Topic: Death Penalty for Drug Smuggler - page 2. (Read 2813 times)

My own view is it's wrong for governments to kill people, always and without exception.

I couldn't agree more mate  .
I personally think they do deserve death penalty and more (if there was anything worst then death) , Indonisia have so strict law I saw someone a Documentary about it on National Geographic pretty cool . they changed their whole living type after the tsunami that killed over 200,000 in 2004 .

i wont agree or disagree with the politics but they knew the risks they were taking.  all in the name of greed.

Drugs are never the problem. I don't care if my neighbor, knowing and understanding what he is doing, goes out and shoots himself up all over the place. The only thing that I need to know is that he won't harm anyone else with what he is doing. If he does harm someone else, then punish him according to the harm done.

Disallowing free usage of drugs is simply taking away the freedom of people. Do you want to force me for my own good? Well, my idea is to stop your forcing of me. And it will be for your own good. Because if you keep it up, there will be me and others who will forcefully throw off your bondage of us, and you won't like it when we do it.

Drugs are not so dangerous compared to anti-drug crusaders. Those people will actually kill you... to protect you from drugs. 

This is ridiculous!!!
What do you do if you are already a muslim? 

In the U.S. and most of the other common law countries, if a man stands as himself in the court (not representing himself or being represented by another - an attorney), he can rightfully demand to face his accuser, his accuser has to have been harmed or damaged, has to prove the harm or damage, has to swear that the accused was the one who did the harm or damage, has to have evidence linking the accused to the harm or damage, and has to have an impartial, third party witness saying that he/she witnessed the accused doing the harm or damage. Standard law. http://voidjudgments.com/

If the accused does the above, and if the accuser does not appear and get up on the stand and swear or affirm the wrongdoing (harm or damage), or if there is no impartial witness, or if the evidence can't be tied to the accused, either the accused is set free, or there is a jury trial.

If the jury is a fully informed jury, they will understand that they can judge both the facts and the law. That is, they can judge the guilt or innocence of the accused, and they can, also, judge the law to be right or wrong. If they judge the law in question to be wrong, it is automatically repealed in every following case that stands on their judgment.

Why doesn't everyone just take this defense? Is it ok for Muslims to import drugs or something? Will they get away clean when they're caught "It's ok I'm a Muslim".

A few years ago, one of the death row inmates in Indonesia had his sentence commuted, after he converted to Islam. Another well known example is that of Australian model Michelle Leslie. She was arrested for drug possession. She claimed that she had converted to Islam, and the judge gave her a lenient three months sentence rather than a mandatory 15 year term.

well that's the problem, though the people taking the risk for monetary gain quite literally pay with their life if caught. If you think the riches are worth it then go ahead.


The people in power and who make the laws are always hypocritical. Does it say what Indonesia plans to do with the maid? Prison, set free etc?

I probably wasn't clear enough on my actual position on this topic, starting with my first post in this thread. I don't have a problem with mature individuals doing drugs. I'm not for the death penalty. I don't necessarily have a problem with smugglers or even dealers. My problem is mainly with the pushers and gangs, since this is often just a tactic used to drag kids into the fold and a lifestyle of crime. I pity the fool that tries pushing any hard drugs like coke or heroin on anyone I care about. Like I said earlier, love and education/communication are the best deterrent against drug abuse (I stress abuse, not use), but if I found out that someone (or some group) tried to pressure anyone I care for into that world they'd have me to deal with. And I assure you I would certainly lose my cool and I won't be merciful.

As far as statistics go. The death rates among alcohol and prescription drug users vs coke and heroin users could very well just be a matter of lifestyle and accessibility. I completely agree that locking up users is retarded and yes even a violation of their rights.

Drugs can destroy peoples lifes in many ways.
Addicts needs money for the drugs and some will turn to crime to fund their habit, this in turn affects the whole community but never should anyone be put to death for dealing/smuggling drugs.

Alcohol and tobacco is a much worse problem from all angles but they are still legal.
The governments are the biggest problem because they are addicted to the tax revenue from these products.
Death penialty for people who traffic drugs will not stop nor even slow the flow.
Governments should just legalise drugs and collect the billions of $ in taxes.

Drug use commonly speaking is as old as the caveman, that you state that cocaine wasn't available, uuuuhm, duh, what kerosine or benzine to produce right You state a few misconceptions, alcohol and legal prescription kill far more and addict far more people then illigal drugs will ever will. Also criminalizing causes more addiction... every recent survey has shown that the countries who don't criminalize but damage reduce have far less addiction problems then say America, where you can get life for a couple of grams in some regions if it's your third time. Locking someone up for life for drug use is retarded and a violation of human rights.... same as killing people for it...

I've known enough people that snorted and/or smoked cocaine and/or heroin to know it's not the end of the world for them at that stage. They can even lead relatively normal lives. (I've even been there myself.) I've also seen what happens to people once they get into using needles. All of them were severely dysfunctional and I've never seen anyone come back from it, although I'm sure even that's possible, just extremely unlikely. Those lives were destroyed and I'd hate to see that happen to anyone, especially someone I care for. So, from personal experience I can tell you, it's not an easy thing to recover from once you head down that road, and at some point (like when you use needles) it's basically impossible. Sure excessive eating, drinking alcohol, even too much sex can become a serious problem, but I promise you, dealing with those addictions are child's play compared to coke or heroin. I'm also 99.99% positive you won't find anyone who mainlines either drug posting in this or any other forum for that matter, however I'm quite confident you'll find plenty who do like the smell of coke here.

Btw, cocaine or heroin was definitely NOT being used by cavemen. The average coca leaf contains from 0.5 to 1 % of the alkaloid cocaine, so chewing on the leaves of coca plants, which actually has some health benefits and is what South American indigenous peoples have been doing for over a thousand years, has far less potency and is not even remotely comparable to using the now common powdered form of cocaine, regardless of which method you choose.

People don't seem to get that  the vast majority of drug users are normal people who just take drugs now en then and have a functionally life, sometimes even kids. Not everybody walks around with a needle in his arm.... again, less then 3% of people develop a problem, yet over 25% of people have trouble either with food intake or alcohol..... If you feel lik eevery drug user is a junky, governments have succeeded in their propaganda and criminalizing substance taking.... Which is as old as cavemen, maybe even older then the oldest profession

its justified when not carrying it out is likely to result in damage to more people which is why many countries retain it for times or war to prevent desertion and complete destruction of the state. this is a third world country that has't got resources to imprison hundreds of thousands more people and fight a war on drugs.

lindsay sandiford (bali deathrow woman) is sort of a family friend if that counts

In the meantime...

Indonesia pays "blood money" to save maid from execution in Saudi Arabia

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04/03/world/meast/saudi-arabia-indonesia-maid/

<< Indonesia's government has stepped in at the eleventh hour to help save an Indonesian woman on death row in Saudi Arabia from being executed this weekend. Satinah Binti Jumadi Ahmad, a 40-year old working as a housemaid in the Gulf kingdom, was sentenced to death in 2011 after she reportedly admitted to killing her 70-year-old female employer and stealing approximately $10,000. She said it was in self-defense as her boss had been trying to attack her at the time. >>

They will execute people for drug smuggling, but will pay to save the life of a murderer.

Indonesian scum.

I agree with you both, yet still hold my position.

Very smart analysis about why this can't ever work besides any moral, just like prohibitionism.

And, by the way, if your kids becomes drug addicted don't blame the pusher and expecially don't ask the state to kill him, taking your role as a father will do much more.

Killing drug smugglers not in immediate self-defense just raises the premium on drugs. Suppliers and dealers get richer, users get poorer.