People cheering the death penalty for drug smugglers

[EVT1]

news.yahoo.com/australians-72-hour-notice-execution-indonesia-source-135718676.html

And as usual I read some comments- but this country is very pro-death so I think a lot of people have no problem with this.  Poll after poll shows it.  But when it comes to cases like this- where the crime is transporting something illegal- and so many chime in with approval- I have to wonder where in the hell is humanity?  What happened where people think killing other people is a dandy solution?  How callous can people be?  And Virgil wonders why I hold humanity in contempt.  It really disgusts me.

Your hear don't smuggle drugs in that country- their own fault and maybe we should adopt that policy here.  I wonder how the same folks would feel of some Christian in Iran was facing the death penalty because they made a snide remark about Allah- would it be the same- you knew the laws, blah blah blah.  There is such a thing as morally wrong- and this coming killing is morally wrong.

[bean29]

I pretty much agree, serial killers are about the only time I think death penalty might be ok. I don't understand the justification Muslims have for killing and enslaving those not of their faith.

[djAdvocate]

the death penalty is lame.

[mmhmm]

Do I like it? No, I don't. However, these people were smuggling heroin into the country. Indonesia has very, very strict rules when it comes to drugs. It's a damned good idea to know the laws in countries you intend to visit. If you intend to break those laws, it's a damned good idea to know what the result will be if you get caught. Frankly, I don't feel particularly sorry for them. If they're not willing to use their heads, I'm not willing to shed many tears for them.

[zibazinski]

You break the laws of the country, you pay the price. Wish we'd enforce our laws. 

[thyme4change]

There are some people that I would never trust are rehabilitated - like serial killers.  I don't really have a strong opinion on the death penalty for them.  I think keeping them alive is pointless and dangerous.


As far as others - the only way it makes sense to me is if other for-profit criminals will actually be deterred by the potential penalty, then at least it has a point.   

[busymom]

Another category of criminals who are never rehabilitated are pedophiles. At the very least, they should be locked up permanently.

[zibazinski]

I could go along with that, either they give up their organs or never get free again but I'm not totally sure it's physical and not mental. They could still commit crimes against children. Plus, what do we do about women who prey on the young?

[mmhmm]

Apr 27, 2015 6:15:37 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Apr 26, 2015 23:12:36 GMT -5 busymom said:

Another category of criminals who are never rehabilitated are pedophiles. At the very least, they should be locked up permanently.

Some countries give them a choice- after they do their time they can have their freedom- but the price is they must agree to the loss of their organs that allow their sex drive to work.  I think I could agree to that here- as long as it was their choice, and not a mandated removal.

The problem with this solution is that these criminals aren't motivated by sex, necessarily. They're motivated by the need to control. They can still do a lot of harm without their sexual organs and many of them (if not most) will.

[ArchietheDragon]

Apr 26, 2015 23:12:36 GMT -5 busymom said:

Another category of criminals who are never rehabilitated are pedophiles. At the very least, they should be locked up permanently.

What is a pedophile?

[Green Eyed Lady]

Apr 26, 2015 6:24:52 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Do I like it? No, I don't. However, these people were smuggling heroin into the country. Indonesia has very, very strict rules when it comes to drugs. It's a damned good idea to know the laws in countries you intend to visit. If you intend to break those laws, it's a damned good idea to know what the result will be if you get caught. Frankly, I don't feel particularly sorry for them. If they're not willing to use their heads, I'm not willing to shed many tears for them.

Agreed, Mmhmm.  I don't like it either.  I can't, however, work up a lot of sympathy when they chose to do what they did.  I do feel badly for their families who will have to suffer for their actions.

People like this have probably played a part in a lot more deaths than any serial killer.  Allegedly, they traffic in heroin.  I'm betting the death tally for the drugs they have helped to provide to people have caused many, many more deaths than Ted Bundy or his ilk ever did.  Not sure why some think serial killers are any worse. 

[billisonboard]

Apr 27, 2015 8:24:21 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

... I'm betting the death tally for the drugs they have helped to provide to people have caused many, many more deaths than Ted Bundy or his ilk ever did.  Not sure why some think serial killers are any worse. 

Just as these people chose to smuggle drugs, those who took the drugs made that choice. The victims of serial killers don't choose themselves.

[Green Eyed Lady]

Apr 27, 2015 8:32:19 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Apr 27, 2015 8:24:21 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

... I'm betting the death tally for the drugs they have helped to provide to people have caused many, many more deaths than Ted Bundy or his ilk ever did.  Not sure why some think serial killers are any worse. 

Just as these people chose to smuggle drugs, those who took the drugs made that choice. The victims of serial killers don't choose themselves.

I didn't say I felt sorry for the drug users who died either - simply that the people selling the drugs had a part in those deaths.   They are just as bad. 

[justme]

Apr 27, 2015 7:23:04 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Apr 27, 2015 6:15:37 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Some countries give them a choice- after they do their time they can have their freedom- but the price is they must agree to the loss of their organs that allow their sex drive to work.  I think I could agree to that here- as long as it was their choice, and not a mandated removal.

The problem with this solution is that these criminals aren't motivated by sex, necessarily. They're motivated by the need to control. They can still do a lot of harm without their sexual organs and many of them (if not most) will.

And unless they uhh get rid of everything it's possible to buy synthetic testosterone to replace what you're not taking.

[thyme4change]

Apr 27, 2015 7:23:04 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Apr 27, 2015 6:15:37 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Some countries give them a choice- after they do their time they can have their freedom- but the price is they must agree to the loss of their organs that allow their sex drive to work.  I think I could agree to that here- as long as it was their choice, and not a mandated removal.

The problem with this solution is that these criminals aren't motivated by sex, necessarily. They're motivated by the need to control. They can still do a lot of harm without their sexual organs and many of them (if not most) will.

Yes, but a good number of them have a significant mentality change when they go through the surgery and lose a significant level of testosterone.  Their body chemistry changes after that process and that affects everything - including the way you think.  At that point, you could still be a power-hungry violent criminal, but so can everyone else walking down the street.

I know there are people that have been let out of prison are given "chemical castrations" (depo provera), but if they don't show up for treatment then they are in parole violation - it is pretty easy to disappear during that time.  I like the idea of something more permanent.  

[zibazinski]

DH's former stepdaughter sperm donor went to prison over and over for being a pedophile   She was a victim and countless others. They actually let him out again and he married a woman with CHILDREN!! WTH? What kind of a system allows that?

[Green Eyed Lady]

 

and he married a woman with CHILDREN!! WTH? What kind of a system allows that?

I'm wondering what kind of woman allows that....let alone what kind of system.

[zibazinski]

Please, I've met those kind of women. ANY man is better than no man at all.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I suppose you are right.  I just can't see a mom risking her children like that.  Guess it happens.

[The Captain]

Not to sidetrack the discussion, but I have to debunk a often misunderstood "fact" about pedophiles.

The recidivism rates for pedophiles are generally comparable to those of rapists.  The belief that all of them will offend again is wrong.  In addition, with treatment, the recidivism rate for pedophiles is actually less than that of rapists.

I do not in any way condone this behavior, but let's know the facts before we give up on someone.  Just like any other criminal, they can serve their time, hopefully get treatment, and have another chance to contribute something positive to society.

For some specifics look at table two of the attached:

www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1161

[Green Eyed Lady]

Are they successfully treated....or do their continuing acts go unreported?  Recidivism rates mean nothing if the crimes aren't reported.  I admittedly know nothing about pedophilia and the associated statistics, but I'm guessing a huge number of these acts go unreported...forever.  Children are much easier to threaten into silence. 

[ArchietheDragon]

Apr 27, 2015 10:23:50 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Not to sidetrack the discussion, but I have to debunk a often misunderstood "fact" about pedophiles.

The recidivism rates for pedophiles are generally comparable to those of rapists.  The belief that all of them will offend again is wrong.  In addition, with treatment, the recidivism rate for pedophiles is actually less than that of rapists.

I do not in any way condone this behavior, but let's know the facts before we give up on someone.  Just like any other criminal, they can serve their time, hopefully get treatment, and have another chance to contribute something positive to society.

For some specifics look at table two of the attached:

www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1161

I am with Captian.  But I am against all mandatory minimum sentencing.   Not enough room for reasonable thought.  

[zibazinski]

Put them in general population. Problem solved.

[Deleted]

Apr 25, 2015 21:21:56 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

news.yahoo.com/australians-72-hour-notice-execution-indonesia-source-135718676.html

And as usual I read some comments- but this country is very pro-death so I think a lot of people have no problem with this.  Poll after poll shows it.  But when it comes to cases like this- where the crime is transporting something illegal- and so many chime in with approval- I have to wonder where in the hell is humanity?  What happened where people think killing other people is a dandy solution?  How callous can people be?  And Virgil wonders why I hold humanity in contempt.  It really disgusts me.

Your hear don't smuggle drugs in that country- their own fault and maybe we should adopt that policy here.  I wonder how the same folks would feel of some Christian in Iran was facing the death penalty because they made a snide remark about Allah- would it be the same- you knew the laws, blah blah blah.  There is such a thing as morally wrong- and this coming killing is morally wrong.

Of course we're pro death. What do you expect for critters that reside at the top of the food chain ? We apply a term such as "punishment", "criminal", "war", or "parasite", that we're comfortable with, and just keep on killing. Why are you so surprised ? The humans that are not killers, have been constantly weeded out all through mans history. Some times the weeding has a few setbacks due to various reasons, but it's usually short lived. It's our nature.    

[The Captain]

Apr 27, 2015 10:39:21 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Are they successfully treated....or do their continuing acts go unreported?  Recidivism rates mean nothing if the crimes aren't reported.  I admittedly know nothing about pedophilia and the associated statistics, but I'm guessing a huge number of these acts go unreported...forever.  Children are much easier to threaten into silence. 

This is a highly valid question.  However, considering all sex offenders are required to register, and most likely would be known to family and friends as such, I would presume if anything they are under even more scrutiny. 

In addition, I believe in almost all instances conditions of parole require the individual not to engage in occupations or activities that bring them into unsupervised contact with children.

[zibazinski]

You'd think that, huh? Yet a pedophile was allowed to marry someone with new victims for him to molest. Where was his parole officer?

[djAdvocate]

Apr 27, 2015 12:06:51 GMT -5 The Captain said:

Apr 27, 2015 10:39:21 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

Are they successfully treated....or do their continuing acts go unreported?  Recidivism rates mean nothing if the crimes aren't reported.  I admittedly know nothing about pedophilia and the associated statistics, but I'm guessing a huge number of these acts go unreported...forever.  Children are much easier to threaten into silence. 

This is a highly valid question.  However, considering all sex offenders are required to register, and most likely would be known to family and friends as such, I would presume if anything they are under even more scrutiny. 

In addition, I believe in almost all instances conditions of parole require the individual not to engage in occupations or activities that bring them into unsupervised contact with children.

i would add something to the controversy here- i am against the RSO lists.  i think it is an invasion of privacy.  i can go on and on about WHY i think that is the case, but the simplest way of saying it is that the kind of offenses that are part of that list include things like public nudity.  so, if you are drunk, and go pee in an alley at 1AM, and an officer spots you, you can end up on that list, which is pretty awful if you ask me.

[The Captain]

I'm not denying that Zib, but they wouldn't be allowed to be coaches, teachers, daycare workers etc.  You can't make it illegal to marry someone as far as I know.

I would hope no woman would willingly put her children as risk like that but unfortunately we know it happens.

[The Captain]

Apr 27, 2015 13:12:47 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Apr 27, 2015 12:06:51 GMT -5 The Captain said:

This is a highly valid question.  However, considering all sex offenders are required to register, and most likely would be known to family and friends as such, I would presume if anything they are under even more scrutiny. 

In addition, I believe in almost all instances conditions of parole require the individual not to engage in occupations or activities that bring them into unsupervised contact with children.

i would add something to the controversy here- i am against the RSO lists.  i think it is an invasion of privacy.  i can go on and on about WHY i think that is the case, but the simplest way of saying it is that the kind of offenses that are part of that list include things like public nudity.  so, if you are drunk, and go pee in an alley at 1AM, and an officer spots you, you can end up on that list, which is pretty awful if you ask me.

It's not perfect.  There are also many other ways to get on the list that would have most sane people scratching their heads.  I'm not sure what the answer is but in this case I'm willing to limit a prior offender's freedoms to protect potential future victims.

Unfortunately we live in an imperfect world.

[Green Eyed Lady]

I agree with you mostly, DJ.  Some of the people on that registry are no more of a risk of harming someone than you and I are.  I'm not against the RSO.  I'm against what qualifies a person to be on that Registry.