No activist speak up for the victims & families whose life got destroyed by drugs

[littlefish]

I stick to my stance that no humans should have the right to decide whether another person should live or die. You may say I will feel differently if someone close to me was a victim but it does not change my view that two wrongs do not make a right. When people tell me examples like these, it is an indication that they are biased and their views will change depending on who are the victims. You either think it is ok to have the death penalty or not ok to have it, you can't say you will support it because you or your family could be victims.

When enough people believe in this view, the death penalty should and must be abolished, doesn't matter what you or I think as individuals.

 

[BusNo64]

Victims of drug addicts and their families have no one and opportunity to speak up to petition for harsher sentence for drug trafficking at Istana, these are the people who need help and not the other way round? Right?

then u speak for the victim lor....go petition for hasher death penalty lor ....nobody stopping u RIGHT?

 

[cheekenpie]

I stick to my stance that no humans should have the right to decide whether another person should live or die. You may say I will feel differently if someone close to me was a victim but it does not change my view that two wrongs do not make a right. When people tell me examples like these, it is an indication that they are biased and their views will change depending on who are the victims. You either think it is ok to have the death penalty or not ok to have it, you can't say you will support it because you or your family could be victims.

When enough people believe in this view, the death penalty should and must be abolished, doesn't matter what you or I think as individuals.

Do you believe in karma then?

 

[yellow people]

.....

Queen, have you forgotten already?

http://www.singsupplies.com/showpost.php?p=539546&postcount=40

 

[Green Light]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lHKXxaQNW5g?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lHKXxaQNW5g?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1AKJN7n67sA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1AKJN7n67sA?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[Green Light]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ToPHnKohZhE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ToPHnKohZhE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[littlefish]

Do you believe in karma then?

Your question is irrelevant to the discussion. The question here is what is the right punishment for a crime (it is alright for different crimes to have different punishments)? Do you think an eye for an eye kind of justice is right? In this particular case, it is not even an eye for an eye as the drug trafficker did not kill another person literally.

Let's say your child used a marker pen and drew a picture on your face while you were sleeping, do you inflict the same treatment on your child as punishment? If you believe that killing another person is wrong from the beginning, you will understand why supporting the death penalty goes against this belief. Supporting the death penalty means you are ok with killing another person as long as some conditions are met. The problem with this view is that everyone will have different ideas about what those conditions are. Only in a non-democratic country can you claim to have consensus in this area.

My view is that killing another person except in cases of self-defence is a crime. Once you hold this view, you will realise that punishing a criminal with the death penalty means you are guilty of committing the crime of killing. If you argue that the criminal may go on to kill people if allowed to live, then my answer is that this is a conjecture and you are casting your judgement based on possible future events.

Note that I am certainly not advocating showing sympathy to criminals. I wouldn't be losing any sleep if they got killed in prison.

 

[scroobal]

Opposition is not asking for the death penalty to be removed. Its Political suicide. Except for SDP, the rest who have links to political parties are doing it on a personal level. Its not on any Opposition agenda before or now (not sure about SDP). Ravi has distanced himself from SDP and he is running his own campaign.

I am not sure how you came to the conclusion.

c. if the opposition come into influence and force the government to throw out the death penalty, will that be a loss? That is the question to ask instead of getting rid of the PAP.

.

 

[scroobal]

Nothing do with Karma.

The death penalty is like taxes. Nobody likes it and if allowed to vote in a referendum, both will be voted out and I suspect that taxes will have higher % of reject votes.

Someone however have to look after the meek, the vulnerable, the unfortunates and gullible in society. These falls in the lap of the government of the day no matter what country.

The PAP will be delighted to get rid of death penalty in a heartbeat because they and their families live in good class bungalows, in areas where they won't see the seedy side of Singapore. They have sought views on the death penalty and the sampling suggest that the elderly and those from the HDB heartland are for the death penalty because they have seen the scourge of drugs during their younger days. The loss of loved ones to drugs and destruction of whole families.

We all can pretend that life is sweet and as long as our kids are ok, we love to be liberals as it is indeed the fad. But sometimes there has to be harsh measures.

The SEA countries have the death penalty because of the proximity to the golden triangle. By the time, the no. 4 grade heroin hits the 1st world, it is heavily adulterated. Many of the western addicts can walk away after a period of abuse. Not so for the locals.

It common knowledge that the younger set in the PAP are asking to remove the death penalty and the caning. Nothing to do with one's consciousness. More to stop the harassment and jibes when attending western schools, partying and socialising in the west or with westerns. To be in the in crowd.

Do you believe in karma then?

 

[scroobal]

There is a module in Kennedy School in Harvard on roles in state matters. At the end of the exercise, students find out all their leanings and inclinations such as socialist, liberal, conservative etc will have little bearing when crafting national policies. The policies will be pretty much driven by numbers and society over individual needs. While those policies are formulated, special mechanisms have to be created to continue to protect individuals rights.

Eventually ones realises that when living in a society, one has to have 2 sets of principles. One for the individual and one for society.

 

[littlefish]

They have sought views on the death penalty and the sampling suggest that the elderly and those from the HDB heartland are for the death penalty because they have seen the scourge of drugs during their younger days. The loss of loved ones to drugs and destruction of whole families.

This is exactly why people have to speak up for what they believe in. If this outlet is denied to them, every single aspect of life will be dictated by the majority (it still stands to be proven whether it is the view of the majority, I suspect most are just blase because the issue has no immediate impact on their lives).

In fact, if you put the issue across in another way, you will find that most, if not all, of those who were executed did not hail from privileged backgrounds. The rich and connected will almost always be able to find a way out. The problem here is that most SGreans are like sheep with no strong opinions on anything unless it hits their pockets. They can be easily swayed by eloquent arguments instead of engaging in critical thinking. It becomes like living by the rules set for governing an unruly mob.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

My points.

a. drug addiction carries far more serious consequences and damage to society than gambling and alcohol addictions

Where are your facts to back up what you just wrote. :oIo:
When was the last time you read about a case of a traffic accident dy a driver that was drugged out? My knowledge tells me that alcohol is the number killer and reaches a wider number of individuals than than drugs.

Which leads to more serious consequences is impossible to say. But alcohol causes more societal problems than drugs especially in a society such as ours.

And don't be a cheap bastard and provide stats from Mexico. We are talking about Singapore.

Dictators and fascists political parties have caused more hardships and deaths than drugs or alcohol combined!

b. society mandated death for drug traffickers simply because they want a drug-free society and not one where pushers are present at every street corner and in schools.

Singapore society never mandated mandatory death sentence. The PAP government did. The PAP has never made it an election issue and thus it is false to say that our society have had their final say on this issue. The fact is that the PAP has never made any pertinent topic an election issue and this includes the dilution of the population with FTs.

c. if the opposition come into influence and force the government to throw out the death penalty, will that be a loss? That is the question to ask instead of getting rid of the PAP.

The PAP has to be gotten rid of for sheer incompetence, arrogance and idiocy. Just look at their policies and the things their leaders say.

d. the evidence that some oppositions are fighting for their self-interest had been reported. Even with the evidence, you still cannot see the dirt in them, it is simply because you are dishonest to yourself. If you dislike what you see in the PAP and you see the same happening in the opposition but defended the opposition and criticise the PAP, then dishonesty is the correct description of you.

There is no evidence that SDP is in it for themselves. If they can safe a life then good for them. As far as I know, PAP policies have lead to many Singaporeans killing themselves at MRT tracks and from HDB blocks.

What evidence against the SDP are you talking about? People like you can and should be sued for defaming the APs. Be mindful of your words. I won't be surprised if PAP supporters are taken to court for both civil and criminal offencences in the near future.

You are a pathetic pea-brain. Your former PAP MPs seem to have a hard time earning as much as they did when they were part of the PAP. What happened to their invincibility?

Singapore has a strategic location in world trade and her ports have been vital to meet this demand. The PAP did nothing but to inherit the ports. Did the PAP move the land masses such that Singapore sits strategically for the world to trade.

Real GDP for Singaporeans is only as good as that of Malaysians and much lower than the other Asian dragons. A majority of our people will be indebted for the rest of their lives. A majority of our people lead a largely stressful and unhappy life when compared with our neighbours.

So, I suppose that you will blame the APs for Singapore's problems?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Eventually ones realises that when living in a society, one has to have 2 sets of principles. One for the individual and one for society.

Dear Scroobal,

On the case of Mandatory Death Penalty, I have a very different view from yours. Well, although this may cost me some votes, but it is important to understand the nature of the law we have here. Read Lucky Tan's blog post here

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/08/death-penalty-why-we-need-to-rethink.html

I am not totally against Death Penalty but I am against the Mandatory nature of it. This is basically because it defies human logic. While we want to protect our young and gullible from being harmed by drugs, we should also protect innocent people who are just being made used by syndicates to become their drug mules unknowingly. We should also protect innocent people who might be maligned by others; it is very simple, just slip a small packet of drugs into your pockets or bags, that will get you hung.

The drug law here is totally illogical and against human nature. First, we are supposed to believe in the whole administration of law here, to be free from mistakes and malicious intent. To believe one person 100% is already so difficult but to make us believe 3000 people 100% at one go, is something unimaginable. The Mandatory sentencing is based on this premise, all the findings are 100% TRUTH, the presumptions on drug trafficking made in the law are 100% reasonable and those police officers, investigators, prosecutors are 100% perfect as God who will not make any mistakes at all. These assumptions and presumptions are totally against human nature.

When you are to make judgment on anything, it is not a straight forward yes or no whether you believe the case brought forward to you. You may think you are 50% convince, 70% convinced or 90% convinced and thus the requirement to exercise different degree of discretion in meting out the sentencing. Mandatory sentencing, in particular capital punishment, would need higher level of proof but the law itself, has stated a very low requirement of proof by the prosecution.

We may not face this problem in our lifetime, but it doesn't mean that our children, grandchildren or future generations would not be in a situation of being accused of something which they did not do but the low requirement of proof by law would put them to the gallows. The only fall back we or they would have then, is for us to change the system to a more balanced one. Up the requirement of proof and remove the mandatory nature of the sentencing. Let the judges who are supposed to be wise men in our society to exercise their wisdom and discretion.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[balajii]

gms,

sigh... u really r block of wooden head.

drug mules drug lord all should be hang. what u meant by made use of? that idiot knows very well what he is going into. he probably enjoy the fruits of his dirty $ many times b4 he got caught. now kpkb want to live. pui.

if u come to my area, i gotta void my vote(no way pap will get it). luckily u already said u go to tampines.

so ap still have 1 vote from me. :p

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

gms,

sigh... u really r block of wooden head.

drug mules drug lord all should be hang. what u meant by made use of? that idiot knows very well what he is going into. he probably enjoy the fruits of his dirty $ many times b4 he got caught. now kpkb want to live. pui.

if u come to my area, i gotta void my vote(no way pap will get it). luckily u already said u go to tampines.

so ap still have 1 vote from me. :p

Balajii, you should read Lucky Tan's blog post first to understand the issue better.

Nobody is saying drug mules should not be hung here. But the requirement of proof (read Lucky Tan's blog) is just too low to warrant such drastic mandatory capital punishment.

You found a man with drugs stuck under his car when he drives through the custom. Does it really mean that he is FULLY AWARE of the drugs? Consciously trafficking the drug? The law doesn't require the prosecutor or police investigators to prove that. But there is a chance that this poor fellow has been made used by drug syndicates unknowingly! He didn't profit from this trafficking! He didn't even know the drug exists in the first place!

Now, put yourself into his shoe, you are caught with drugs stripped underneath your car. You are being caught. You will be hung. You like it this way? There is no avenues or ways for you to prove your innocence!

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Green Light]

On Mandatory death penalty, the question is how do we draw the line?Mandatory when? when the drug mules came from poor family like YOng he should be spare? when Yong came from a well to do family then he should be hang? then we are digging a bigger hole for our legislation system and many standards and argument which no one will ever have the answer

 

[Green Light]

You found a man with drugs stuck under his car when he drives through the custom. Does it really mean that he is FULLY AWARE of the drugs? Consciously trafficking the drug? The law doesn't require the prosecutor or police investigators to prove that. But there is a chance that this poor fellow has been made used by drug syndicates unknowingly! He didn't profit from this trafficking! He didn't even know the drug exists in the first place!

Now, put yourself into his shoe, you are caught with drugs stripped underneath your car. You are being caught. You will be hung. You like it this way? There is no avenues or ways for you to prove your innocence!

Goh Meng Seng

So do you participate in the recent spare vui kong's petition rally in HL park because you believe he is innocent?

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

So do you participate in the recent spare vui kong's petition rally in HL park because you believe he is innocent?

It is not up for me to determine whether he is innocent or not. The recent Hong Lim Park event, as I have said in some other thread, is not about believing whether Vui Kong is innocent or not. It is on the structure of the system we have here.

If you believe in Democracy, you will believe in separation of powers. But the system here is far from Democracy because the powers are totally concentrated to a few persons in the Cabinet. The law is set by them, their ministries administer the whole legal process and eventually, the last resort of clemency is done by them. This is illogical in a Democracy. I was there, to petition a change to this ill conceived system.

On the other hand, while many people think drug mules should be hung, but there should also be distinctions on the degree of the matter. Such discretionary powers should be left to the judges but at this moment, the judges are bounded by the Mandatory sentencing set by the ruling party. Thus, the discretionary powers should be shifted to the President but yet, the court has ruled that such discretionary powers still lies on the Cabinet who have set the law and administer it!

Thus, this is a matter of the system, not particularly on whether I think anyone should be hung or not, or that anyone is guilty as charged.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[balajii]

gms,

so u mean that idiot is innocent because other people stick drug to his car? he don't know anything?

if that is the case then the police should be hang. but how u know this? u guess only? or u involve in the case?

if the police have proven beyond reasonable doubt that the idiot knows he is trafficking drug, he should be hang.

can u make yourself clear gms? u want to save that idiot because u believe he is innocent (meaning u doubt police work)? or u want to save him knowing and admitting the fact that he did traffic the drugs but with blah blah mitigating factors.

pls make it clear.

 

[balajii]

Balajii, you should read Lucky Tan's blog post first to understand the issue better.

Nobody is saying drug mules should not be hung here. But the requirement of proof (read Lucky Tan's blog) is just too low to warrant such drastic mandatory capital punishment.

You found a man with drugs stuck under his car when he drives through the custom. Does it really mean that he is FULLY AWARE of the drugs? Consciously trafficking the drug? The law doesn't require the prosecutor or police investigators to prove that. But there is a chance that this poor fellow has been made used by drug syndicates unknowingly! He didn't profit from this trafficking! He didn't even know the drug exists in the first place!

Now, put yourself into his shoe, you are caught with drugs stripped underneath your car. You are being caught. You will be hung. You like it this way? There is no avenues or ways for you to prove your innocence!

Goh Meng Seng

gms u r contradicting yourself. 1st you write long story as if u know some inside info. next u say its not up to u whether he is innocent or not.

in this case whatever is the story in red for? any relevance to this case? no relevance then say for ____