# Death penalty



## mongey (Apr 28, 2015)

so there is a allot of debate flying around Australia today as 2 Aussie drug smullgers got executed in Indonesia over night 

they got caught 7 or 8 years ago ( I think ) and both showed remorse and rehabilitation in jail. after much protest and back and forwarding between our governments they finally did it 

personally I dont support the death penalty . I think yeah there are some extreme cases where it may be justified but deciding where that line in the sand is just too complicated . I def dont fell drug smugging is worthy of being shot 

that said I have been to Bali and they leave you in no doubts in Bali airport when arriving over what happens if you get caught. there is a massive sign over customs that pretty much just says "we shoot drug smugglers." 

I also dont feel its up to me to decide, or my country to enforce how other countries deal with their laws . Again I dont agree with it and I personally will never go there again , but I know allot of aussies who are up in arms will forget about it and go back next year for the cheap holiday and Bin tang singlets 

USA for instance still has the death penalty for extreme cases . how can we be up in arms with indonesia and fine with the USA ? 

thougths ?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 28, 2015)

Thier country, thier rules. As you said, it's well known how they treat drug trafficking and the perpetrators certainly knew. 

I'm not in support of the death penalty, for many reasons, but if you're going to play with fire, you have to accept you'll get burned.


----------



## Hollowway (Apr 29, 2015)

Yep. It's their country, so you pretty much have to agree with their rules, because if you're there it's an implied consent that you know and agree.

OP, what are you actually asking? If people agree with the death penalty, or why the US's system is better/worse than Indonesia? I'm not sure where you're going. Obviously there's a spectrum of how people feel about the death penalty, so if you want us to have some sort of a discussion you're going to have to frame it, otherwise no one's going to want to weigh in.


----------



## mongey (Apr 29, 2015)

Just rambling I guess. 

question is does the severity of a crime justify the use of the death penalty and how can you actually determine where that line is ? Drug dealers should live but Saddam Hussein dies ? you kill 4 people you don't die but 5 and your gone ? If someone is insane they shouldn't be killed but isn't anyone who commits a heinous crime that hurts people insane in some way ?

why do people feel so strongly that other countries need to live by their code of morality ?


----------



## BornToLooze (Apr 29, 2015)

Honestly I think if you are a murder you should be killed the same way you killed people. Either that or let the victims family decide what happens. 

For instance, say you kept someone captive for 10 years, raped them, tortured them and then they finally died from it. Do you really think that person deserves to feel a little prick, everything gets numb and they go to sleep and don't wake up? Or do they deserve every once of pain they inflicted on their victim?

If you are going to kill people for committing a crime it should be something that terrifies them, not you won't feel anything.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 29, 2015)

The issue with things so violent or permanent is that most of the time there is not 100% certainty of guilt. How would you feel if the punishment fit the heinous crime and they actually had the wrong guy. if I had to make that call I'd feel terrible. That burden is then left on the family who made that call as well.

Just look at the number of vindicated death row inmates and it's easy to see that killing someone for a crime you can't be 100% certain happened is not right. My opinion gets a bit more murky when there's zero doubt however (clear eye witnesses, overwhelming evidence, etc.).


----------



## thrashmetal85 (Apr 29, 2015)

There is no argument that can be made for State sanctioned murder.

But that does not mean I am here to demand that be changed. It is by the will of that State's people, and we must show though evidence and positivity the that capital punishment is a poor punishment.


----------



## estabon37 (Apr 29, 2015)

I'll try to be brief, but I probably won't be. I'll put this together in sections, and the first paragraph of each section should be a self-contained argument, so if you want the short version, read the first part of each bit. Here we go...

--------------------------------------------------------------

Firstly, I think harsh penalties for drug offences are fucking stupid. We've had these discussions at length in this forum, and much of it doesn't need to be repeated here. Indonesia's harsh penalties on drug smuggling are there as a deterrent, and they're only so effective in this regard. 

My general opinion on drug laws is that drugs should be decriminalised at the least, preferably legalised, and manufactured publicly / privately under set health standards under a sales model that sees the majority of profits going towards social causes such as substance abuse rehabilitation as a best-case scenario. Again, this argument exists in detail elsewhere on this forum, and can be found all over the internet, so going into further detail here just derails the thread from the actual conversation - these particular drug smugglers in Indonesia.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Secondly, I'm not a fan of the death penalty in general, but only because it strikes me as sentence-as-revenge. There are people in prison that have committed crimes that would cause the most compassionate people on Earth to see that there is no hope of rehabilitation, a likelihood that they will cause more despair in the lives of others, and that their lives in prison will be restricted to the point that they might as well be dead. So, while I don't think capital punishment has much in the way of benefits, I'm not against it in the cases of 'worst possible offenders'.

------------------------------------------------------------

Third, _this is an intensely political situation_. The Indonesian / Australian political relationship has been strained for a while. When East Timor held a referendum for its independence in 1999, many local Indonesians acted with hostility, and an Australian-led UN peacekeeping force went in to protect the residents of the new country. Australia has not been popular with many Indonesians since then, and our political bullying of Indonesia over asylum seekers, our military's incursions into Indonesian territorial waters to stop boats full of smuggled people, and the revelation that our intelligence agencies actively tried to tap the phones of Indonesia's last president and may have used our embassy as a 'spy centre' haven't improved the relationship.

Over the last fifteen years, on and off, consecutive Australian governments of both major political persuasions have tended towards flexing what few political muscles we have at the Indonesians. This makes us kind of unpopular over there, to the best of my knowledge, and it's amazing how many Australians are oblivious to the fact. So many people here complain about 'American intrusion into everybody else's business', but think it's fine if we do the same. 

This is not to say there is large, open, and active hostility between our populations. There isn't. But it's sensitive. This is often the case between international neighbours, so we have to hope that the people in charge will be level-headed and treat one another with respect and dignity. Our Prime Minister is bad at this. Our foreign minister has already made (probably hollow) threats of 'consequences'. In other words, our politicians are probably going to behave like children over this. It's not a surprise.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Last point, and hopefully it doesn't seem too unrelated. Our politicians and our public have been appealing for the death sentences to be revoked on humanitarian grounds. We are currently holding thousands of people in detention centres (including hundreds of children), indefinitely (to the point that some have been locked up for years), and our primary defence (apart from a zealous interest in 'fighting people smuggling') is that it is our right as a sovereign nation to defend our borders from undesirable parties. 

---------------------------------------------------------------

That last point bears repeating.

The governments of Prime Ministers John Howard, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott have all defended the use of harsh, inhumane laws in the defence of our borders. Those laws have hurt thousands of people, many have attempted or committed suicide while detained for up to two years (far longer than international averages, which include 30 days for the US), all in the name of border protection.

*Indonesia's harsh drug smuggling penalties are a form of border protection.*

For any Australian politician to claim that the executions of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran is unfair or inhumane is arrogant and hypocritical. As an isolated argument, it is correct. I can't deny that, and as I stated in the first couple of points, I agree. Harsh drug policies are absolutely stupid. Death penalties are unnecessary. *But it is not an isolated argument*. The long-term, complex factors that weigh down the relationship between Australia and Indonesia can not be ignored, and I'm fucking disgusted at the fact that they are not only being ignored by most people that talk to me about this issue, but it seems that they are ignored because we are largely ignorant. 

So, like everybody that talks to me about this issue, I am saddened, shocked, angered, and want something to be done about the situation. Unlike everyone else, it's not the executions that lead me to this state.


----------



## Korbain (Apr 29, 2015)

While they knew the risks, i still don't think they should have died. I know its their country, their rules, but its okay for Indonesia to beg for people to get off execution in other countries...

Besides the fact of how much aid we give that country, i feel like this was a big .... you to us. Their president completely ignored our prime ministers calls, gave out execution notices on anzac day when we asked them to respect that day, etc.

Some of the other people that got executed seemed to have to turned their lives around as well, some of these guys have been waiting for 10 years + for this to happen. I agree they took a stupid risk and got caught, i think some common sense needs to take place in if these people have changed/been rehabilitated, do they need t die? 

In the case of the Australians, its clear as day they had changed their life around and became better people. They were happy to stay in jail for life to keep helping the other inmates, which is what a lot of people can prove they done up to the day they died. One became a preacher and the other became an artists and was teaching other in mates art.

Strictly talking about the Australians, as i don't know the full story of the others 100%, i feel it was a massive waste of life for 2 guys that had made a ....ing stupid mistake at like 21 years old, sat in jail for 10 + years and clearly had became better people in that time.

They had so much more use alive helping people in jail, community work, etc. now they're dead. 

They knew the risks yes, but if you are going to execute them, as soon they're convicted do it then. Don't let them be rehabilitated, turn there life around, then kill them.

It's a very sad day, just because this was preventable. For murder, rape, etc. fine, that warrants death to me. In the end Indonesia had a chance to prove their jail's can change inmates and make them better people/rehabilitate, which they did, and then they killed them. Idiots

I could .... on for ages, i haven't even touched on that the Judge apparently offered to take a bribe to stop them being executed. Apparently they were meant have a hearing for that early in May, now they're ....ing dead.

I'll stop though, there's too much to talk about  Im sad and ....ing angry, Indonesia is an amazing country ruled by an extremely corrupt government and police force. I don't know why Australia helps them so much, they clearly don't give a .... what we think.


----------



## estabon37 (Apr 29, 2015)

Korbain said:


> Besides the fact of how much aid we give that country



I agree, that fact should be kept aside. Nepal should not be made to feel it owes something to any country that provides aid in the coming weeks, and the decisions of its government should not affect whether or not wealthier countries offer assistance to foreign citizens. Aid money should not be offered with the threat of cutting it short if you have a disagreement later, although our Prime Minister apparently disagrees.



Korbain said:


> I don't know why Australia helps them so much, they clearly don't give a .... what we think.



Let's not mistake the decisions of governments for the sentiments of citizens, and let's not react pettily by suggesting the removal of funding that supports people that have done nothing wrong. I agree with you on most of your points, but the anger I'm seeing and hearing throughout the Australian media and social media tends to be directed at the Indonesian public as much as its government. It's as scary as it is stupid.


----------



## cwhitey2 (Apr 29, 2015)

flint757 said:


> The issue with things so violent or permanent is that most of the time there is not 100% certainty of guilt. How would you feel if the punishment fit the heinous crime and they actually had the wrong guy. if I had to make that call I'd feel terrible. That burden is then left on the family who made that call as well.
> 
> Just look at the number of vindicated death row inmates and it's easy to see that killing someone for a crime you can't be 100% certain happened is not right. My opinion gets a bit more murky when there's zero doubt however (clear eye witnesses, overwhelming evidence, etc.).





This is one my biggest gripes with the Death Penalty. Other than that I'm all for it.


Its my American right to have someone killed for a crime they may or may have not committed!!!! (sarcasm)


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 30, 2015)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Thier country, thier rules. As you said, it's well known how they treat drug trafficking and the perpetrators certainly knew.
> 
> I'm not in support of the death penalty, for many reasons, but if you're going to play with fire, you have to accept you'll get burned.



Too convenient. 

Here's the truth, if you are going to be sentenced to death (which I don't support for more reasons than I can discuss here) then there is 0.0% excuse for it to be 8 years. None. ZERO, zippo, zilch. If you are going to kill 'em, kill 'em. If you can't do that in a humane period of time, it's not acceptable.

Remind you of anyone?


----------



## Shewter (Apr 30, 2015)

BornToLooze said:


> Honestly I think if you are a murder you should be killed the same way you killed people. Either that or let the victims family decide what happens.
> 
> For instance, say you kept someone captive for 10 years, raped them, tortured them and then they finally died from it. Do you really think that person deserves to feel a little prick, everything gets numb and they go to sleep and don't wake up? Or do they deserve every once of pain they inflicted on their victim?
> 
> If you are going to kill people for committing a crime it should be something that terrifies them, not you won't feel anything.



I disagree with this. I don't think that the State should be in the revenge business. I'm also about 50/50 on the state dolling out any death to its citizenry, but if we are going to allow it, it should be absolutely emotionless in the way it is carried out.

6 man firing squad, 4 blanks, two live rounds, no one knows who has the live round. I don't agree with lethal injections, I don't agree with hanging, I don't agree with electrocution.

Like I mentioned, I'm not 100% okay with the state carrying out death penalties, but unlike the Kingdoms of Old, we can't just dump our dangerous convicts in Australia anymore. I don't think they'd appreciate that.


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

Never acceptable. Period.

In this day and age, state sanctioned revenge killing is far beneath us.


----------



## Korbain (Apr 30, 2015)

estabon37 said:


> I agree, that fact should be kept aside. Nepal should not be made to feel it owes something to any country that provides aid in the coming weeks, and the decisions of its government should not affect whether or not wealthier countries offer assistance to foreign citizens. Aid money should not be offered with the threat of cutting it short if you have a disagreement later, although our Prime Minister apparently disagrees.
> 
> 
> 
> Let's not mistake the decisions of governments for the sentiments of citizens, and let's not react pettily by suggesting the removal of funding that supports people that have done nothing wrong. I agree with you on most of your points, but the anger I'm seeing and hearing throughout the Australian media and social media tends to be directed at the Indonesian public as much as its government. It's as scary as it is stupid.



I don't want their citizens to suffer, or to cut their funding entirely. Both our countries rely on each in their own ways, Indonesia obviously relies on us a bit more.

I definitely wouldn't be giving them 600 million a year though lol Honestly my main problems are how it was all handled, the 10 year period, the bribery/corruption, and the overall slap in our face.

Man they ....ing escorted them to that island with fighter jets covering, half their ....ing military on the streets haha it was like what the ....? These dudes seem to be pretty harmless now. Indonesia used it as excuse to parade around and show of their military. Half of which is probably donated from us...


----------



## cwhitey2 (Apr 30, 2015)

I think some people are so ....ed up the "Correctional" system wont work....but something else does.


Almost 40k per prisoner a year...are you kidding me. I don't even make that much money


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

cwhitey2 said:


> I think some people are so ....ed up the "Correctional" system wont work....but something else does.
> 
> 
> Almost 40k per prisoner a year...are you kidding me. I don't even make that much money



Our prison system is anything but "correctional".


----------



## cwhitey2 (Apr 30, 2015)

asher said:


> Our prison system is anything but "correctional".



That was my point 


Taking a life should be the last resort. But these criminal eat better than most people...would save a us money in the long run by eliminating the 'problem', but there are to many innocent people convicted so its a tough call.


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

cwhitey2 said:


> That was my point
> 
> 
> Taking a life should be the last resort. But these criminal eat better than most people...would save a us money in the long run by eliminating the 'problem', but there are to many innocent people convicted so its a tough call.



Like it came up in the Tsarnev thread:

Putting someone on death row in the US is about ten times more expensive than life without parole.

So no, it really wouldn't, ignoring the fact that too many (any, but a distressing number) of innocent people are executed.


----------



## USMarine75 (Apr 30, 2015)

thrashmetal85 said:


> There is no argument that can be made for State sanctioned murder.




Well, technically, there is... you just apparently don't agree with it. 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/30/us/feat-jeffrey-dahmer-killer-explanation/index.html

"The man who beat serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer to death inside a Wisconsin prison says he did it because of Dahmer's creepy sense of humor -- which included turning prison food into fake limbs covered with ketchup to resemble blood, the New York Post reports.

Christopher Scarver, who was sentenced to two life terms in prison for killing Dahmer and another man at Columbia Correctional Institution in 1994, said the confessed cannibal would leave the fake limbs around the prison where others would find them."


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

That's less of an argument for the death penalty and much more that our prison system is terrible


----------



## pink freud (Apr 30, 2015)

In an ideal world the death penalty would be fine. We don't live in an ideal world. Hell, we can't even agree on _why_ the death penalty should be implemented. If we as a society can't even decide if the death penalty should be used as vengeance or if it should be used only on people incapable of rehabilitation and are otherwise a threat to others how can we in good conscience continue to use it?


----------



## mongey (Apr 30, 2015)

I'm not sure how I feel about withdrawing aid from Indonesia .I can see why many feel like that but at the end of the day I dont feel the people of Indonesia should suffer 

to me this whole thing points out the problem with the death penalty . you have to give due process and explore every avenue before you can use it which takes 10 years. in that 10 years a person facing death "finds" something and tries to improve themelves for the better . then when they have acheived it , its time to be shot


----------



## estabon37 (Apr 30, 2015)

Shewter said:


> I'm also about 50/50 on the state dolling out any death to its citizenry, but if we are going to allow it, it should be absolutely emotionless in the way it is carried out.
> 
> 6 man firing squad, 4 blanks, two live rounds, no one knows who has the live round.



It seems the main reason the Indonesian executions are contentious is that the sentences are being carried out against non-Indonesian citizens. The last six months has been a constant barrage of emotional appeals to the Indonesian president and various judges, and those appeals were ignored. That's a sign that emotion wasn't really entering the equation. And these executions were carried out by 12 man firing squads and an unknown number of blanks, so it pretty well fits your criteria in that regard.

The lack of emotion in this case was probably more of a problem than a benefit. The Brazilian prisoner that faced the firing squad was mentally ill, and apparently didn't realise what was going on until he was standing in front of the guns. While Indonesia certainly isn't the only country to execute people suffering from mental illnesses (or state, if you prefer; I'm not trying to throw guilt by association into the mix), death sentences tend to be applied to murderers, not drugs offenders. The Indonesian judicial and political systems are essentially taking a stance that says "If you break the law, your background, mental state, and rehabilitative prospects don't matter, the sentence will be carried out". In the case of nonviolent offenders, this doesn't make sense, and emotional appeals might have more of a place than in the cases of violent offenders.



Shewter said:


> unlike the Kingdoms of Old, we can't just dump our dangerous convicts in Australia anymore. I don't think they'd appreciate that.



Yeah, it seems we're generally against people coming to our country without our express permission right now, to a hypocritical degree.


----------



## zappatton2 (Apr 30, 2015)

Even if a killer can be proven 100% culpable and competant, even if he/she is a serial killer with an unrepentant sadistic streak, the death penalty still has no place in the 21st century. If someone murdered somebody I cared about, would I want them to die? Yeah, I imagine I would. But should the state kill them on my behalf? As I see it, retribution doesn't serve the purpose of modern justice.

In fact, I don't even see the need for prisons to be harsh, unpleasant places, even for those who will (and should) never see release. For extreme crimes, like murder, rape, child abuse and extreme violence, punitive laws have no demonstrable effect. The death penalty, and harsh prison sentences, do not act as effective deterrents for crimes of passion or compulsion. And the vast majority of people in such situations are not sadistic psychopaths and can be rehabilitated. Norway has a low crime rate, and the lowest recidivism rate in the world, because they don't treat their prisoners like animals, and put real effort into rehabilitation and reintegration.

Some people are genuinely dangerous. Leave them locked up. But treat them like humans. It serves no purpose to kill them or make their lives a living hell, except to appease the mob. I like to think that we as a society have moved well beyond that, even if the whole "tough on crime" populist shtick does sell politically. This is why I'm glad we don't elect our judges, I trust the Charter and the rule of law far more than I trust an angry mob demanding blood.


----------



## flint757 (Apr 30, 2015)

Have to sort of disagree with your first sentence. I could see it being fitting for that exact sort of person personally. But I wouldn't be upset if it went away compleyely either. I don't hold a strong opinion regarding the death penalty.

Your comparison to Norway isn't a valid one either. We have higher poverty rates, a more diverse populous (socially and economically), a history of violence and a crappy social safety net. You can't entirely attribute Norway's social success to how they operate their prisons. Not saying your wrong, but that it's a bit hard to prove since nothing exists in a vacuum.


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

flint757 said:


> Have to sort of disagree with your first sentence. I could see it being fitting for that exact sort of person personally. But I wouldn't be upset if it went away compleyely either. I don't hold a strong opinion regarding the death penalty.
> 
> Your comparison to Norway isn't a valid one either. We have higher poverty rates, a more diverse populous (socially and economically), a history of violence and a crappy social safety net. You can't entirely attribute Norway's social success to how they operate their prisons. Not saying your wrong, but that it's a bit hard to prove since nothing exists in a vacuum.



But they also have a mission statement of not treating people like animals 

Why not both?


----------



## flint757 (Apr 30, 2015)

We should definitely treat prisoners better and attempt to help them lead more fulfilling lives outside of a jail cell. It's to everyone's benefit to do so as it will have some impact on all of our lives. I'm just saying that doing so isn't going to solve all of our problems as it's only one small part of the puzzle. People commit crimes because of poverty, social pressure, circumstance and/or mental illness. Even if we treated prisoners better they're still going back to their old neighborhoods drenched in poverty with little upward social mobility. Couple that with people pretty much refusing to hire ex-cons and gangs, if one has joined one, being quite...persuasive, that even still it won't prevent people from resorting to crime again. 

My point to my response was that it seemed like he was attributing a lot of Norway's social success to how they treat prisoners and I honestly doubt it plays that big of a part. How many people in Norway even make it into prison system in the first place? Like I said, that could 100% be the reason for their success, but there's a lot more differences between Norway and North America than just how we treat our prisoners.


----------



## asher (Apr 30, 2015)

flint757 said:


> Even if we treated prisoners better they're still going back to their old neighborhoods drenched in poverty with little upward social mobility. Couple that with people pretty much refusing to hire ex-cons and gangs, if one has joined one, being quite...persuasive, that even still it won't prevent people from resorting to crime again.



Rehabilitation programs and focus on reducing recidivism can actually make this not the case, which would help a great deal.


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 30, 2015)

Ooops, I think I have my threads all ....ed up 

Sorry.

What I meant to say was rehabilitation is a great idea, saved my life.


----------



## Hollowway (May 1, 2015)

Ah, I think stopping aid is completely on the table. It's a little late now, but countries give each other money always as some part of a deal. I think it would be been pretty normal for the spam or whoever to say that they're dropping aid if they don't return the citizens, if that's what they wanted. Yes, the citizens of the aid-receiving country may get caught in the middle, but someone is always collateral damage in situations like these, and those citizens cannot be held hostage by the government in order to get aid. It's just enabling to use that argument. I'm not condoning it, but I don't see threatening to take away aid as an unfair bargaining maneuver.


----------



## Shewter (May 1, 2015)

estabon37 said:


> It seems the main reason the Indonesian executions are contentious is that the sentences are being carried out against non-Indonesian citizens. The last six months has been a constant barrage of emotional appeals to the Indonesian president and various judges, and those appeals were ignored. That's a sign that emotion wasn't really entering the equation. And these executions were carried out by 12 man firing squads and an unknown number of blanks, so it pretty well fits your criteria in that regard.
> 
> The lack of emotion in this case was probably more of a problem than a benefit. The Brazilian prisoner that faced the firing squad was mentally ill, and apparently didn't realise what was going on until he was standing in front of the guns. While Indonesia certainly isn't the only country to execute people suffering from mental illnesses (or state, if you prefer; I'm not trying to throw guilt by association into the mix), death sentences tend to be applied to murderers, not drugs offenders. The Indonesian judicial and political systems are essentially taking a stance that says "If you break the law, your background, mental state, and rehabilitative prospects don't matter, the sentence will be carried out". In the case of nonviolent offenders, this doesn't make sense, and emotional appeals might have more of a place than in the cases of violent offenders.
> 
> ...



My statement/response was directed toward the person suggesting that our state sanctioned killing should contain revenge, or rather, an eye for an eye punishment. The emotionless duty is reserved for the execution. By all means, have some humanity when sentencing, but if the sentence determined is death, I will not, ever, EVER condone the State torturing or brutalizing even the most dangerous and disgusting human beings that are to be removed from society.

I don't have a whole lot to say about the Indonesia example. On the one hand, I think it's pretty bad policy to execute foreign citizens for non-violent crime. But, on the other hand, drug smuggling is just one piece of a puzzle that breeds violent crime. I don't know though, this is not my fight, and I am not Indonesian nor Australian so I don't really have a dog in that fight.


----------



## fogcutter (May 1, 2015)

I think there is a lot of value to having a public discourse about crime and punishment. It should not go away - it is very important for people with international perspectives to ask critical questions about how and why crimes are punished, it is our responsibility as civilized people to try to make good decisions about this. 

Since moving to Singapore, I have been really shocked about how the locals here feel about crime and punishment. if they imposed the death penalty for jaywalking, I bet it would get good public support. They impose vicious punishments for trivial infractions, and they like it that way. 

Right now theres a little dumbass kid who made a rude YouTube video critical of the former prime minister, he's been locked up ever since; to the delight of the populace. Last month a Canadian tourist opened a (unlocked) door on the subway and went into the conductor's room. Didn't do anything in there, just walked in. He was imprisoned for over a month, I don't know if they let him leave yet. Apparently he sports a "long hair" haircut, which is a massive red flag to the authorities around here, so I don't think the odds are in his favor. 

There's a lot of common sense truth to the "their house, their rules" thing, but it remains important to have these conversations, to be informed and critical. Nothing is going to change here in Singapore, but Indonesia is changing rapidly and there is opportunity to change and adopt more humane guidelines.

EDIT: It sounds like I'm bagging on the local government here pretty bad, which I guess I am, but I forgot to recognize that the bar out here in Southeast Asia for governments in general is extremely low. <cough> Malaysia, <cough>


----------



## Dooky (May 1, 2015)

The really crappy thing about it is that the crimes were committed *10 years ago*. Both men at were aged in the *early twenties* at the time. During their 10 years in prison they completely changed & grew up a lot (and there is a lot of evidence that suggests that they truely did become much better people while in prison). They had grown into two men that had something positive to contribute to society. But Indonesia decided to kill them anyway. Clearly they care more about punishing people than rehabilitating them. Joko is scum, pure and simple.


----------



## justinreagin (Jun 17, 2015)

In cases of career criminals, murder, DNA proven rape, and pedophilia, I am FULLY in support of execution. Not a 30 year stay before hand, but give them the due process, and 2 weeks after the final call and then fry the scumbags.


----------



## max3000 (Jun 18, 2015)

In my opinion, life in solitary confinement is WAY worse than death.

Just think about it, being in a tiny concrete room with basically NOTHING in it, for 23 hours a day, for the rest of your life. It's literally hell.
If I had the choice between spending my next 50-70 years like that I'd just rather they off me.


----------



## michblanch (Jun 18, 2015)

justinreagin said:


> In cases of career criminals, murder, DNA proven rape, and pedophilia, I am FULLY in support of execution. Not a 30 year stay before hand, but give them the due process, and 2 weeks after the final call and then fry the scumbags.




The problem with DNA is that there is collusion between cops, DA's and labs. 
When they all are in agreement that you are going away... Then you are. 

Evidence needs to be handled by a non biased , independent agency.


----------



## asher (Jun 18, 2015)

max3000 said:


> In my opinion, life in solitary confinement is WAY worse than death.
> 
> Just think about it, being in a tiny concrete room with basically NOTHING in it, for 23 hours a day, for the rest of your life. It's literally hell.
> If I had the choice between spending my next 50-70 years like that I'd just rather they off me.



There's a growing set of voices starting to try to classify solitary as psychological torture, as we learn more about its full ramifications on our brains.


----------



## vilk (Jun 18, 2015)

I was pretty certain that solitary confinement is indisputably cruel and unusual punishment and the united states of america is one of the last civilized countries barbaric enough to do it.


----------



## ncfiala (Jun 18, 2015)

I'm against the death penalty in all cases on moral grounds, but even if you don't think it is immoral, I think you should still be against it because mistakes are made all the time. Many death row inmates in the U.S. have been acquitted and released in light of new evidence and forensic techniques.


----------



## vilk (Jun 18, 2015)

^well, in the same vein, since mistakes and whatnot, I would still opt to be wrongfully put to death than wrongfully solitary confinement for life.


----------



## ncfiala (Jun 18, 2015)

vilk said:


> ^well, in the same vein, since mistakes and whatnot, I would still opt to be wrongfully put to death than wrongfully solitary confinement for life.


 
I have no problem with any prisoner choosing to die, even if it wasn't a death penalty offense. I still think suicide is wrong, but I also believe that a person should have the right to do with their own body as they wish. A voluntary death penalty might also help with overcrowding in prisons. That and releasing all the drug offenders. I can't believe this country puts people in prison for using and selling drugs.


----------



## Great Satan (Jun 19, 2015)

Why give the system the legal right to kill someone?
That power can & will be corrupted, to shut people up. To silence dissenters etc.

People who are pro death penalty, its like they've never even heard of corrupt cops or corrupt politicians before.


----------



## asher (Jun 19, 2015)

Great Satan said:


> Why give the system the legal right to kill someone?
> That power can & will be corrupted, to shut people up. To silence dissenters etc.
> 
> People who are pro death penalty, its like they've never even heard of corrupt cops or corrupt politicians before.



To be fair, the death penalty in the US judicial system is a really terrible way to do that. Way too many people and moving parts involved, not to mention you can't do it in every state.

I think it needs to go too, but that's a pretty poor argument against it IMO.


----------



## ElRay (Jun 19, 2015)

To me it's pretty simple. 

If you sentence somebody to prison for life, you can say "Ooopppsss, we made a mistake. You're free. Here's some cash for our error." 

You can't un-execute somebody.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 20, 2015)

ElRay said:


> You can't un-execute somebody.




Not with _that_ attitude!


----------



## Andromalia (Jun 20, 2015)

I'm strongly against it on grounds of logic: if we claim to be better than criminals, killing them with the excuse of legality isn't exactly a stellar way to prove that claim.

Does it cost money to imprison someone ? Yes. Will we do it ? Yes. _Because we're better than them._
Remember that revenge has nothing to do with justice. Killing a criminal doesn't repair anything, but it _does _make you a killer.


----------



## Great Satan (Jun 21, 2015)

asher said:


> , but that's a pretty poor argument against it IMO.



Not to me it ....in aint.

I always find it ironic that the 'pro-life' christians are always the first to be baying for blood in those backwards southern states.

I also see it as inherently cowardly: you want somebody dead but refuse to get your OWN hands dirty, so you leave it to the state and everybody gets to pretend its the moral thing to do just because its technically legal.

State-sponsored murder should never be allowed to happen by its (sane) citizens.


----------



## asher (Jun 21, 2015)

Great Satan said:


> Not to me it ....in aint.
> 
> I always find it ironic that the 'pro-life' christians are always the first to be baying for blood in those backwards southern states.
> 
> ...



... but all those reasons are good and also completely different arguments than "it's too easy for corrupt politicians to manipulate"


----------



## TheFranMan (Jul 1, 2015)

Asher, I assume you're a student at UVA? I went to JMU.

I'm firmly against the death penalty on moral and ethical grounds along with plenty of other reasons. Let's get past the moral and ethical grounds and assume that it checks out morally and ethically. Then you have to question what purpose it serves as a punishment and whether that purpose is just.

Does it deter crime? The statistics show an increase in violent crime in most states that ratified the death penalty after the nationwide moratorium. Also, deterrence assumes that criminals think logically, which is a dubious assumption at best. Lets assume that criminals do think logically though. Deterrence also needs a reasonable expectation that a negative outcome would be realized by the perpetrator, which obviously is not that case. It's been shown pretty conclusively that capital punishment does not satisfy the deterrent effect aspect of just punishment.

I could go through retribution, rehabilitation, economic benefits, and incapacitation (the other typical rationales behind punishment) and explain how they all fall short aside from incapacitation, but I'll spare everyone that discussion unless someone is truly interested.


----------



## asher (Jul 1, 2015)

Former, now working in town


----------

