They've been shot dead

[Big Shed]

There plenty who do care, such as their innocent families who have been given a very torrid time. If it was your son you may have a different opinion?

Brett, I think a lot of people, myself included, would take more of notice of your defence of convicted drug pushers if they could see you express the same sympathy for their intended victims and their families.

As I have said before, there is far too much emphasis in this country on protecting the "rights" of the perpetrators of crime and squillions of dollars expended on "rehabilitation" and crims being released on early parole so they can offend again and not nearly enough sympathy and support for the victims and their families.

I could turn your argument around and say you would have a totally different opinion if it was your son that had his life ruined, or cut short, by these drug pushers.

We have far too many "bleeding hearts" in this country that sympathise with people committing crimes but don't spend any time thinking about their victims.

[Bushmiller]

Who cares, cause I like many many others don't give a rats.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with one of my children when he was about fifteen (he is now thirty two). It wouldn't really matter what I said to him, his stock reply was "I don't care."

I said, "Yes you do."

he said, "No I don't." and so it went on for a while until I explained to him. At the time I drove a very dilapidated twin cab Toyota Dyna truck. I have to say it was not at all cool. I pointed out that if he didn't care, why did he ask me to park two hundred meters down the road when I picked him and his siblings up from school. He looked at me and smiled.

I am afraid in varying degrees, we all care. If you didn't, you wouldn't have replied. I suspect, and I am quite prepared to be shot down on this, that you, along with others, are wearied by the publicity and the politics.

Regards
Paul

[FenceFurniture]

Brett, I think a lot of people, myself included, would take more of notice of your defence of convicted drug pushers if they could see you express the same sympathy for their intended victims and their families.

Who is defending them?
I think they should be left to rot in gaol, because state sanctioned killing makes the State no better than the perpetrators, particularly in murder cases.

The only reason I've brought it up now is because it is so topical atm, and involves Australians, therefore it's pretty close to home. I have the same view of the death penalty wherever it is applied.

I mean really, it's all over for those two now. No more pain, no suffering - that's just restricted to their families and friends. The poor mother's etc will suffer for the rest of their lives, just as the families of murder victims suffer. At least if they were in gaol their punishment would be ongoing. It can't be much fun in an Indonesian gaol.

[Twisted Tenon]

It is fair enough to say that they knew the odds and were prepared to take the risk of being executed, however the Indonesians havnen't applied their own laws evenly. I believe that they have the best legal system money can buy.
All capital punishment achieves is to encourage the crooks to leave no witnesses alive.

TT

[TermiMonster]

This is a bit of a red=herring but still related: How did you (me) feel about the death penalty for the Bali bombers?
Is the death penalty good sometimes but not others?
etc.
TM

[FenceFurniture]

This is a bit of a red=herring but still related: How did you (me) feel about the death penalty for the Bali bombers?
Is the death penalty good sometimes but not others?
etc.
TM

Well, now that they are dead we'll never get any more info out of them. Keep them alive, in a lousy gaol with appropriate lack of privileges. They may one day get a pang of conscious and reveal more accomplices. Perhaps under a truth drug or similar. In the case of Chan and Sukumaran, perhaps they'd even reveal who the big boys in Australia are.

[Bedford]

Well, now that they are dead we'll never get any more info out of them. Keep them alive, in a lousy gaol with appropriate lack of privileges. They may one day get a pang of conscious and reveal more accomplices. Perhaps under a truth drug or similar. In the case of Chan and Sukumaran, perhaps they'd even reveal who the big boys in Australia are.

Well they've had ten years to do that, and it seems they didn't...................

[FenceFurniture]

Well they've had ten years to do that, and it seems they didn't...................

That doesn't mean they may not have in the future.

Who knows what the inducement of staying alive might bring? I know they were deeply concerned for their families safety if they coughed up that sort of info.

Do those who agree with their deaths think that the death penalty should be re-introduced here?

[rrich]

I wasn't aware of this until just today. (Internet news on Yahoo)

I have seen a lot of the damage to society that is done by drug pushers and smugglers. I worked in an area where there were a high percentage of drug users. It was not a place where one would work over and into the evening.

I knew of the death penalty for drug running in Indonesia. I'm sorry to say that I have little sympathy for those executed. I have personally seen several relatives/neighbors/acquaintances trapped in the downward spiral of addiction, including two overdose deaths. Would a death penalty have prevented the overdose deaths? I don't think that there is an answer to the question.

For years I have been in favor of a similar penalty here in the US for those smuggling drugs, in a quantity for sale, across our borders. Here we have a different issue on our southern border. A commercial truck driver pulling a trailer crosses the border with drugs hidden inside. The claim is that the driver is just that, a truck driver delivering goods. The vast majority of truck drivers do not know the type of goods that they are carrying. This makes a death penalty difficult to impose.

I'm sorry for not showing sympathy for your blokes but I've seen the other and very dark side of addiction. Two lives snuffed out so that someone could make a profit.

[A Duke]

Hi,
The only reason I oppose the death penalty is that you can not rely on the legal system to convict the right person. I do not mind if they bump off the guilty but a post humus pardon dose not help the wrongly convicted. The cost of keeping someone in jail for 20 years for killing 6 or 7 people then letting them out to kill another 3 or 4 innocents, does make one wonder.
On the subject of human rights, the more sub human they are the more the do gooders carry on about their human rights.

2dworth.jpg

[Bob38S]

Many speak of the death penalty as not being a deterrent - it has always been my understanding that it was a punishment and that any deterrent from or because of it could be classed as a bonus.

Without being smug, smart or trite, the statement that the death penalty ensures that there are no repeat offenders is 100% true.

I tend to think more about the victims than perpetrators. There possibly is a place for the death penalty where the perpetrators have been caught and apprehended in the act, not convicted on verballed testimony or circumstantial evidence.

[FenceFurniture]

Hi,
The only reason I oppose the death penalty is that you can not rely on the legal system to convict the right person. I do not mind if they bump off the guilty but a post humus pardon dose not help the wrongly convicted. The cost of keeping someone in jail for 20 years for killing 6 or 7 people then letting them out to kill another 3 or 4 innocents, does make one wonder.

Interesting point Hugh. Yes it's very expensive to keep people in gaol. I seem to recall a figure of well over $100k per year for Australian prisoners.

But unless someone pleads guilty then there are enough times where innocent people are found guilty to support what you say. Just last week the FBI fessed up to getting it wrong for the last 40(?) years on hair samples or similar (I didn't read the detail). DNA samples being switched, evidence tampering and so on and so on.

Of course, where the death penalty exists I would think it highly unlikely that someone would plead guilty. So the legal etc costs of proving their guilt would add up to quite a few years gaol cost (in the case where they might plead guilty if it was a gaol term, not death).

There's a fair bit to it all, and it's not just black and white.

[FenceFurniture]

Very interesting to look at wikipedia and the countries that have the DP.
On the twin American continents there is only the USA (remember the recent execution where the guy took ages to die in agony because the injection was screwed up or an experiment?)
Apart from about 4 other countries, the rest of the DP users are spread in a thick belt from north east Africa right across the Middle East and Asia in an unbroken path (with a couple of isolated exceptions).


And a quote from it:
As of March 2015, of the 195 independent states that are UN members or have UN observer status:

• 103 (53%) have abolished it for all crimes;
• 6 (3%) have abolished, but retain it for exceptional or special circumstances (such as crimes committed in wartime);
• 50 (26%) retain, but have not used it for at least 10 years or are under a moratorium;
• 36 (18%) retain it in both law and practice.

[Big Shed]

Could I ask that this thread stay on topic, ie the execution of convicted drug smugglers in Indonesia.

A debate on the pros and cons of the death penalty is an entirely different matter, we don't have it here anymore, Indonesia does and that is their sovereign right.

If the thread continues to be steered off topic it will be closed.

[Evanism]

I agree with Rob in post #14 - how can one trust the state to take a persons life when they are fundamentally incapable of anything else?

Would you trust the state with your money? Letting it decide whether you can have children? Or give it the right to euthanase you on your death bed?

I wouldn't give the state the right to give me a HAIRCUT let alone the opportunity of shooting me.

On criminality....

Criminals such as these, the worst 0.1% are the worst of the worst and should be thrown permanently in a hole until they die at 110. They were no angels. They weren't rehabilitated. They were scum. Pure scum. They belong firmly to 0.1% that make our society bad. They NEEDED removal. We are better with them gone.

The fact they didn't give up the names is proof enough of their continued contempt and criminality. Rehabilitation begins with repentance. The endless legal battles and inevitable bullets could have been stopped with a single name.

Perhaps time would have loosened their tongues. Bigger fish are caught. Those options are now closed.

Makes me also wonder who these big fish are.... senior Indonesian politicians I'd wager. The corruption of Indonesia is 100% complete. What a hole.