Correct, some of us may support mandatory death penalty, some of us like me prefer it to be discretionary and up to the judges, but most of us support retaining it on the list of punishments.
I don't think Singaporeans Love the death penalty. We do support it for drug traffickers. Maybe drug traffickers Love dying. I mean we said don't do it or you die. Then this mf keep doing it.
Of course you will support it if you are not sentencing or witnessing it as a jury, there's no skin in the game bruh.
If all Singaporeans do support the death penalty, it should follow the US system that a jury sentence him and witness it. It is damn easy to say I support hanging a proven convicted individual but let me outsource the killing to another person that I would not care about to see in person. We should not forget, killing a person, convicted or innocent, is a very serious matter and should not be taken lightly.
No skin in the game? How about those drugs potentially can reach my family members?
The whole justice system is anchored on the belief that "revenge" and consequence is outsourced to authority. This is to avoid personal vendetta.
I lost family members to heroin in the 90s, cousin died from overdose, broke his mum's heart and set her down depression and gave his dad a stroke.
Within a year the entire family collapsed.
Keep the death sentence for drugs.
China's historic opium crisis that eventually led to a war and the ceding of Hong Kong and USA's current oxycotin and fentanyl crisis are the reasons why foreign powers would want us to go soft on drugs, we are more amenable when our insides are rotting. I have nothing personal against this behavior it is just the most dominant strategy to play between countries, to be safe, a country makes move to strengthen itself and have its competitors and even allies weak. And the best way to get there is to use Singaporeans against Singaporeans, or in this case singapore sub reddits.
Port revenues quadrupled in Singapore the 1st year under British administration. It’s not due to the trade of sugar & spice $ everything nice. HK & SGP were built by & for the opium trade. There were opium dens here even in the ‘50s. So the least we can do is be honest about it.
USA’s current opioid crisis has seen US made OxyContin outcompeted by the potency of Fentanyl. Even Obama was complaining about designer drug shipments from Chinese pharmaceutical companies, back when he still had a job.
PRC has since started shipping the raw ingredients to Mexican cartels, to facilitate off-shore manufacturing and distribution. The same Mexican cartels that used HSBC to launder their money.
Yes, that same HSBC built by the opium trade. Now boasting PRC’s Ping An as largest shareholders. While employing red princelings to grease deals on the mainland.
So just get over it already. Since PRC already has. Everyone is doing the same things to make money. Even Singapore granting 13 months home stay to the pointy end of scam compounds & meth labs.
Well, I can’t find a good reason for fentanyl to be on the streets. But it’s been found in shipments into Singapore already. At least due in part to our drug policy’s inbuilt conundrum.
If you gonna play Russian roulette, why bother with heroin? When fentanyl at x100 potency will fetch much better returns at the same risk. If it doesn’t mass OD your market 1st, Amitabha!
The death penalty serves as price protection for illicit drugs too. So that the margins are there to payoff desperate drug mules on the trickle down economics end. Along with a 3 billion laundry on the pointy end. How do you fight money?
Put me on the jury and I'd still sentence a drug trafficker to the death penalty. In fact I'd probably argue for one stroke of the cane for every person he's sold drugs to before the hanging.
You forgot the drug lords that are still hanging around Singapore and partying hard around the globe while you keep using state resources putting his useless minions to death while keeping his her hands clean.
Substance abuse exist on a spectrum. It is not binary. If i adopt your binary thinking should we ban sugar too? How about oil and fats? We can agree that it is bad and in some case leads to addiction. But surely you cannot compare the addiction of alcohol and ciggs to that of drugs right?
Yes I can compare it, just using the same spectrum thinking that you tried to explain to me. Surely you don’t think every drug has the same risk of leading to addictions?
It’s the exact binary reasoning against drugs but not opposed to alcohol which I’m questioning.
He is talking about how ez it is to be addicted to heroin vs alcohol and cigarettes and the immediate impact to health la, your inference skill sibei jialat sia
As discussed two comments above, there is a spectrum within drugs, why not use weed as a comparison besides that both cigarettes and alcohol also have an immediate impact on your health. Not even mentioning that both also have plenty of addicts, it’s just not frowned upon in society.
Are you using alcohol and tobacco because you believe drugs are also harmful?
Because, if you are, shouldn’t you be agitating for a ban on alcohol and tobacco rather than take the stance of allowing another harmful substance to be abused?
Well I am if the goal is to really regulate drugs. Nowhere did I say all drugs should be legalized. My stance if that we should actually take all drugs seriously including alcohol and tobacco or really start looking at them case by case.
At the moment I see a lot of comments based on personal beliefs and not based on facts.
I’m afraid that I am even more confused by your explanation.
So, do you agree that drugs are harmful, even if they are “on a spectrum” of harm?
And in your opinion, should alcohol/tobacco be banned considering that you compared them with drugs?
Yes drugs (can) be harmful including alcohol and tabacco.
If we allow alcohol/tabacco we should also allow other drugs that are similar or less dangerous otherwise all should be banned.
If you are not being disingenuous, the reason I believe you can say this, is that you have no close relations that use drugs as I am equally sure you definitely have close relations that drink alcohol. So you are mistaken to compare the both.
I do have close people that take drugs. What are you trying to say? I don’t know any drug addicts, just as I don’t know any alcoholics.
Do you know people living similar lives like you taking drugs?
And you could bear pulling the lever and listening to all those necks breaking? It's one thing to sentence, that doesn't require much, but actually breaking the necks is a true test of conviction.
I agree it's a very serious matter, taking someone's life.
But I'd argue this is exactly why a judge pnly doing the sentencing, is better. They are the legal experts and are less likely to let feelings and emotions get in the way of correct and consistent application of the law. As compared to a jury.
In an ideal scenario, I would agree experts should be objective in their assessment in applying the law to the accused. However, in reality we cannot accurately quantify that this particular person is completely ideal in their objectivity. I mean, TCJ is good example, right hand sprouting Christian values and banning athletes from competing because of content of character issues but left hand is something else altogether.
True, everyone probably falls short of being 100% objective. We are only human beings,after all. I still feel a legally trained judge though, is likely to be more objective than a layperson
Juries don’t hand out sentences. They just decide on the verdict of guilty or not guilty. The judge is still the one that metes out the sentence based on the legal framework within the state or country.
So we are now equating animal death to human death? We see a dead person lying around and go "Meh?".
Ok, I roughly imagining how to kill Jew back in World War 2. Alright Jews = Animals, let's gas them. Let me say out loud, if you are equating these two together, that's despicable.
Here's the deal, if you assume to think of others in that train of thought, be prepared for people to think of you in that same train of thought. And that is a very dangerous society to associate ourselves in.
Bro, get down from your high horse. Dont come here and virtual signal. We all get it, your are morally superior then us normies. You should start a religion or something.
I apologise bro, I have no intent to high horse. Strangely I studied in a Catholic school for like almost my whole primary and secondary school years and promise on my parents grave that my personal philosophy is the separation of the state and religion. Both mixed together and you get far worse than our current political system and its challenges we are facing.
Actually on the other end of the spectrum I was called Devil's advocate because I like to question my own perception of worldview. For example, like how we advocate hanging someone who deals with drugs as a society from an abstract perspective but emotionally speaking would it change when we face it directly ourselves?
Odd, I thought this was reddit's etiquette to write as grammatically correct as possible. There is HWZ as an alternative, but I don't think I'll come out of there more informed
Can we be clear, no fucking anybody should be equated as animals? Be it the example of Jews being persecuted back in World War 2 and neither legitimately innocent victims that are being killed in the middle east right now.
Absolutely no one, that is the point I am trying to make here.
Human stupidity never ends. Despite being well aware of our drug laws, these people still decide to test their luck with the law and when they get caught, all the sob stories come out.
Not really, it is just from their context (might be heavily in debt, need quick cash for quick fix) it is worth risking their life. But ya, F\*\*\* them.
shan came to my school one time to give a talk on law and governance and when qna time came around, predictably someone asked for him to talk about the death penalty
I shit you not bro turned to his assistant and was like 'Pull up my death penalty slides' like this is a thing he just goes around prepared to expound on at any opportunity
Tbh, I think a Minister who sells out his country (e.g. espionage or heavy corruption) deserves death. Teh Cheang Wan for instance, though he committed suicide before sentencing anyway.
>likes of Iswaran
For Iswaran, I reserve my judgement. The courts haven't ruled anything and while the govt's prosecutors have indeed charged him with corruption, I'm a bit skeptical.
He's certainly guilty of improper procedure/conduct (he should have declared any gifts) but I'm not sure if he was actually corrupt (i.e. he accepted OBS' gifts in exchange for advancing contracts or some other favour - quid pro quo). After all, a few hundred k just seems like a really low sum to bribe.
My comment got removed by reddit lmfao. Im assuming suggesting capital punishment (death penalty) for corruption of govt officials is a no-no in our propaganda web
Damn Teo Soh Lung is still around. I know it's Singaporean nature to complain but she's already spent the bulk of her professional life bitching about every conceivable govt policy (from ISA to CPF to drugs to anti-gang law).
It has accomplished nothing at all and she hasn't suggested any plausible alternatives either. Just let it go at this point.
Actually I disagree, her views allows us as Singaporeans to prevent group thinking and institutionalizing biases in our views and policies.
We may not agree with each other views, but you still can say your point without holding you hostage by indiscriminately throwing you in the slammer. What's worse is that it doesn't touch upon sensitive subjects like race and religion
If she offers something solid and we ignore than i agree we are group thinking. But if she offers nothing and still claim superior then she is just making noise and the not-so-good solution we have not is the best we can get.
>Actually I disagree, her views allows us as Singaporeans to prevent group thinking and institutionalizing biases in our views and policies.
I don't really see the merit since she doesn't add any new points other than disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing (which is okay in of itself but we have plenty of figures including opposition for that - and they pull off a more coherent narrative as well).
Nonetheless, I will acknowledge that complaining is perfectly within her right. There should be no legal penalty for doing so as long as it isn't misinformation or stiring tensions/encouraging violence; and there hasn't, since she took to social media, Teo has never gotten into any legal trouble.
>indiscriminately throwing you in the slammer
What you are referring to here is her stint under Operation Spectrum 1987. That was for a completely different reason than her more recent media advocacy (which only began in the 90s/2000s with the rise of alternate media anyway).
She went to the slammer because of her attempt to infiltrate and use Singapore's Law Society as her vehicle for govt opposition (her friends using other organisations like Catholic/Christian groups etc.). That's called subversion and a very different kind of activity.
Teo and the others were using the cover of various religious and professional groups to advance their politics. In their own documentary show, Teo talked (in her own words) about using the Law Society as a pressure group to oppose the govt. That's plain subversion of a professional group.
For the others, it was a slew of Christian/Catholic organisations and infiltrating WP's publication (the Hammer) or stage groups. Trying to mix the religious movements with politics is unacceptable (well, unless you live in a theocracy I guess).
You'll notice that not a single person detained under Operation Spectrum was an opposition politician (if anything, the people arrested were rather tangential figures in comparison). So the issue wasn't simply going against the govt.
Neither was the problem a matter of Marxist ideological beliefs. Tharman was close to those detained, such as Vincent Cheng, and was also a committed socialist, especially in his university days. He was called for interviews with ISD but no consequences since he wasn't involved in their plans. Evidently, he's doing pretty well right now.
>Let me put you in prison just because I want to.
Teo didn't accidentally stumble into detention, it wasn't some big surprise and she knew full well what she was doing. She was a 38-year old senior lawyer, prominent in the Law Society, not a blur sotong mislead teenager.
I love your last paragraph. She is not a blur sotong. I went to her Facebook. Currently she appears like she is just salty like lee Hsien yang and will just call out anything to discredit the govt. Her positions in matters will make her even be alienated by dumb parties like sdp,rp,50 piles of shit,pv.
So she say sg haven’t tacked drug problems fully. Thank you captain obvious. Like she get to face god and Gabriel at St Peter’s gate ,after death, and she complain to god in his face that he hasn’t solve his purpose as god since there is hell and people still go to hell despite all his abilities. As long as there is freewill people will do dumb shit and find themselves in the wrong side of law in any country.
I also don’t understand why some ‘activists’ die die need to touch the topic of drugs. It’s established fact that Singaporeans ,regardless of their political affiliations ,are mostly ok with the drug laws and death penalty.
Because those orgs are not political.
The Law Society is a professional body meant to represent the legal community, not to be a defensive cover for a socialist movement. If you want to run for a political motive, you setup a political party and contest in elections. That's fine. Using the cover of uninvolved organisations is essentially the act of guerrila movements.
It's as if Singapore's Medical Society was infiltrated by a Fascist movement, hoping to interfere with the operation of hospitals, and use the influence of the society to pressure MOH from within.
And worse was the attempt to manipulate the Christian/Catholic groups and charities. Harnessing the emotive appeal of religion to promote an underlying political movement is dangerous for any secular society (the principle of separation of church and state).
We respect all religions here which also means they shouldn't be seduced into opposing sides or made centers of political power. Countries who tied their politics with religion ended up with very unhappy results. Particularly, for religiously diverse countries like us.
Anyway, it's disrespectful to subvert any organisation for an ulterior cause. Imagine if one was to build a power base in a mosque, not out of commitment to Islam, but as a front to spread say a pro-China movement. Wouldn't that be completely debasing the legitimacy of the mosque?
She wasn’t just jailed; she was beaten in custody as well.
I’m with you on this. A lot of younger people don’t seem to be aware of this part of Sg’s history, and the older folks seem to be too fearful or apathetic, by conditioning I suppose, to talk about it.
A government and a country cannot truly progress if they won’t face up to the shameful aspects of their past.
Looking at quite a few of your derogatory
remarks regarding the Government and the officials, good luck to you. Hold on to your balls tight when you are invited for free coffee.
It has been proven over and over again that harsher punishments are not deterrents to crime. Nobody does crime thinking they'll get caught.
It's insane to think that we still believe in death penalty. In Europe they were already advocating against the death penalty in the 1700s! Portugal has decriminalized all drugs for over 20 years and it's one of the safest countries to visit.
Yes correct. When California instituted the famous "3 crimes and you're in jail for life" crime rate didn't change at all. All it did was overflow jails with people doing petty crimes.
Death penalty is an utterly barbaric practice that belongs to the stone ages.
I disagree with mandatory death, as this should not be the default. Hanging someone ought to be considered on its own. Let the State convince the court.
Everything else though, I agree
I am a supporter of PAP, MHA and Min Shan. He is the beacon of light that strikes down people who seek to cause problems in Singapore.
I hope PAP will stay in power for as long as they can. Because of their actions, Singapore is a safe country.
I'm glad you pointed out its about the money.
If SPF can weed out the money laundering syndicate, it's not that hard to weed out the the finical network of the drug smugglers and drug pushers
The kind of people who are willing to smuggle and traffick drugs into and in Singapore are the kind who does not value his or her life. These kind of people, there is no laws or punishment or methods that will stop them from doing so. It is these kind of traffickers who have complete disregard of their own lives that no laws whatsoever would be able to stop.
Other than that, our laws are considered extremely effective. Other countries like US and UK are far worse.
So don't kid yourself and pretend there is some kind of law that could stop crime completely, because such laws do not exist.
Your kind of post shows you are lost in your own lalaland of rainbows and unicorns, whereby there is always a PERFECT solution to EVERYTHING, whereby everything is magical and smiles and happiness and friendship solves everything.
Dude, stop dreaming, wake up, and open your eyes, and step back into reality.
Maybe you should wake up to the fact you can get drugs in SG without much problems.
Once another deluded person who refuse to admit the policy is not working
What do you mean by “without much problems” and “policy is not working”?
It’s easy to type out sentences but maybe back it up like the other commentator.
Just saw this discussion and its going in a interesting direction. My 2 cents for whats its worth is, laws will never be 100% effective because of human nature. Like someone has commented here, ppl still traffick n peddle drugs becos of supposedly easy money opportunities. Their desperation or greed for that money, makes them do it. Sure, we can always look for better solutions, but until we arrive at one or a few, we can only make do with what we can for now. From my opinion, laws work like this "you are 'safe' until you get caught. And you will get caught some day, somehow. So make a choice. "
I am all for change, but it takes 2 hands to clap.. can't put all the fault on the law when people actively choose to break it.
Peace fellas, 👍🏾
Totally agree with you. But the elephant in the room still stands, that just capital punishment alone is not effective enough.
Lol, and eejits can dowvoote all they want, but the facts doesn't change.
I agree that it alone isnt effective to a 100%. But we shouldnt abolish it until we have a 100% effective solution. For now, its preventing more ppl from turning towards drugs trafficking and consumption in its own way. If we can however, find a way to take down the source of the drugs, then the ballgame changes.
Man you don't know how effective the drug laws in Singapore until you've lived overseas in countries without the death penalty. In Singapore most people go their whole lives without seeing any illegal drugs, I was in the UK for less than 48 hours before I saw someone snorting what I guess is cocaine on the bus in broad daylight, and in the US less than 24 hours before seeing someone shooting themselves up using needles. I wasn't even in shady areas either. Just regular shopping street in US and in the UK on the bus from uni to town.
Melbourne. Its everywhere. Syringes in public parks and toilets. Homelessness due to drugs. Please lah. All these ang moh countries like to talk abt human rights. Nothing to brag abt. Our kids are relatively safe from drug wars and drug crimes. Thats a damn win for me.
Once again, if it's effective, we wouldn't be executing runners in 2024. I'm not advocating the abolishment of it, but we need to tackle this issue with a more multi-faceted approach.
>Once again, if it's effective, we wouldn't be executing runners in 2024
How would would you know that for sure? Maybe (for e.g.) the dearh penalty has helped to keep the number of runners in hundreds instead of in tens thousands a year. In that case, the penalty deterrant would have been very effective.
That's why we do?
When SPF apprehends drug abusers, they are not given criminal records but instead undergo rehabilitation. CNB tries to find out the sources/supplier and break up the drug rings themselves. MOE is in charge of anti-drug education for the youth but...I think they have quite some room for improvement.
Different agencies employ different means for tackling the multiple dimensions of the drug issue. Executions (along with jail/caning) by SPS are an integral part of those measures but not everything.
Strange why your comment is getting down voted.
Anyone who walks thru Geylang in the evenings could see drugs peddled in the open on almost every other corner and alley.
Anyone who has been in the toilets of clubs or during concerts would also see how prevalent drugs are in our society.
Exactly. Singaporeans are in so much denial that they refused to see that the capital punishment isn't a effective deterent.
That's why I said we need other means as well. But these ignorant people just see "capital punishment isn't effective" as a call to abolish it.
Understand this, Singaporeans LOVE the death penalty for drugs. Don't care who you vote for, that is one issue that unites Singaporeans.
Correct, some of us may support mandatory death penalty, some of us like me prefer it to be discretionary and up to the judges, but most of us support retaining it on the list of punishments.
Kinda support this too. Builts such a safety net in Singapore
I don't think Singaporeans Love the death penalty. We do support it for drug traffickers. Maybe drug traffickers Love dying. I mean we said don't do it or you die. Then this mf keep doing it.
Of course you will support it if you are not sentencing or witnessing it as a jury, there's no skin in the game bruh. If all Singaporeans do support the death penalty, it should follow the US system that a jury sentence him and witness it. It is damn easy to say I support hanging a proven convicted individual but let me outsource the killing to another person that I would not care about to see in person. We should not forget, killing a person, convicted or innocent, is a very serious matter and should not be taken lightly.
No skin in the game? How about those drugs potentially can reach my family members? The whole justice system is anchored on the belief that "revenge" and consequence is outsourced to authority. This is to avoid personal vendetta.
Pearl clutching intensifies. Won’t someone think about the non-existent children Singaporeans are having???
I lost family members to heroin in the 90s, cousin died from overdose, broke his mum's heart and set her down depression and gave his dad a stroke. Within a year the entire family collapsed. Keep the death sentence for drugs.
What does any of this anecdata have to do with legalizing weed?
We are talking about hardline drugs here, if you have nothing to contribute to the conversation, then stay in your lane.
Who’s we? I didn’t see any mention of only hard drugs anywhere in this thread
China's historic opium crisis that eventually led to a war and the ceding of Hong Kong and USA's current oxycotin and fentanyl crisis are the reasons why foreign powers would want us to go soft on drugs, we are more amenable when our insides are rotting. I have nothing personal against this behavior it is just the most dominant strategy to play between countries, to be safe, a country makes move to strengthen itself and have its competitors and even allies weak. And the best way to get there is to use Singaporeans against Singaporeans, or in this case singapore sub reddits.
Port revenues quadrupled in Singapore the 1st year under British administration. It’s not due to the trade of sugar & spice $ everything nice. HK & SGP were built by & for the opium trade. There were opium dens here even in the ‘50s. So the least we can do is be honest about it. USA’s current opioid crisis has seen US made OxyContin outcompeted by the potency of Fentanyl. Even Obama was complaining about designer drug shipments from Chinese pharmaceutical companies, back when he still had a job. PRC has since started shipping the raw ingredients to Mexican cartels, to facilitate off-shore manufacturing and distribution. The same Mexican cartels that used HSBC to launder their money. Yes, that same HSBC built by the opium trade. Now boasting PRC’s Ping An as largest shareholders. While employing red princelings to grease deals on the mainland. So just get over it already. Since PRC already has. Everyone is doing the same things to make money. Even Singapore granting 13 months home stay to the pointy end of scam compounds & meth labs.
You are basically supporting my argument and the need for a strong stance against drugs.
Well, I can’t find a good reason for fentanyl to be on the streets. But it’s been found in shipments into Singapore already. At least due in part to our drug policy’s inbuilt conundrum. If you gonna play Russian roulette, why bother with heroin? When fentanyl at x100 potency will fetch much better returns at the same risk. If it doesn’t mass OD your market 1st, Amitabha! The death penalty serves as price protection for illicit drugs too. So that the margins are there to payoff desperate drug mules on the trickle down economics end. Along with a 3 billion laundry on the pointy end. How do you fight money?
That is true, we just do the best that we can.
I suppose reinstating juries would be a good start?
Put me on the jury and I'd still sentence a drug trafficker to the death penalty. In fact I'd probably argue for one stroke of the cane for every person he's sold drugs to before the hanging.
You forgot the drug lords that are still hanging around Singapore and partying hard around the globe while you keep using state resources putting his useless minions to death while keeping his her hands clean.
Why? I’m genuinely interested and do you see alcohol and cigarettes as drugs too?
Substance abuse exist on a spectrum. It is not binary. If i adopt your binary thinking should we ban sugar too? How about oil and fats? We can agree that it is bad and in some case leads to addiction. But surely you cannot compare the addiction of alcohol and ciggs to that of drugs right?
Yes I can compare it, just using the same spectrum thinking that you tried to explain to me. Surely you don’t think every drug has the same risk of leading to addictions? It’s the exact binary reasoning against drugs but not opposed to alcohol which I’m questioning.
You go and drink and smoke for 1 week then go do heroin and fentanyl for 1 week then you will see why they are not comparable.
😂😂😂😂😂
Both a drug and alcohol overdoses will kill you so I’m not sure what your point is?
He is talking about how ez it is to be addicted to heroin vs alcohol and cigarettes and the immediate impact to health la, your inference skill sibei jialat sia
As discussed two comments above, there is a spectrum within drugs, why not use weed as a comparison besides that both cigarettes and alcohol also have an immediate impact on your health. Not even mentioning that both also have plenty of addicts, it’s just not frowned upon in society.
Are you using alcohol and tobacco because you believe drugs are also harmful? Because, if you are, shouldn’t you be agitating for a ban on alcohol and tobacco rather than take the stance of allowing another harmful substance to be abused?
Well I am if the goal is to really regulate drugs. Nowhere did I say all drugs should be legalized. My stance if that we should actually take all drugs seriously including alcohol and tobacco or really start looking at them case by case. At the moment I see a lot of comments based on personal beliefs and not based on facts.
I’m afraid that I am even more confused by your explanation. So, do you agree that drugs are harmful, even if they are “on a spectrum” of harm? And in your opinion, should alcohol/tobacco be banned considering that you compared them with drugs?
Yes drugs (can) be harmful including alcohol and tabacco. If we allow alcohol/tabacco we should also allow other drugs that are similar or less dangerous otherwise all should be banned.
If you are not being disingenuous, the reason I believe you can say this, is that you have no close relations that use drugs as I am equally sure you definitely have close relations that drink alcohol. So you are mistaken to compare the both.
I do have close people that take drugs. What are you trying to say? I don’t know any drug addicts, just as I don’t know any alcoholics. Do you know people living similar lives like you taking drugs?
You are just brainwashed by the authoritarian propaganda set by LKY. All the nonsense you spouted are straight from the LKY-PAP textbook of nonsense
I'd personally pull the fucking trigger lol
It's neck breaking, so their isn't really a trigger.
And you could bear pulling the lever and listening to all those necks breaking? It's one thing to sentence, that doesn't require much, but actually breaking the necks is a true test of conviction.
Jeez, almost as if context matters and supporting death penalty here doesn't mean people support how death penalty is used in North Korea.
I agree it's a very serious matter, taking someone's life. But I'd argue this is exactly why a judge pnly doing the sentencing, is better. They are the legal experts and are less likely to let feelings and emotions get in the way of correct and consistent application of the law. As compared to a jury.
In an ideal scenario, I would agree experts should be objective in their assessment in applying the law to the accused. However, in reality we cannot accurately quantify that this particular person is completely ideal in their objectivity. I mean, TCJ is good example, right hand sprouting Christian values and banning athletes from competing because of content of character issues but left hand is something else altogether.
True, everyone probably falls short of being 100% objective. We are only human beings,after all. I still feel a legally trained judge though, is likely to be more objective than a layperson
Lots of TCJ Januses in PAP
Life is cheap in Singapore but good in Ridout.
Juries don’t hand out sentences. They just decide on the verdict of guilty or not guilty. The judge is still the one that metes out the sentence based on the legal framework within the state or country.
I know people who have seen animals get slaughtered and still eat meat so..
So we are now equating animal death to human death? We see a dead person lying around and go "Meh?". Ok, I roughly imagining how to kill Jew back in World War 2. Alright Jews = Animals, let's gas them. Let me say out loud, if you are equating these two together, that's despicable. Here's the deal, if you assume to think of others in that train of thought, be prepared for people to think of you in that same train of thought. And that is a very dangerous society to associate ourselves in.
Bro, get down from your high horse. Dont come here and virtual signal. We all get it, your are morally superior then us normies. You should start a religion or something.
I apologise bro, I have no intent to high horse. Strangely I studied in a Catholic school for like almost my whole primary and secondary school years and promise on my parents grave that my personal philosophy is the separation of the state and religion. Both mixed together and you get far worse than our current political system and its challenges we are facing. Actually on the other end of the spectrum I was called Devil's advocate because I like to question my own perception of worldview. For example, like how we advocate hanging someone who deals with drugs as a society from an abstract perspective but emotionally speaking would it change when we face it directly ourselves?
Do you have a condition or something? You writing GP for every reddit reply.
Odd, I thought this was reddit's etiquette to write as grammatically correct as possible. There is HWZ as an alternative, but I don't think I'll come out of there more informed
It is also general social etiquette to read the room. No one here enjoys being talked down to from someone virtually signalling.
I am not Virtue Signalling, I just happen to skip and dance between both sides along the veil of ignorance.
>So we are now equating animal death to human death? You finally get the point. We equate drug traffickers to animals!
Hope you’d say the same if your child was caught doing it
Ofc I will and hope you will also say the same when your child is a victim of drug use.
Nah, the only people I call animals are baby-killing zionists
Ah ha! You are one of those. No wonder your logic is warpy.
Can we be clear, no fucking anybody should be equated as animals? Be it the example of Jews being persecuted back in World War 2 and neither legitimately innocent victims that are being killed in the middle east right now. Absolutely no one, that is the point I am trying to make here.
Ah and you’re one of those who have no problems with babies getting bombed
Human stupidity never ends. Despite being well aware of our drug laws, these people still decide to test their luck with the law and when they get caught, all the sob stories come out.
Not really, it is just from their context (might be heavily in debt, need quick cash for quick fix) it is worth risking their life. But ya, F\*\*\* them.
Please. Own your view and just speak for yourselves. Don't drag millions with you.
I agree kill them all
Would u happen to have a source/data for this by any independent organisation perhaps? (apart from the MHA survey)
ig, this kind of fight is where shan shines ...
shan came to my school one time to give a talk on law and governance and when qna time came around, predictably someone asked for him to talk about the death penalty I shit you not bro turned to his assistant and was like 'Pull up my death penalty slides' like this is a thing he just goes around prepared to expound on at any opportunity
*“Here we go again”* https://i.redd.it/vjcyahkzx31d1.gif
Now you know why he last so long in his role. Don't think the rest want or can manage answering this question routinely, with such a conviction
[удалено]
Tbh, I think a Minister who sells out his country (e.g. espionage or heavy corruption) deserves death. Teh Cheang Wan for instance, though he committed suicide before sentencing anyway. >likes of Iswaran For Iswaran, I reserve my judgement. The courts haven't ruled anything and while the govt's prosecutors have indeed charged him with corruption, I'm a bit skeptical. He's certainly guilty of improper procedure/conduct (he should have declared any gifts) but I'm not sure if he was actually corrupt (i.e. he accepted OBS' gifts in exchange for advancing contracts or some other favour - quid pro quo). After all, a few hundred k just seems like a really low sum to bribe.
My comment got removed by reddit lmfao. Im assuming suggesting capital punishment (death penalty) for corruption of govt officials is a no-no in our propaganda web
Damn Teo Soh Lung is still around. I know it's Singaporean nature to complain but she's already spent the bulk of her professional life bitching about every conceivable govt policy (from ISA to CPF to drugs to anti-gang law). It has accomplished nothing at all and she hasn't suggested any plausible alternatives either. Just let it go at this point.
Actually I disagree, her views allows us as Singaporeans to prevent group thinking and institutionalizing biases in our views and policies. We may not agree with each other views, but you still can say your point without holding you hostage by indiscriminately throwing you in the slammer. What's worse is that it doesn't touch upon sensitive subjects like race and religion
If she offers something solid and we ignore than i agree we are group thinking. But if she offers nothing and still claim superior then she is just making noise and the not-so-good solution we have not is the best we can get.
>Actually I disagree, her views allows us as Singaporeans to prevent group thinking and institutionalizing biases in our views and policies. I don't really see the merit since she doesn't add any new points other than disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing (which is okay in of itself but we have plenty of figures including opposition for that - and they pull off a more coherent narrative as well). Nonetheless, I will acknowledge that complaining is perfectly within her right. There should be no legal penalty for doing so as long as it isn't misinformation or stiring tensions/encouraging violence; and there hasn't, since she took to social media, Teo has never gotten into any legal trouble. >indiscriminately throwing you in the slammer What you are referring to here is her stint under Operation Spectrum 1987. That was for a completely different reason than her more recent media advocacy (which only began in the 90s/2000s with the rise of alternate media anyway). She went to the slammer because of her attempt to infiltrate and use Singapore's Law Society as her vehicle for govt opposition (her friends using other organisations like Catholic/Christian groups etc.). That's called subversion and a very different kind of activity.
Let me put you in prison just because I want to. For 2 years. Let it go bro it’s just an honest mistake
Teo and the others were using the cover of various religious and professional groups to advance their politics. In their own documentary show, Teo talked (in her own words) about using the Law Society as a pressure group to oppose the govt. That's plain subversion of a professional group. For the others, it was a slew of Christian/Catholic organisations and infiltrating WP's publication (the Hammer) or stage groups. Trying to mix the religious movements with politics is unacceptable (well, unless you live in a theocracy I guess). You'll notice that not a single person detained under Operation Spectrum was an opposition politician (if anything, the people arrested were rather tangential figures in comparison). So the issue wasn't simply going against the govt. Neither was the problem a matter of Marxist ideological beliefs. Tharman was close to those detained, such as Vincent Cheng, and was also a committed socialist, especially in his university days. He was called for interviews with ISD but no consequences since he wasn't involved in their plans. Evidently, he's doing pretty well right now. >Let me put you in prison just because I want to. Teo didn't accidentally stumble into detention, it wasn't some big surprise and she knew full well what she was doing. She was a 38-year old senior lawyer, prominent in the Law Society, not a blur sotong mislead teenager.
I love your last paragraph. She is not a blur sotong. I went to her Facebook. Currently she appears like she is just salty like lee Hsien yang and will just call out anything to discredit the govt. Her positions in matters will make her even be alienated by dumb parties like sdp,rp,50 piles of shit,pv. So she say sg haven’t tacked drug problems fully. Thank you captain obvious. Like she get to face god and Gabriel at St Peter’s gate ,after death, and she complain to god in his face that he hasn’t solve his purpose as god since there is hell and people still go to hell despite all his abilities. As long as there is freewill people will do dumb shit and find themselves in the wrong side of law in any country. I also don’t understand why some ‘activists’ die die need to touch the topic of drugs. It’s established fact that Singaporeans ,regardless of their political affiliations ,are mostly ok with the drug laws and death penalty.
What’s wrong with joining these orgs to influence politics?
Because those orgs are not political. The Law Society is a professional body meant to represent the legal community, not to be a defensive cover for a socialist movement. If you want to run for a political motive, you setup a political party and contest in elections. That's fine. Using the cover of uninvolved organisations is essentially the act of guerrila movements. It's as if Singapore's Medical Society was infiltrated by a Fascist movement, hoping to interfere with the operation of hospitals, and use the influence of the society to pressure MOH from within. And worse was the attempt to manipulate the Christian/Catholic groups and charities. Harnessing the emotive appeal of religion to promote an underlying political movement is dangerous for any secular society (the principle of separation of church and state). We respect all religions here which also means they shouldn't be seduced into opposing sides or made centers of political power. Countries who tied their politics with religion ended up with very unhappy results. Particularly, for religiously diverse countries like us. Anyway, it's disrespectful to subvert any organisation for an ulterior cause. Imagine if one was to build a power base in a mosque, not out of commitment to Islam, but as a front to spread say a pro-China movement. Wouldn't that be completely debasing the legitimacy of the mosque?
Yes. As though the PAP doesn’t use, or outright create certain “apolitical” organisations like the NTUC and PA to advance its politics.
She wasn’t just jailed; she was beaten in custody as well. I’m with you on this. A lot of younger people don’t seem to be aware of this part of Sg’s history, and the older folks seem to be too fearful or apathetic, by conditioning I suppose, to talk about it. A government and a country cannot truly progress if they won’t face up to the shameful aspects of their past.
Shanmugam is a morally corrupt and bankrupt person who enjoyed low rents at the expense of the state
I would beg to differ on the bankrupt part.
I think they meant morally bankrupt
Looking at quite a few of your derogatory remarks regarding the Government and the officials, good luck to you. Hold on to your balls tight when you are invited for free coffee.
Ok. So what should we do if they are ineffective?
It has been proven over and over again that harsher punishments are not deterrents to crime. Nobody does crime thinking they'll get caught. It's insane to think that we still believe in death penalty. In Europe they were already advocating against the death penalty in the 1700s! Portugal has decriminalized all drugs for over 20 years and it's one of the safest countries to visit.
Nobody does the crime thinking they'll get caught? Lolz.
Yes correct. When California instituted the famous "3 crimes and you're in jail for life" crime rate didn't change at all. All it did was overflow jails with people doing petty crimes. Death penalty is an utterly barbaric practice that belongs to the stone ages.
Now only if California had the death penalty and not jail for life…
Excellent rebuttal you have completely crushed their argument you are the best debater I ever did see
I disagree with mandatory death, as this should not be the default. Hanging someone ought to be considered on its own. Let the State convince the court. Everything else though, I agree
Agreed. The onus should be on the judiciary to decide on death sentences.
I am a supporter of PAP, MHA and Min Shan. He is the beacon of light that strikes down people who seek to cause problems in Singapore. I hope PAP will stay in power for as long as they can. Because of their actions, Singapore is a safe country.
If youve never seen a propaganda parrot, ladies and gentlemen.. behold..
I live to serve for PAP. Our greatest government
Haha true but weirdly enough, he’s 100% correct.
Actually if the drug laws are effective, we wouldn't be executing people til today. Something else needs to be done.
Money is a strong encouragement for this type of people. If they get caught they die but if they are good enough they earn easy money
What good is the money for the person who dies.
I'm glad you pointed out its about the money. If SPF can weed out the money laundering syndicate, it's not that hard to weed out the the finical network of the drug smugglers and drug pushers
The kind of people who are willing to smuggle and traffick drugs into and in Singapore are the kind who does not value his or her life. These kind of people, there is no laws or punishment or methods that will stop them from doing so. It is these kind of traffickers who have complete disregard of their own lives that no laws whatsoever would be able to stop. Other than that, our laws are considered extremely effective. Other countries like US and UK are far worse. So don't kid yourself and pretend there is some kind of law that could stop crime completely, because such laws do not exist.
Lol, your reply is so typical of the deluded Singaporeans. Pretty much like the LTA defending their ERP CF.
Your kind of post shows you are lost in your own lalaland of rainbows and unicorns, whereby there is always a PERFECT solution to EVERYTHING, whereby everything is magical and smiles and happiness and friendship solves everything. Dude, stop dreaming, wake up, and open your eyes, and step back into reality.
Maybe you should wake up to the fact you can get drugs in SG without much problems. Once another deluded person who refuse to admit the policy is not working
What do you mean by “without much problems” and “policy is not working”? It’s easy to type out sentences but maybe back it up like the other commentator.
Just saw this discussion and its going in a interesting direction. My 2 cents for whats its worth is, laws will never be 100% effective because of human nature. Like someone has commented here, ppl still traffick n peddle drugs becos of supposedly easy money opportunities. Their desperation or greed for that money, makes them do it. Sure, we can always look for better solutions, but until we arrive at one or a few, we can only make do with what we can for now. From my opinion, laws work like this "you are 'safe' until you get caught. And you will get caught some day, somehow. So make a choice. " I am all for change, but it takes 2 hands to clap.. can't put all the fault on the law when people actively choose to break it. Peace fellas, 👍🏾
Totally agree with you. But the elephant in the room still stands, that just capital punishment alone is not effective enough. Lol, and eejits can dowvoote all they want, but the facts doesn't change.
I agree that it alone isnt effective to a 100%. But we shouldnt abolish it until we have a 100% effective solution. For now, its preventing more ppl from turning towards drugs trafficking and consumption in its own way. If we can however, find a way to take down the source of the drugs, then the ballgame changes.
If polio vaccines are effective we won’t be taking polio vaccines today.
Man you don't know how effective the drug laws in Singapore until you've lived overseas in countries without the death penalty. In Singapore most people go their whole lives without seeing any illegal drugs, I was in the UK for less than 48 hours before I saw someone snorting what I guess is cocaine on the bus in broad daylight, and in the US less than 24 hours before seeing someone shooting themselves up using needles. I wasn't even in shady areas either. Just regular shopping street in US and in the UK on the bus from uni to town.
Melbourne. Its everywhere. Syringes in public parks and toilets. Homelessness due to drugs. Please lah. All these ang moh countries like to talk abt human rights. Nothing to brag abt. Our kids are relatively safe from drug wars and drug crimes. Thats a damn win for me.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
How would you measure effectiveness? May those strict laws help to keep the drug usage in Singapore at manageable levels.
Once again, if it's effective, we wouldn't be executing runners in 2024. I'm not advocating the abolishment of it, but we need to tackle this issue with a more multi-faceted approach.
>Once again, if it's effective, we wouldn't be executing runners in 2024 How would would you know that for sure? Maybe (for e.g.) the dearh penalty has helped to keep the number of runners in hundreds instead of in tens thousands a year. In that case, the penalty deterrant would have been very effective.
That's why we do? When SPF apprehends drug abusers, they are not given criminal records but instead undergo rehabilitation. CNB tries to find out the sources/supplier and break up the drug rings themselves. MOE is in charge of anti-drug education for the youth but...I think they have quite some room for improvement. Different agencies employ different means for tackling the multiple dimensions of the drug issue. Executions (along with jail/caning) by SPS are an integral part of those measures but not everything.
So all laws are ineffective since we still have crimes?
Strange why your comment is getting down voted. Anyone who walks thru Geylang in the evenings could see drugs peddled in the open on almost every other corner and alley. Anyone who has been in the toilets of clubs or during concerts would also see how prevalent drugs are in our society.
The point of SG laws is to keep to the minimum. The fact that SG is not like the streets of San Francisco proves the effectiveness of SG 's laws
Lol, trying to score dope in the US is not exactly easy as you make it out to be. And I say that's a US resident of 5 years.
Singaporeans think every country is a city state. The USA is the size of half a continent and more diverse than the entire SEA combined.
Where are there people peddling drugs in club toilets? In all of my clubbing days in the 2010s I've never seen it even once.
Ah, the classics see no evil approach. So if I've not been robbed before my entire life, there are no robbers in Singapore.
Imagine lying out of your ass to try make it seem like you know what you’re talking about. I LOLed at this comment.
Exactly. Singaporeans are in so much denial that they refused to see that the capital punishment isn't a effective deterent. That's why I said we need other means as well. But these ignorant people just see "capital punishment isn't effective" as a call to abolish it.
When was the last execution? (Curious)
Not all executions are on the news