|
. : : Death Sentence - German Girl Caught with Marijuana : : . (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| Well, yes, but the US isn't a theocracy (although it sometimes does seem to be that way). And yes, it is stupid that there's no distinction between drugs. I mean, it was ok to kill that guy who they found with 4kg of heroin, but this is really retarded. |
|
|
| 'mju:zik |
drug tito about your sig lol....at least we dont have people chasing us and trying to kill us in those darkened rooms. we've created the perfect pacman!!!!
4kg of heroin??? holy that is a lot of $$$$$$$$$ |
|
|
| j_spot |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ-Fuq
Oh come on people! These stupid terrorist waster drug users DESERVE to die. I mean, for all we know, she might have went out dealing this poison to innocent children, who then get addicted and start taking HEROIN AND CRACK and then go out murdering people and robbing the corpses to pay for this evil stuff!!!!11 And the small minority who wont go on to heroin will turn gay and grow breasts and if theyre a girl they will get a moustach and a penis and go crazy. Dont u know thats what cannabis does???
And we all know shes going to go and give her profits to al qaeda and saddam etc.
The only way we can stop this is by killing ALL those drug takers and dealers! THEYRE EVIL!!!!11!! |
I sure hope im missing the sarcasm in your completly assinine post. |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| its sad to us Westerners to see that someone could be hanged for posession of Marijuana, whatever the amount, but remember the law is the law and so while she might be given 5yrs in Germany, Singapore is not Germany and the laws of Singapore should have been respected by this young lady. Not having that amount of weed was not a hard law to follow was it, especially knowing the penalty. Wish her the best of luck, but in another country follow the laws of that nation, its there for a reason. |
|
|
| caddyshack |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fire999
The volume exceeds the 500-gram minimum required for the mandatory death penalty, which is carried out by hanging, according to the Central Narcotics Bureau, which made the arrests. |
Hanging?? what is wrong with these people, especially for something as harmless as weed.
| quote: | Originally posted by Thor
Signapore is a barbaric justice system, ironicly it shares the love for the death penalty like the USA on of the few modern countries that still uses it. |
tru |
|
|
| caddyshack |
| I bet they will leave her head on the end of a spear as an example for all the drug dealers. Savages!!! |
|
|
| jdat |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Well, I guess it was ok then in your opinion for the talibans to make females wear burkas and to forbid them basic human rights like education or health care? I mean, the law is the law, right? Those women could have defected to the Northern Alliance anytime, couldn't they? Who are we westerners to judge local traditions? Things like female circumcisions or cutting of someone's hand for stealing a few coins should be looked upon from a local perspective and you'll then see they're really not so bad. They're only there to keep the stability in the society and to prevent it falling apart. |
you do have a point, but us as outsiders, how can we view such things? No matter what point of views we have they will always appeared flawed, out of context, highly offensive etc etc ....
it's concretely impossible to debate such a thing, law is law, you break it .... what should be done ? |
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| The danger of executing innocent people far outweighs any possilble benefits in terms of deterrent. One of OJ Simpson's former lawyers (I think Barry Scheck) has a foundation that funds DNA testing for people on death row. They have freed dozens of innocent people who were to be executed. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by jdat
you do have a point, but us as outsiders, how can we view such things? No matter what point of views we have they will always appeared flawed, out of context, highly offensive etc etc .... |
Actually I believe that the outsiders often have a more rational approach to local traditions and judicial systems than most of the insiders. People fear the unknown, and anything that might cause danger or upheaval. The local population is afraid of change, as the change brings the unknown. A person living in developed world and observing the system from the outside knows that such a change will not cause the society to fall apart. A person from the inside always has some suspicons about it. People living in a system have everything to loose if that system fails, therefore they're clinging to the current framework of that system even if it's far from perfect. A person on the outside has no such fear and is therefore more capable of seeing the faults and solutions to them.
| quote: | | it's concretely impossible to debate such a thing, law is law, you break it .... what should be done ? |
It's not impossible to debate it. Laws are not god given, they're dictated by the society. If you change the society, people will demand a change in the laws. But it goes vice-versa as well. If you change the laws, that will affect the society too. There's plenty that can be done. National governments dictate the laws. Since countries are not isolated entities, their government policies are dictated by external as well as internal stimuli. If a world community insists that a country should change its laws in accordance with the mroe civilized values, and if the pressure is strong enough, there is quite a likely chance that a change will occur. Now, since people are usually judged by the version of the law that is best for them, if a law change is enacted, and if the law loosens up a bit, that girl will be tried under the new and more forgiving law.
Now, as far as universal justice goes, I believe such a thing can exist, and here is my perspective on the issue. Justice is some sort of a compromise between individual needs and freedoms on one side, and those of the society on the other. If we look at the overall benefit depending on the the amount of freedom in the society, we see that it's a sort of a function whose peak is in the middle. In very opressive systems, the society stagnates or falls behind as all free thought is restricted. On the individual level, people are deprived of freedom and are severly constrained which makes them stupid and unhappy. In very liberal systems, crime flourishes and corruption is rampaging. People are feeling unsafe and uncertain and are more prone to engage in criminal activities. Therefore the best solution is somewhere in the middle, where the needs for safety and control balance each other out with needs for freedom. That sort of balance has been more or less found in all the rich and prosperous countries. Countries with vastly different systems usually fall way behind in terms of development. Too liberal countries often fall apart, while too strict ones slowly fade into irrelevance.
In that manner, we should consider what effects her selling weed on the rest of the society has. The only thing it does is that it mildly influences a certain amount of individuals in a negative way. In that case, the most fair punishment would be to affect the seller in a (mildly negative way)*(number of people affected). If we consider a short-medium prison sentence to have a medium-heavy negative effect on the person, we could say it is the most fair punishment. |
|
|
| dj aki |
| i think that if she committed a crime there, she should be punished by their law. i also think its a bit too much for dealing weed, but she should have known better. citizens there will be punished the same way if others do it, so just because she is from germany, does not mean she should be punished according to german laws. it is not fair for people live there. |
|
|
| caddyshack |
| quote: | Originally posted by jdat
you do have a point, but us as outsiders, how can we view such things? No matter what point of views we have they will always appeared flawed, out of context, highly offensive etc etc ....
it's concretely impossible to debate such a thing, law is law, you break it .... what should be done ? |
The law is the law?? That is the worst thing i have ever heard. Lets just go back to the code of Hammurabi if thats the case.
Code of Hammurabi |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Actually I believe that the outsiders often have a more rational approach to local traditions and judicial systems than most of the insiders. |
But often outsiders lack the cultural background to understand the validity of existing laws.
| quote: | | People fear the unknown, and anything that might cause danger or upheaval. The local population is afraid of change, as the change brings the unknown... A person from the inside always has some suspicons about it. People living in a system have everything to loose if that system fails, therefore they're clinging to the current framework of that system even if it's far from perfect. |
...Either that or they simply believe their laws are perfect just and working, in which case our suggestions fall on deaf ears.
| quote: | | A person on the outside has no such fear and is therefore more capable of seeing the faults and solutions to them... A person living in developed world and observing the system from the outside knows that such a change will not cause the society to fall apart. |
Again this is by the outsiders definition of justice... according to local definitions there may be no faults. History has proven that it is hard to predict what will happen when any country attempts to adopt western values, and whether that will involve the collapse of society (the USSR is one example).
| quote: | | It's not impossible to debate it. Laws are not god given, they're dictated by the society. |
True... if you come from a Western liberal legal tradition that is. Islamic jurisprudence would dictate that laws are based on the teachings of Mohamed and therefore are god-given.
| quote: | | National governments dictate the laws. |
[Muslim Cleric]The laws of Allah as handed down by Mohamed in the holy Q'uran dictate the laws... A good government merely implements them[/Muslim Cleric]
| quote: | | Since countries are not isolated entities, their government policies are dictated by external as well as internal stimuli. If a world community insists that a country should change its laws in accordance with the mroe civilized values, and if the pressure is strong enough, there is quite a likely chance that a change will occur. |
There is also a good chance the developing world world will see this as Western colonisation - another attempt by the Judeo-Christian world to ipose their values onto teh rest of the world, inciting more anti-Western sentiment which leads to more terrorism etc... "More civilized" is an outdated, and clearly subjective term. According to countries living under Sharia law, their values are more civilized than those of the infidels.
| quote: | | Now, as far as universal justice goes, I believe such a thing can exist, and here is my perspective on the issue. Justice is some sort of a compromise between individual needs and freedoms on one side, and those of the society on the other. If we look at the overall benefit depending on the the amount of freedom in the society, we see that it's a sort of a function whose peak is in the middle. In very opressive systems, the society stagnates or falls behind as all free thought is restricted. |
That's not a bad summary of the Western liberal definition of justice. To us the emphasis on rights sounds intuitive and "universal" because we were brought under such a system and taught to value rights and freedom. However Muslims would argue that the Western legal tradition places too much emphasis on rights and freedoms and not enough on God... according to them Allah dictates the rules which allow society to function the right way (close o God and away from sin). China still has a very restrictive system, yet it is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. The USSR was a superpower and a massive economy, as soon as it adopted Western values it crumbled.
| quote: | | On the individual level, people are deprived of freedom and are severly constrained which makes them stupid and unhappy. In very liberal systems, crime flourishes and corruption is rampaging. People are feeling unsafe and uncertain and are more prone to engage in criminal activities. |
If that was the case, no country would ever return to stricter, more oppressive Islamic laws, because everyone would instantly be so much happier and "less stupid" (??) when the laws are removed. As for crime flourishing in more liberal countries - this is a bit off-topic, but can you think of a country where crime is flourishing because it's to liberal?
| quote: | | Countries with vastly different systems usually fall way behind in terms of development. |
[Sharia lawyer]What about spiritual development and closeness to God? are they not more important than economic development? Besides tehre are plenty of very wealthy Muslim countries in the Middle East[/Sharia lawyer]
| quote: | | Too liberal countries often fall apart, while too strict ones slowly fade into irrelevance. |
Can't get much more liberal than many of the Scandinavian countries... yet they have some of the highest living standards in the world, and have had for centuries. The USSR turned into an economic and military superpower under Stalin (one of the reasons many Russians still consider him to have been a great leader), who instituted one of the strictest regimes in history. The Mongols nearly conquered the world under a harsh totalitarian leadership. Such states tend to fade into irrelevance when they soften up.
| quote: | | In that manner, we should consider what effects her selling weed on the rest of the society has. The only thing it does is that it mildly influences a certain amount of individuals in a negative way. In that case, the most fair punishment would be to affect the seller in a (mildly negative way)*(number of people affected). If we consider a short-medium prison sentence to have a medium-heavy negative effect on the person, we could say it is the most fair punishment. |
Again you're speaking from a liberal western legal definition of justice. And there is no way to prove that this definition is objectively superior to any other definition.
I'm all for abolition of the death penalty and pressuring other nations to do so. But you have to do so with the full realisation that you are simply imposing your subjective values on someone else who doesn't share your views. Americans in particular often forget this. |
|
|
|
|
