means that if they continue what they do, it means that they are hypocrites. I get it. But nobody should have to pay for with their lives what we as a society enable.
Again, mental illness has nothing to do with anything. If your opinions are that freely taking the life of a human being is right just because he carried man-made substances around that would not even be distributed IF we had to decency to turn it down, then I urge you to re-examine your views. Being educated people. you would surely turn down an offer of drugs. If everyone were this way, would it not mean that the drug market would have to shut down?
But if you still feel this way, then we can always agree to disagree. However, FeverGuy, there is no subject not worth debating. If you keep an open mind, you will find that many other opinions make as much sense as yours, as ridiculous as they are.
Sorry lobo76, i neglected to mention that heroin and cocaine ranked as the most dangerous on the list of 20. But I really don’t think it matters. Here’s the article if you wish to read it.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-03-23-drug-study_N.htm
i totally agree drugs and weapons don’t kill its human so is gambling in this case who should sentence to death?
#63 Wee Pong
You said:
In another word, you are proposing that drugs like heroin, morphine, marijuana etc. be legalized and made available just like alcohol and cigarettes, and drug traffickers should be treated like any cigarettes or alcohol vendors! Did we get you right?
I was just waiting for someone like you to come along and jump to absurd conclusions like that. An alternative, equally dumb proposal would be to put all cigarette and alcohol vendors to death.
Sounds extreme? Yes. It is. And that is what opponents of the death penalty for drug trafficking have been trying to say all this while. The punishment does not fit the crime, especially since the victims – those innocent lambs whose lives are bound to be destroyed by the trafficker’s callous act of importing drugs – have to actually consent to being victims before any harm can be inflicted on them.
TOC attracts so many anti-PAP netizens and many pro-death penalty supporters. I wonder if many of you anti-PAP netizens are also pro-death penalty supporters.
We still have a long way to go before we (can) become a nation of civil and educated people with well-placed compassion, in my opinion.
For those who supports the death penalty, I wonder if you also think that caning is a great deterent? I’m sure many of you who supports the death penalty get easily riled up in anger, fear and ‘excitement by reports of violent or sick crimes and would like the death penalty imposed on these criminals too.
I do wonder in an example I am about to ask, which incites more hatred in you; say a man, trying to sell drugs to your daughter OR a man who tortured and raped your daughter?
I wonder in both crimes, which one does your daughter have a choice.
Death for both situations?
Well, unfortunately for you death-penalty supporters, torture and rape doesn’t carry the capital punishment. Pity eh?
I hope none of you or anyone closely associated with you, will ever be in any situation where one might toy with the idea of anything to do with drugs in any country that carries the death penalty because surely in your view, everything is so clear cut, and every decisions in your life or anyone else’s in your view are made in the clearest of the minds and circumstances.
Must be great to be so sure that another human deserves no right of existence. I used to be a pro-death penalty fella, it was fantastic, I read the news, I look at their pictures, I shrugged, and with the usual casual “well, they asked for it” attitude I carried on my day, enjoying my meals.
No need to get too upset pro-death penalty supporters, just click on the “thumbs down” icon will do.
Very simple question:
Id drug traffickers deserve the death penalty for bringing in drugs, then does it not follow that the customs officers also deserve the death penalty for not being alert enough to stopping those drugs from getting in?
Ridiculous, I know.
Exactly!
For far too long, the blame of guilt placed on the drug traffickers have made drug abusers out to be victims – unwitting, helpless victims.
This, of course is not true – going by the argument of those pro-death penalty people. For you cannot blame the drug traffickers without also at the same time blaming the drug abusers.
Supply can only be sustained by demand.
Both then are equally guilty.
Why then, death for one and not the other?
No need to go into wikipedia, law books, theories and what not. Just simple questions show up the absurdity of the practice we have now.
It is quite plain, actually. Don’t you see it?
Hi Rizal,
“You are aware that alcohol and cigarette has led to many deaths and social problems yet you accepted it. But when it comes to people trafficking drugs, you believed that they should be put to death otherwise many lives would be ruined? Aren’t you being a hypocrite? I’m not saying that drug traffickers shouldn’t be punished, but the crime doesn’t deserve a death sentence unless it cost the life of an innocent.”
Err… I don’t remember mentioning I support alcohol and cigarette. I just want to point out the fact that it’s difficult to eradicate them..
“But you would obviously want that sort of punishment for thievery. You would even like it if rapists get their penises tore off.”
And please.. Do not infer that want all sorts of sadistic punishments being mete out just because I agree on death penalty as a deterrence for drug traffickers.
We don’t agree on some points doesn’t mean we should start accusing each other.
“It is in no way justified or morally right to take the life of a person who committed a non-violent crime, a crime which could not linked him directly to the death of a person.”
I see what you are trying to get across and it is right if you put it in certain context. But do remember. Though a crime/act may not be violent in nature, the harm it brings about may be deadly.
However, I do believe in time the system will change and that maybe the death penalty will not be needed when more useful methods of prevention are found.
For the anti-death penalty supporters, 4kg of heroin in this briton case is not a small amount in comparison with the 47g of heroin in Yong Vui Kong’s case. Don’t mix up perpetrators and victims. If play big, must lose big. If play small, it’s acceptable the loss should be smaller.
This is nothing new. Muslims in UK have a habit that when the going gets tough with the law, use some sort of excuse to get away from a tough sentence or get a reduced sentence. What makes it worse is muslim lawyers use the thinking to help out other muslim brothers and sisters. the advice they give would not be given to other UK citizens, that’s fact. This is what they preach in mosques. Want to make the most of the UK benefit system?…. convert to islam first then we will tell you, i have been in that situation so i know this. Every country has a right to protect their country from mindless people, this just happens to be a drug dealer carrying 4kg of heroine, which most likely comes from Afghanistan. if this person had a mental illness then it most likely been registered with NHS, if not the UK benefit system. muslim youngsters who go to uni in UK surprisingly claim benefits too but they would not tell me how and why. Justice in UK is seriously blind because people know how to escape the law and there is nothing the Judge or Magistrate can do. China have a right to use death sentence as well as any other country such as USA, etc. China executed those who mixed chemicals in powdered baby milk. If that had happened to make into the UK then i am pretty no one in the UK would have an issue if they got executed or not. British Empire never gave justice to no one where ever they went to take over land so i am not sure why the hype over this person. China court gave time to bring evidence but nothing was given. As this is nothing new, lets get over this!! the execution prevented the creation of more addicts!!!
Justice is served right.
The question is not whether he is bipolar/mentally-unstable/weird or not, that alone is not enough to get anyone off the hook anywhere in the world, even in UK. The real question is whether he has provided adequate evidences to the courts to convince the judges that he was totally unaware of the consequences of his action during the whole process when the crime is being committed. Obviously he failed to do so and as the result the law of the land had been fully applied.
Let assume that under certain rare extreme manic phases a bipolar disorder sufferer could totally lose his mind and judgment of the reality. But that alone is still not enough as the defense. He has to be in his manic phase and totally lost his mind during the WHOLE PROCESS when he negotiated and agreed the deal with his so-called friends, to accept, carry, clear the airport security, declare to Chinese customer/immigration, and deliver the package to the defined destination for his friends. Does anyone truly believe his so-called friends will assign such an important task to a person at the time when the guy totally lost his mind and fully unaware of the reality? I guess only a bipolar during his extreme manic episode phase will! And I am glad the judges in this case are not in their bipolar manic phases.
Littering – Fine $1000
Not Flushing of Toilets – Fine $500
Drug Smuggling – Death
If I were a boss trying to convince someone gullible. I don’t think it is very difficult. Using singapore’s advertisements for punishments as an example, if you were caught littering for the first time, is it a fine of $1000? Or is it a maximum fine of $1000 for serial litterbugs? Do you think if you were caught for not flushing for the first time, the fine is $500?? Of course not, because it has always been an ascending punishment system.
Would I tell my drug muses that first time offenders will get the noose? Or could I show the stats to my would be carriers about many examples of ascending punishments in the law.
Do you think as a drug lord, I would have many ‘brothers’ who had been in prison instead of being in the grave to give their testimonies to would be sacrificial lambs to ease their concerns?
Do you think the loss of much (easily produced) drugs per smuggling act concerns me as a drug lord when the profit margin is more than 20000%?
Do you think drug lords are stupid and kind? Or do you think these drug lords are powerful and have a way with people, and knows who they can use?
Do you think all these insignificant traffickers know the meaning of mandatory?
Of course you do.. all of you who are in support of the death-penalty seems to know exactly what these people think, and how they think, and what the consequences and circumstances are. You probably should just do studies and statistics base just on yourself and your emotions for it seemed that all other studies and statistics (with links) presented to you are trivial and flawed.
And guess what, these people, the smugglers, who are worth nothing to you, are also similarly worth almost nothing (nothing if they are caught, something if they are not) to the drug lords.
How many here grow up or go through in life have flout rules of home, school or work even when you know the punishments that awaits you if you were caught. How many of you were caught?
How many of you keep dark secrets?
Those punishments that are suppose to await you if you are caught.. do they consume you and stop you from doing what you are not suppose to do or do you try your chances once in a while, fingers crossed?
Punishments sure are deterents, aren’t they?
Alvin, Rizal, theinkhorn, Lynn
From the logic or your alcohol and gun analogies. Can we infer that:
Putting drugs and guns side by side with alcohol and cigarettes in the supermarket shelves? The cause the SAME harm? The effects of using them are EQUAL? (I’m not implying you to endorse this, just an assumption to test your logic.)
Forget about statistics and whatever articles, just ask yourself this:
If you are force to choose one item from the below list for you love one (or yourself) to take which one will you choose?
1. One gun shot
2. 5g of heroine (or a typical dosage, not sure what is it, 5g is just e.g.)
3. One bottle of beer
4. smoke one cigarette.
Please ANSWER this simple question.
You guys are just confused with the similarity and somehow omit the differences of these items.
Just think deeper about it, you’ll find the answer yourself.
I do not support or oppose death penalty, but your logic and analogy it seriously flawed.
When a country demands that no drugs be brought into it illegally and prohibit that with the death penalty, it’s just stupid; downright ‘uneducated’, ‘uninformed’ and ‘untaught’ to try to bring drugs into it. Perhaps there’s nothing which can be done for these people, who, as they say, because of some serious mental disabilities, cannot understand, won’t listen to warnings about penalties for drug trafficking – which, incidentally, are not very much longer than this post – into certain countries. But there’s something which can be done for others who will bring drugs illegally into countries like China in the future. Such as what has been done to Shaikh. Nothing can be done to those who will bring drugs illegally into China for now. But something can be done for those who will bring drugs illegally into China for now. Shaikh has done it together with the Chinese authorities. I applaud the Chinese authorities for standing by their own laws, refusing to succumb to international pressure and executing a drug trafficker even when he is explained a drug trafficker.
actually justkaypoh, if those were the only 4 options, i’d probably just walk out of the store.
I don’t believe you’ve managed to understand their arguments. The point is not to compare these substances/objects. All 4 are dangerous, granted. But as Lynn mentioned, there has to be actual consent from the victims. No amount of drugs, alcohol, tobacco or guns could harm someone UNLESS he or she allows them to.
Actually GreatAsia, it’s usually what you don’t see that surprises you. I do not believe the education being handed out is extensive enough, which is where my suggestion came from. I actually have it on good authority that the drug market is very much alive and kicking in Singapore, and especially among the youth and teenagers. But, just as you cannot support your claims with statistics, I can’t either, which makes both our arguments rather redundant.
Now instead of insisting on turning this into an east vs west debate(which it never was), shall we focus on the issue at hand?
86) theinkhorn on January 4th, 2010 8.10 am
All 4 are dangerous, granted.
I think you just missed the point. The point was they are not equally dangerous.
71) theinkhorn on January 3rd, 2010 1.00 pm
Lobo76, three factors were used to determine how harmful the drugs were: the physical harm to the user, the drug’s potential for addiction, and the impact on society of drug use. One article actually described ecstasy as being “as dangerous as riding a horse”. Its quite an interesting subject.
Frankly, all the articles that I skimmed through (those with links posted in this thread) doesn’t say much more than what you just wrote. For instance, (I would like to use what justkaypoh wrote) what is the quantity in measure the physical harm caused? Was one bottle of beer compared against a dose of drug when comparing potential for addiction?
lobo76, you are free to do your own research for more of such articles. Can’t be doing your work for you now can i.
I understand that you’re trying to emphasize how much more addictive drugs are to alcohol. Here’s what you should know. Heroin and Cocaine are number two and three respectively on the list of most addictive substances. Alcohol is one mere place below them.
The most addictive substance? Nicotine.
So to answer your question, alcohol isn’t far behind drugs in terms of potential for addiction. Take this information in and think about your argument again.
We shouldn bother what the chinese do and they shouldn bother what we do. I wonder if one day which will happen sooner or later given the hundred of thousands of communist in singapore, if one day we execute one of them for being a traitor or what not, will they press on us?
Alvin ,
I suggest you stop jumping into the bandwagon of
western liberals and HR lunatics in bashing China
for its action.
Funny these people always work up a storm when
China is concerned but is quiet as a mouse when
atrocities & HR violations are committed in Iraq
and Afghanistan, or by their proxies and friends in ME
This is not a human rights issue, but clear cut law
and order criminal case.
I think you know based on both criteria, China is right
and justice is served.
Actually, notaliberal, taking away a man’s right to breathe is generally considered a human rights violation. And once again, let’s not turn it into an east vs west debate. Make no mistake, it could have been an all eastern affair, and the “bashing” would still have taken place.
What is justice, notaliberal? By definition, it is “the quality of being just; righteousness”. An eye for an eye isn’t justice my friend. It is revenge. Taking lives is not just. Sure, it is an adherence to the Chinese law. Thats the point. This particular law(the death penalty), which is also in existence in states like Ohio and Texas (just so you don’t hop back onto the east vs west debate again) is not fair, not just, and certainly not moral.
It isn’t even a liberal or conservative issue. It is about whether the man’s actions called for such a punishment. It is about whether such a punishment should even exist in the first place, since statistics have proven that it does not work as a deterrent. And it is about whether there is a better way to deal with it. Nothing more.
89) theinkhorn on January 4th, 2010 10.29 am
lobo76, you are free to do your own research for more of such articles. Can’t be doing your work for you now can i.
It seems to me that you are asking me to do research to prove your point?
The research was brought up by you (without substantiating points). It’s like you just accepted the ‘result’ without any verification, and now I am supposed to do research to help verify it for you?
The most addictive substance? Nicotine.
again, please clarify a bit more on how this conclusion was reached, and not just simply state it. Is it 1g of nicotine (or 1ml of alcohol) vs 1g/ml of whatever other substance?
Not at all. I am requesting that you do research to disprove my point.
http://www.drugrehabtreatment.com/most-addictive-drugs.html
One of the many articles listing nicotine as the most addictive substances. Too long for me to copy and paste here so please feel free to browse.
http://druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/library/basicfax5.htm
This link contains details related to the above article.
Hope these answer your questions.
theinkhorn, I expected you’ll had evaded my simple questions.
You were saying the respectively most addictive substances goes in the order of
1.Nicotine
2.Heroin
3.Cocaine
I’ve use the same analogy again. If you have captured by terrorist and they point a gun on your head to force use to choose to take one ‘dosage’ on an item from the above, which one will you choose?
Will you choose Heroin or Cocaine rather than a single cigarette?
I know you’ll sure avoid this question again.
By common sense most normal person will choose a cigarette.
If you truly believe the list above then by your logic you’ll choose Cocaine.
Just count the number of drug rehab center versus nicotine rehab center. Which one has more? Don’t forget the number of ‘nicotine users’ is a lot more.
If you want to promote anti-death penalty, by all means do so. Please do not use flawed logic to discredit yourselves.
Sorry but i genuinely do not understand the point you’re trying to make. You want me to select out of three addictive substances, which i would take if i had a gun pointed to my head. Would you explain your reasons for this question and your point behind it?
Yes i do believe the list because it has been compiled by people who have spent way more time in labs, conducting experiments, tests, and they certainly are much more credible than us. But, by my logic, there wouldn’t be a gun pointed to our heads. By my logic, the gun does not exist, but the act of consumption still does. So, my question is, why?
You are making comparison between nicotine and cocaine. For what reason, I have no clue. It doesn’t matter which is more addictive. It doesn’t matter which causes more harm.
You employ only the first three on the list. Please note that caffeine has been ranked above marijuana, yet one is banned and the other is not. By your logic, if there a gun was pointed to your head, you would pick the one that is perceived to be less harmful no? I assume you’d pick coffee, even though it’s more addictive than marijuana. Just as you picked nicotine over cocaine.
I wouldn’t go as far as to call your logic flawed, even though it has clearly surpassed that stage. But do read the list carefully, and decide whether your argument remains feasible.
I knew you would had avoided my questions, I think you are smart enough to understand my hypothetical question. I believed you are just acting ‘blurr’.
Didn’t you heard of this common hypothetical question that goes: “if your wife and your mum who don’t know how to swim are drowning in the waters(pool or sea), which one will you save first”
Probably you’d answered something like: “by my logic, both of them won’t be swimming or drop together in the pool” or “I’m good enough to save both at the same time”
“Sorry but i genuinely do not understand the point you’re trying to make. You want me to select out of three addictive substances, which i would take if i had a gun pointed to my head. Would you explain your reasons for this question and your point behind it?”
“By your logic, if there a gun was pointed to your head, you would pick the one that is perceived to be less harmful no? I assume you’d pick coffee, even though it’s more addictive than marijuana. Just as you picked nicotine over cocaine. ”
You said you do not understand the point I’m trying to make, but you can apply ‘my logic’ and posed a question with similar logic back to me. If you don’t understand my point, how then are you able to pose back a question to me by ‘my logic’?
Figured it out while i was typing but couldn’t really be bothered to delete what I already typed. But that’s really besides the point. Anyway, appreciate the compliment. And yes, i probably would have said something about saving both at the same time, nice guess.
As i said before, the issue is not how much more addictive substance A is than substance B. Now, while I may not understand the purpose of your question, i can certainly relate to what you’re trying to do.
If you can provide me an answer to my question, posed according to your logic, that would be really helpful. We’re pretty much doing things your way now, so, which is going to be my friend? Caffeine or marijuana?
Just wanted to highlight that post #34 has most accurately, imho, expressed what I believe many chinese feel. Well written.
Dismissing the impact of the opium wars on the chinese psyche is similar to ignoring how the war of independence/civil war in the US has shaped US public perception on issues like gun rights.
If one has been on the BBC have your say forum, it is surprising to read how many British and commonwealth people actually support China’s actions, applauding its tough stance against drugs and wishing that its govt had the same spine. I agree with those sentiments.
Funny how in Singapore, you can hang someone who is 18, assuming he/she can already make life and death decisions but yet an 18 year old cannot vote.