Do you reckon this fat mess deserves do die?

Bustacapp

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ences.html



Personally I don't subscribe to the mentality that drug dealers and smugglers are as bad as murderers.

daviesee

Lots of Countries have laws that we find abhorrent but if you go there you have to abide by them.

It's a strange one though. Some reports have her cooperating in sting operations for a more lenient sentence.

danlikesbikes

Tough to answer really. Do I believe that the death penalty is fair in these modern times & what with the number of people later acquitted it does make me wonder.

However as @daviesee says when in another country you need to understand and respect their customs and laws whether you agree or disagree with them

junglist_matty

Been to Bali myself and they have a zero tolerance towards drugs, this is something that is widely publicised and something that they take very seriously and have in the past applied the death sentence to criminals caught trafficking drugs to/through their country.

If you go there, either respect their laws OR take a risk but be willing to pay the punishment if you get caught, it's fairly simple really; it's not the UK.


Hell in North Korea, it's own people get sentenced to death or sent to a prison camp for simply not bowing to their "god"!

CambsNewbie

Don't know the full facts but from skim reading the attached link seems she was caught with 11lbs of heroin, nota small amount.

I don't agree with the death penalty myself, but as others have said, you live and in this case, die by by the rules of the country you are in.

Bustacapp

She is incredibly stupid and arrogant but I doubt she's done anything direct and harsh enough to warrant someone putting a bullet through the back of her skull.

...not that I care or anything.

Frank the tank

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

ballysmate

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

Agree with Frank 100%. Crime is intrinsically linked to drugs. People may say that dealers are not murderers, but they DO peddle death and deserve whatever the law, in whichever country they operate, metes out.

Bustacapp

Frank the tank wrote:

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape

I disagree 100%. Murderers and rapists are evil. Most drug dealers are only guilty of not giving a f@ck and having no morals. It's not like they shove the drugs down peoples throats. Of course they help contribute to the misery of drugs, but then so do the addicts.

Ben6899

Bustacapp wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape

I disagree 100%. Murderers and rapists are evil. Most drug dealers are only guilty of not giving a f@ck and having no morals. It's not like they shove the drugs down peoples throats. Of course they help contribute to the misery of drugs, but then so do the addicts.

The addicts represent the misery of drugs; they don't help contribute to it.

AchillesLeftKnee

11lbs of heroin? That's a hell of a lot of misery to dump on others, so yes, I'd regard that as a serious crime warranting a stiff sentence.

However, in my opinion the death penalty is wrong - end of - because I simply don't think there's a legal system and, for that matter, state (of any flavour of government) that's incapable of miscarriages of justice whether intentional or accidental. It's bad enough for the wrongly imprisoned to lose potentially many years of their lives due to failings in the legal system, but at least they've got a chance of justice in the end. "Sorry we gassed\shot\electrocuted\hung\beheaded etc you" doesn't really have the same potential for an eventual happy ending.

sungod

everyone in the prodution and supply chain is part of the problem, the farmers may be driven by poverty, addicts by their habit, the rest are driven by greed for money and power

it's no secret what the penalty is, she chose to actively support a trade that destabilises entire countries, corrupts police and entire political systems, causes the carnage in mexico, makes kids end up whoring themselves out to get their next hit, and leaves the rest of us to pay for it and suffer the side effects

dead processors don't make drugs
dead smugglers don't distribute drugs
dead pushers don't sell drugs

Bustacapp

Ben6899 wrote:

The addicts represent the misery of drugs; they don't help contribute to it.

And what if a dealer is an addict who deals to feed his habit? Is he then exempt of being labelled evil?

I don't think addicts should be seen as victims either.

Bustacapp

sungod wrote:

dead processors don't make drugs
dead smugglers don't distribute drugs
dead pushers don't sell drugs

Would be easier to kill the addicts and cut the whole need for the above out.

nweststeyn

I don't agree with the sentence...

...however, as mentioned above, the rules are made very clear. When I travelled to Bali last year I think I had about 10 opportunities to back out if I had been smuggling drugs. They make it very very clear at every stage, from booking your ticket to arriving at the airport to collecting your baggage at the other end. I must have been informed that any possession of drugs would be punishable by death at least 20 times.

Ben6899

Bustacapp wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

The addicts represent the misery of drugs; they don't help contribute to it.

And what if a dealer is an addict who deals to feed his habit? Is he then exempt of being labelled evil?

I don't think addicts should be seen as victims either.

Seriously. Most addicts nick stuff to feed their habit. Most dealers don't do the drugs. They're pretty fucking organised individuals/syndicates; not quivering cokeheads or washed out heroin junkies.

Drug dealing is a business, think how well you could run a business if you were drug-dependent.

FWIW, I'm discussing in the context of 11lbs of heroin; not an 8th of weed.

danlikesbikes

Bustacapp wrote:

sungod wrote:

dead processors don't make drugs
dead smugglers don't distribute drugs
dead pushers don't sell drugs

Would be easier to kill the addicts and cut the whole need for the above out.

I think the point being made stands up for itself.

If you kill the addicts and cut out the whole need for killing the chain above then what happens when the chain moves onto other users who may/may not become addicts?

Bustacapp

Danlikesbikes wrote:

Bustacapp wrote:

sungod wrote:

dead processors don't make drugs
dead smugglers don't distribute drugs
dead pushers don't sell drugs

Would be easier to kill the addicts and cut the whole need for the above out.

I think the point being made stands up for itself.

If you kill the addicts and cut out the whole need for killing the chain above then what happens when the chain moves onto other users who may/may not become addicts?

Similarly if you killed all the producers and dealers, then what happens when they are replaced overnight with another load?

danlikesbikes

Bustacapp wrote:

Similarly if you killed all the producers and dealers, then what happens when they are replaced overnight with another load?

Don't think that you quite get the point I was making.

If there were no processors => smugglers => dealers then the machine would go away making there no addicts. I'm in no way an expert & not naive enough to believe that there are stocks out there somewhere that if any one of the chain were removed the drugs chain could not survive until a replacement was found.

However a far more effective & cost efficient way of dealing with the drugs trade is to target those further up the 'food chain'. Akin to treating the cause not the symptom.

thegreatdivide

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

So a teenager caught selling an eighth of home grown weed to his mate is as bad as killing someone?

Ben6899

thegreatdivide wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

So a teenager caught selling an eighth of home grown weed to his mate is as bad as killing someone?

No, agreed.

But I thought the cited 11lbs of heroin had set the level for this discussion.

Sorry Frank, I'll let you reply.

Mikey23

that is the rule of the country and the decision of its judiciary. she knew the risks ..

so teenager selling weed to drug dealer/smuggler/rape/murder. where is the cut off point between what is acceptable and what is not acceptable and how does society decide? discuss in not less than 10000 words

DesB3rd

If there were no processors => smugglers => dealers then the machine would go away making there no addicts.

There’s a lot to suggest that coming down hard on the demand side would be more effective. As long as demand remains the market tends to find a way to supply – this case is a good demonstration of that, the state has created the greatest disincentive within its power but people are still willing (and I guess, in the vast majority of cases, successfully) to risk being a part of the supply chain.

The problem is that we baulk at the prospect of coming down hard on the demand side - the junkie “victim” or, worse still, having Shoreditch Tobias or cul-de-sac teen do jail time for the occasional use of a little weed or coke. We feel a need to target the “proper criminals” – i.e. the people on the supply side, who are, as demonstrated, near impossible to discourage…

alihisgreat

DesB3rd wrote:

If there were no processors => smugglers => dealers then the machine would go away making there no addicts.

There’s a lot to suggest that coming down hard on the demand side would be more effective. As long as demand remains the market tends to find a way to supply – this case is a good demonstration of that, the state has created the greatest disincentive within its power but people are still willing (and I guess, in the vast majority of cases, successfully) to risk being a part of the supply chain.

The problem is that we baulk at the prospect of coming down hard on the demand side - the junkie “victim” or, worse still, having Shoreditch Tobias or cul-de-sac teen do jail time for the occasional use of a little weed or coke. We feel a need to target the “proper criminals” – i.e. the people on the supply side, who are, as demonstrated, near impossible to discourage…

Isn't that where the death penalty enters the equation? - at least at the lower levels - obviously there isn't much to discourage the guy sitting safely at the top of the pile.

but I do agree that in most countries they are not discouraged by current laws due to the fact they have two choices:

1) have nothing for the rest of their life
2) have something for a few years, then get shot.

and you're obviously going to choose No.2 given that you won't recognize the reality of the risks of being a drug dealer.

danlikesbikes

DesB3rd wrote:

There’s a lot to suggest that coming down hard on the demand side would be more effective. As long as demand remains the market tends to find a way to supply – this case is a good demonstration of that, the state has created the greatest disincentive within its power but people are still willing (and I guess, in the vast majority of cases, successfully) to risk being a part of the supply chain.

The problem is that we baulk at the prospect of coming down hard on the demand side - the junkie “victim” or, worse still, having Shoreditch Tobias or cul-de-sac teen do jail time for the occasional use of a little weed or coke. We feel a need to target the “proper criminals” – i.e. the people on the supply side, who are, as demonstrated, near impossible to discourage…

It may be more effective to do this & agree that in any market if you remove the demand then the market simple dies.

But I doubt that it is very efficient due to the number of users (demand) far outweighing those of the supply (manufactures, dealers).

I think though that there will always be a market no matter what the drug is, in the same way that legal drugs such as drink or caffeine (my drug of choice). If you come down hard on one set of drugs users the dealers are only going to move into other areas just look at modern history over the last 30 or so years and drugs & the end users have changed and sadly probably will still do so in the future.

slowmart

Was it a slow news day when that rag published the story? The only details which were correct were the sentence and the name of the individual concerned.

The appeal has failed and their appeal court has confirmed the death sentence which leaves open an appeal to their Supreme Court. If that fails a Presidential pardon is her only hope.

So adding a different dimension to this topic,

Would those supporting the death penalty be prepared to carry out the sentence of the court?

Frank the tank

thegreatdivide wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

So a teenager caught selling an eighth of home grown weed to his mate is as bad as killing someone?

This is why the whole issue gets fudged and the wrong uns get away with it. Obviously someone selling their mate a "bit of weed" as you describe is not quite the same as murder or rape. But where do you start to take a hard line?

OP says drug dealing isn't in the same catagory as murderers, How many have been killed just in drug "turf wars" that's without counting those who actually die from the drugs themselves.

BTW being honest I can say I don't foresee myself ever taking drugs however I do believe we are ALL capable of murder (not premeditated) myself included.

upperoilcan

I would gladly pull the trigger on the old bag....

This wasn'nt her first rodeo,I hope they make a shining example of her.

nathancom

Drugs don't kill people. Drug laws kill people.

ballysmate

thegreatdivide wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

So a teenager caught selling an eighth of home grown weed to his mate is as bad as killing someone?

No of course it isn't.
But we already classify illegal drugs as it is, and as a consequence the penalties for supplying Class A drugs is stiffer than Class B or Class C.
Simples

thegreatdivide

Ballysmate wrote:

thegreatdivide wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

I'm sure she knew the penalties for drug running in that neck of the wood.

I disagree with the OP I believe drug dealing/smuggling is on a par with murder and rape, and in this country we are too soft on wrong uns. A lot of crime (serious crime inc rape/murder) in this country is drug related one way or another and that is why I personally take a very dim view of drug dealing.

So a teenager caught selling an eighth of home grown weed to his mate is as bad as killing someone?

No of course it isn't.
But we already classify illegal drugs as it is, and as a consequence the penalties for supplying Class A drugs is stiffer than Class B or Class C.
Simples

I know that. I was just making a point ;-)