Death penalty not a deterent? Singapore executes heroin dealer

[valvano]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177407,00.html

Don't know about you, but if I were in the drug dealing business I'd stay away from Singapore.

[ChrisLove]

Nonetheless, you may be astonished to here that Van Nguyen was actually NOT the first person to be executed in Singapore for drugs offenses. In fact, as the very article you quoted points out, over 100 people have been executed since 1999 for that very offence.

Incidently, he was visited by his twin brother the day b4 execution, personally if my twin was on tha row, I would not be keen to visit, the potential for mix up wold be too scary

[QueenAdrock]

Well I know the only reason why I don't go out and kill someone is because of fear of lethal injection. See? There you go, it IS a deterrent. :rolleyes:

And let me ask, how does that article prove it's a deterrent?

[valvano]

Well I know the only reason why I don't go out and kill someone is because of fear of lethal injection. See? There you go, it IS a deterrent. :rolleyes:

And let me ask, how does that article prove it's a deterrent?

if you knew you had a good chance of being executed if caught dealing drugs in singapore, would do it?

[Funkaloyd]

So I take it that you're finally going to stop beating your wife when they make it a capital offence?

[ASsman]

HAHAHAHA!!!

Oh shit, I spit my drink out... Shit if thats your logic then why not make it torture... Torture>Death, even less people will commit crimes.

[scotty]

Incidently, he was visited by his twin brother the day b4 execution, personally if my twin was on tha row, I would not be keen to visit, the potential for mix up wold be too scary

Nguyen Van was smuggling heroin to pay for his twins $AUD30,000 legal bill because Khoa was a convicted dealer himself, spending nine months in gaol for trafficking, and also having a conviction for causing an affray.

Its been pretty big in the news in Australia. We don't have the death penalty here because of is barbaric and contradictory nature. We didn't mind him spending some time behind bars, but the the death penalty?

[Rancid_Beasties]

I dont agree with the death penalty at all. However, I think that you have to respect a nation's sovereignty and let them charge offenders in the way they choose. Especially when their own citizens are being charged under the same law. Its one thing to try to persuade them to move away from the death penalty, but its another to expect them to change a law specifically for one person.

That being said, the death penalty is in no way a deterrent. Australians have been imprisoned for lengthy periods or executed for drug trafficking in south east asian countries before. And yet there continues to be a stream of drug traffickers from Australia being caught over there. Recently, there has been three cases, the Bali 9, Schappelle Corby and Michelle Leslie, who have all been caught trafficking. The Bali 9 are probably all going to get the death penalty. Corby is in jail for 15 years or something, and Leslie got out on the basis of the small amount of drugs found on her and that she was friends with the son of a politician. All these events have occurred after several Australians have been executed. So its not a deterrent at all.

[valvano]

So I take it that you're finally going to stop beating your wife when they make it a capital offence?

thats a good well thought out response...


:rolleyes:

[greedygretchen]

"While Singapore hangs small-time drug peddlars, the government continues to trade lavishly with Burma - the world's largest producer of heroin. The hypocrisy begs attention."

-from "Burma and Singapore: strange bedfellows" By Dr Chee Soon Juan.

[QueenAdrock]

if you knew you had a good chance of being executed if caught dealing drugs in singapore, would do it?

I wouldn't deal drugs because it's against my morals. I wouldn't shoot someone because it's against my morals. It has nothing to do with being afraid of being executed.

I couldn't speak of drug dealers. I know it won't stop them from dealing drugs, though. A deterrent is something that would deter the criminal from doing the criminal act. They may just be more careful (the infamous "I won't be caught" idea), or deal drugs in other countries.

If the death penalty's a deterrent in America, why do we have such high levels of homicide? You would think the gangsters in New York would think "Yo dawg. I really want to pop a cap in this mothafucka's ass because he slept with my woman and disrespected me, but you KNOW I be subjected to America's capital punishment system and I can't have that." But they don't. When you're thinking with your emotions, you don't think with your brain.

[valvano]

I wouldn't deal drugs because it's against my morals. I wouldn't shoot someone because it's against my morals. It has nothing to do with being afraid of being executed.

.


that's why I said "if", "if" you were a drug dealer and you knew how singapore executes drug dealers, would you do your business there or look for other markets?

[QueenAdrock]

Well, I can't say for sure. I'm not a drug dealer, so I wouldn't know. Drug dealers are obviously in a different state of mind than what I have, so unless you yourself are a drug dealer, and you yourself say "Wow, I'm not going there," you can't say it's a deterrent because you wouldn't know.

It also depends on how big the market is in Singapore. If there are thousands of people itching for drugs, I'm sure there would be someone more than willing to supply it, regardless of consequences. For example, look at the King Crab trappers up in Alaska. It's one of the most dangerous jobs in America (so many people have died from getting pitched overseas into the icy, hypothermic water), and yet there's always people willing to do this. Why? The money's good. They know they can die from their job, they're willing to take that risk. It's the same thing. If there's a big enough market for drugs in Singapore, the money would therefore be very good. People are willing to take risks for money.

[valvano]

Well, I can't say for sure. I'm not a drug dealer, so I wouldn't know. Drug dealers are obviously in a different state of mind than what I have, so unless you yourself are a drug dealer, and you yourself say "Wow, I'm not going there," you can't say it's a deterrent because you wouldn't know.

It also depends on how big the market is in Singapore. If there are thousands of people itching for drugs, I'm sure there would be someone more than willing to supply it, regardless of consequences. For example, look at the King Crab trappers up in Alaska. It's one of the most dangerous jobs in America (so many people have died from getting pitched overseas into the icy, hypothermic water), and yet there's always people willing to do this. Why? The money's good. They know they can die from their job, they're willing to take that risk. It's the same thing. If there's a big enough market for drugs in Singapore, the money would therefore be very good. People are willing to take risks for money.

ah yes, the concept of risk vs reward.....

[Ali]

ah yes, the concept of risk vs reward.....ah yes, moron trying to sound clever...

[ASsman]

Buhuhuh! Good times.

[valvano]

ah yes, moron trying to sound clever...

ah yes, the opinions of eurotrash

[ASsman]

May I continue to bring down the intelligence of this conversion by saying, your mum.

[sam i am]

risk vs. reward is a powerful incentive

Queen has a pretty good argument, valvano.

Her reasoning does beg the question, however : HOW do we deter criminals, if not via punishment? If death or long imprisonment (i.e., loss of freedom) doesn't stop an activity that a society has deemed illegal or immoral, what is to be done?

The logical conclusion is : change the law. Legalize the activity, regulate it, and tax it. It worked with alcohol and tobacco, right?

Well, for those of you who think I've gone off the conservative deep end, here's the answers :

Enforcement. Take the resources it necessitates to make it more profitable to COMPLY with existing laws than it takes to break said laws.

Now....this means an exponential increase in expenditures to achieve the desired result....but the balance has to be struck else we give in to the base desires of the citizenry.

As an example....Israel's recent erection of the wall in "Palestine" has exponentially increased government expenditures in the SHORT-TERM, but has already reduced the trafficking in arms and homicide bombings. So....

Have the benefits outweighed the costs? Many would argue yes. Could the same be applied to drug trafficking or other illegal activites? The answer is yes....given the will and necessary expenditures to achieve the dsired outcomes.

Punishment without enforcement is worthless. Enforcement without punishment is a joke.

[Ace42X]

ah yes, the opinions of eurotrash

What a surprise, once again valvano dismisses his intellectual superiors out of hand.

"well respected news site disagrees with me? Radical propoganda... Someone presents facts? They don't live in the real world. Someone is educated? It doesn't MEAN anything..."

Because the opinion of an ignorant uneducated menial labourer is so superior to that of those pesky intellectuals!

Everyone knows that reading things, absorbing information, actually collecting and correctly processing facts is pointless when you can mouth off about things you don't know the slightest thing about, and then dismiss the opinions of people who actually do as "radical" or "liberal eurotrash nonsense!"

The only thing that makes your existence in this world tolerable for me, Valvano, is the certainty that if the world you crave ever came into existence, you'd be the first waste of space to suffer.

You're lucky proper human beings (the ones with functioning brains) are around to look out for you, otherwise you'd end up getting yourself hurt, jsut like your dumbass government has been getting your troops killed.

[sam i am]

Once again, King Ace showing us all what for through his superior application of his (self-proclaimed) intelligence.

I'd love to see his I.Q.

Wonder if it matches his shoe size? :p

[valvano]

Once again, King Ace showing us all what for through his superior application of his (self-proclaimed) intelligence.

I'd love to see his I.Q.

Wonder if it matches his shoe size? :p

you know what they saw about guys with small feet ( i assume he is a guy)


:D

[valvano]

risk vs. reward is a powerful incentive

Queen has a pretty good argument, valvano.

Her reasoning does beg the question, however : HOW do we deter criminals, if not via punishment? If death or long imprisonment (i.e., loss of freedom) doesn't stop an activity that a society has deemed illegal or immoral, what is to be done?

The logical conclusion is : change the law. Legalize the activity, regulate it, and tax it. It worked with alcohol and tobacco, right?

Well, for those of you who think I've gone off the conservative deep end, here's the answers :

Enforcement. Take the resources it necessitates to make it more profitable to COMPLY with existing laws than it takes to break said laws.

Now....this means an exponential increase in expenditures to achieve the desired result....but the balance has to be struck else we give in to the base desires of the citizenry.

As an example....Israel's recent erection of the wall in "Palestine" has exponentially increased government expenditures in the SHORT-TERM, but has already reduced the trafficking in arms and homicide bombings. So....

Have the benefits outweighed the costs? Many would argue yes. Could the same be applied to drug trafficking or other illegal activites? The answer is yes....given the will and necessary expenditures to achieve the dsired outcomes.

Punishment without enforcement is worthless. Enforcement without punishment is a joke.

i am pretty risk averse. i deal with loss and damage issues everyday in the transportation industry, and you can move freight with a higher declared value and pay a higher freight charge......or you can take a risk a save a few bucks on our transportation bill by declaring a lower value. its at what ever level you feel comfortable with that you go with, its personal preference. i am just saying that with this singapore deal, assuming you are in the drug business but go into it with a clear mind and a sharp business sense, this could be a huge hurdle to this market. but if you a stoned out drug dealer who doesnt think things through, you might just take the fuck it approach......but then when you sober up and find yourself sitting in a jail cell facing the noose, you might sing a different tune...

[zorra_chiflada]

it's an interesting case in australia, particularly the way australians have reacted to the case.
schapelle corby, a pretty white woman, was considered by the australian public to be an innocent victim, and there were many campaigns to "set the poor woman free" but the general consensus was that van ngyuen, a young male of vietnamese descent was guilty as hell and deserved to die.
sometimes i'm ashamed to live in such a blatantly racist country. (n)

[Rancid_Beasties]

I dont think the difference in reaction really came about because of racism. It was more because Nguyen was guilty, admitted it etc, whereas there was an element of doubt with Corby. I think if she admitted it, everyone woulda told her to fuck off too. I actually thought Nguyen seemed like a much more genuine character who loved his family and had very well spoken friends. Corby seemed like trailer park trash. Unlike her, Nguyen didnt appear to be an idiot, he just did something really stupid out of desperation to save his brother. That being said, he definitely did commit the crime and it would be unfair to the singaporeans tried by that law and put to death to let him go and not them. That would be racist in itself, as Nguyen would be getting preferencial treatment simply because hes Australian. Anyway, if you think the reactions are really about looks and appeal, why then is Michelle Leslie being given so much shit by the media and general public?

The only thing we can do is use diplomatic force to move singapore and our closer allies such as America away from Capital Punishment, and to be tougher on drug lords and softer on mules.

PS Good to see ya back Zorra :) (y)

[zorra_chiflada]

I dont think the difference in reaction really came about because of racism. It was more because Nguyen was guilty, admitted it etc, whereas there was an element of doubt with Corby. I think if she admitted it, everyone woulda told her to fuck off too. I actually thought Nguyen seemed like a much more genuine character who loved his family and had very well spoken friends. Corby seemed like trailer park trash. Unlike her, Nguyen didnt appear to be an idiot, he just did something really stupid out of desperation to save his brother. That being said, he definitely did commit the crime and it would be unfair to the singaporeans tried by that law and put to death to let him go and not them. That would be racist in itself, as Nguyen would be getting preferencial treatment simply because hes Australian. Anyway, if you think the reactions are really about looks and appeal, why then is Michelle Leslie being given so much shit by the media and general public?

The only thing we can do is use diplomatic force to move singapore and our closer allies such as America away from Capital Punishment, and to be tougher on drug lords and softer on mules.

PS Good to see ya back Zorra :) (y)

i'm looking at this from a popular news perspective. the abc and sbs tends to deal with news items with slightly more objectivity, but looking at news items on 7 and 9 networks (shows like a current affair and today tonight) support for michele leslie was much clearer.

i've read pieces and heard things on radio, tv etc, where people have actually said "he's not australian, he doesn't deserve our support" (i think he was actually an australian citizen) that was the blatant racism i was talking about. i think many australians think that it's absolutely fine, maybe admirable to have opinions like that.

and there were the few politicians who were publicly stating that nguyen "deserved to die." i never heard any such thing said about corby, leslie or the bali nine.

[Rancid_Beasties]

I woulda thought you of all people would have learnt to ignore those shitty programs by now. Anyway, I think there was a lot of support for Nguyen. Probably as much as Corby and more than Leslie ever received. The difference was that there was also a bunch of right wing nutjobs and parents whose children had died from drug overdoses arguing he should be put to death. I'll agree with you there, in that not many people were calling for Corby's head. However, I still think that is more of a result of the western notion of justice. Nguyen was tried under a relatively fair system and was undeniably guilty. The heroin he had was more dangerous than the marijuarna that Corby had in her bodyboard bag. Corby was tried in a questionable system with a very low acquittal rate, and a huge reluctance to accept alot of evidence that might have helped corby. She maintains her innocence to this day. Thats the difference. But yeah, there is a redneck racist element in our society. The recent resurgence of Pauline Hanson on "Dancing with the stars" shows this :p