US to carry out 1,000th execution

The US is about to carry out the 1,000th execution since capital punishment was reintroduced in 1976.

Kenneth Boyd, a convicted killer, will be put to death by lethal injection in North Carolina for the murder of his estranged wife and her father in 1988.

He will be given three drugs – one to put him to sleep, another to paralyse him, and a third to stop his heart.

Boyd, 57, has said the death penalty is “nothing but revenge”. Relatives of his victims say he deserves to die.

Any hope of a reprieve ended when the Supreme Court rejected Boyd’s final appeal and the North Carolina Governor, Mike Easley, said he could find “no compelling reason to grant clemency”.

US is one of the few countries that still supports capital punishment in the ‘Western’ world.

UK still has some laws for capital punishment, but only for very few charges, I think maybe on one, which is planning to or attempting to overthrow the monarchy.

Quite a few countries in Asia are of course famous for capital punishment when involved in drugs cases.

Like Singapore, which will be hanging an Australian today I believe, for carrying 400 grams of Heroin through their country.

Australian anger over Singapore hanging

Time is running out for 25-year-old Australian drug trafficker Nguyen Tuong Van, who is due to be executed at Singapore’s Changi prison on Friday.

So what do you think of the death penalty?

Is it a form of revenge?

Or is the ultimate punishment?

Does one human have the right to take away another humans life, because he thinks you did something wrong?

I don’t think people deserve to die for trafficing drugs.

Is there anything people deserve to die for?

I think like having your balls cut off and spending the rest of your life in solitary confinment is a thousand times worse than getting exectuted.

Texas is clearly the harshest when it comes to the Death Penalty.

US Executions since 1976 Texas – 355
Virginia – 94
Oklahoma – 79
Missouri – 66
Florida – 60
Georgia – 39
North Carolina – 38
South Carolina, Alabama – 34 each
Louisiana, Arkansas – 27 each
Arizona – 22

Comments

comments

Subscribe

You can subscribe via e-mail to get my posts in your Inbox, or stalk me on numerous other platforms.

Follow my Dayre!


79 Responses to US to carry out 1,000th execution

  1. spiller December 2, 2005 at 3:01 am #

    Drug trafficing, no. But murder, yes.

    “UK still has some laws for capital punishment, but only for very few charges, I think maybe on one, which is planning to or attempting to overthrow the monarchy.”

    So why is Camilia still able to walk around then?

  2. aw December 2, 2005 at 3:05 am #

    Ahahahahaha! Good one, mate!

    Nothing against Camilla, but that was a funny poke, if there ever was one

  3. aw December 2, 2005 at 3:08 am #

    As a Buddhist, I don’t agree with capital punishment.

    But the overriding fact is, everyone must know the risks of carrying drugs is death, in Singapore AND Malaysia.

    What about the 400gm of heroin? How many gang members died, how many families are destroyed because of those 400 grams, enough for 26,000 doses as reported?

    Like ST said, a lifetime of suffering is worse than death – then perhaps, the trafficker got off easier than the thousands of people’s lives that he would have worsened if that heroin shipment went through.

  4. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 3:32 am #

    She gives good blowjobs or something I guess?

  5. Dr B. December 2, 2005 at 5:30 am #

    *just surfed by*

    Death penalty – against for all cases.

    Usually, the penalty for successfully carrying out a crime is more harsh than attempting to carry out a crime…say murder vs attempted murder…shouldn’t attempting to traffic be less of crime than trafficing (on a less than compassionate note…ppl can always choose not to take the drugs…choose life….etc).

    Mandatory death penalty is even scarier. Paeophiles can argue mitigating circumstances in Singapore…

    The finality of the death penalty removes all possibility of redemption. There is no chance to right-a-wrong. No option for a change-of-heart…

    Just think it’s a better idea not to be killing each other.
    I am yet to hear an argument FOR the death penalty that doesn’t use revenge or convience as the main crutch. Laziness should not be the reason for any law….

    In the end I am just a bleeding heart lefty who can stomach the idea of sanctioned killing for whatever reason…peace & love etc…

  6. Tom December 2, 2005 at 5:44 am #

    No more death penalty over here in the UK mate. Back in 97 when Blair first came in, as part of further measures to integrate into the European legal system we repealed the laws that made treason and blue murder a capital offence, so you could bump off the queen or pass state secrets to our sworn enemies and all you’d get in return for your troubles is regular buggery by Fat Joe in Cell block C.

  7. Dr B. December 2, 2005 at 7:26 am #

    “…can stomach…”

    I really meant “..can’t stomach…” honest

  8. Lainie December 2, 2005 at 7:42 am #

    well, if they’re still executing then it can’t be a very effective deterrent, can it?

    I think most people are very disconnected from death and don’t feel it’ll happen to them. And then there are those who either “don’t fear death” or put up the bravado anyway.

    I think a whole lifetime of imprisonment, boredom and being someone’s unwilling butt bitch could sound way scarier to some of these men than death would.

  9. KY December 2, 2005 at 7:58 am #

    they’ll just hire female drug traffickers and murderers if cutting balls is the standard punishment.

  10. jon December 2, 2005 at 8:29 am #

    isn’t taking a life playing god in a way?

  11. Alice December 2, 2005 at 10:14 am #

    Since our society is governed by law, everyone should abide law. Otherwise, why we need law in the first place? Everyone should be well-awared of the death sentence here when trafficking drug in Singapore and Malaysia. This is one way to protect our country from being “flooded” by drugs.
    If you are not trafficking drug, then you will not be sentenced death right? Are we going to switch back to a society without law? A human should have no “right” to sentence or penalize another person according to human right. So should we just close all the prisons?

  12. Andrew Lim December 2, 2005 at 11:05 am #

    The Deceased: Van Tuong Nguyen
    Cause of Death: Suicide

    Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time, folks.

  13. Dr B. December 2, 2005 at 11:26 am #

    I think question here is – is the law right?

    Apartheid was the law in South Africa…it was wrong. The White Australia Policy was law in Australia…it was wrong

    We, as a society, are meant to grow, improve, move forward…

    Basically, trafficing in drugs can still be illegal…but maybe a different punishment might suffice…

  14. Pussy December 2, 2005 at 12:44 pm #

    Bloody back water SE Asian townships executing Aussies (even naturalised ones) for packing some narcotics? Well I guess the poor lad can at least say he never knew the existence of living in an undemocratic oppressive regime, such as was that put an end to his life. Singapore is a fucking joke, let’s make no bones about it, it’s the ultimate shallow state, consume consume consume, yet it offers nothing of value or culture to the rest of the world except to provide an example on how to control and subject its citizens to an authoritarian rule based on principles which it flouts indiscriminately to suit its whims. Lee Kwan Fuck You.

  15. Andrew Lim December 2, 2005 at 3:27 pm #

    Sounds like sombody’s pride needs soothing. =)

  16. Andrew Lim December 2, 2005 at 4:21 pm #

    that comment is amazingly insensitive.

    and my name actually is Andrew Lim.

    gosh, you’re like a disgrace to the name

  17. Andrew Lim December 2, 2005 at 4:45 pm #

    Insensitive, I may have been, but you have to admit that Nguyen was playing the drug trafficker’s form of Russian Roulette. =)

    >> gosh, you’re like a disgrace to the name

    Like a disgrace? As opposed to an actual disgrace like you? πŸ˜‰

  18. metallo December 2, 2005 at 5:15 pm #

    mixed feelings here.

    the guy’s young, and surely, surely there was room for repentance and a change. he should be punished nonetheless for committing the crime, as he should have known the consequences… but probably not in death..

    on a side note, regarding the issue of Australia’s clemency appeals, here’s a short exerpt from abc.net.au:

    Death penalty

    Human rights organisation Amnesty International says the campaign against the death penalty must be supported by stronger government policy.

    Amnesty spokesman Tim Goodwin says the Government’s support for some executions of non-Australians contradicts calls for clemency for Australian citizens facing the death sentence.

    Mr Goodwin has told the ABC’s Lateline he is overwhelmed by the support expressed by Australians who took part in candlelight vigils protesting the execution of Van Nguyen.

    But he says the Government must be consistent in opposing the death penalty if it wants neighbouring Asian countries to change.

    “This message has not been lost on the region that the Australian Government has signalled its approval for particular executions, while seeming to pull out all stops to defend an Australian citizen,” he said.

    “It’s a double standard and fatally undermines Australia’s credibility.”

  19. Kyle December 2, 2005 at 6:59 pm #

    I am an opponent of capitol punishment… no human should kill another simple as that. I live in Texas, which pretty much puts capitol in the express lane. There are hundreds of people on Death Row. It’s very sad.

    p.s. I linked to you in my blog. Your blog is pretty awsome.

  20. mahagurusia December 2, 2005 at 7:47 pm #

    I cannot see capital punishment as a form of revenge but rather a form of deterance. Drugs kill thousands and its illegal in some countries. Knowing the fact, why risk it? 1 criminal life to save thousands….

  21. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 8:38 pm #

    Ah yeah, well there you go, shows how much attention I paid to Mr Blair πŸ˜‰

    Bring back Maggie!

    But yeah, I think to most people, being bubba’s bitch for 20 years would be a better deterrent than death, as Lainie says, most people are too detached from death for it to be an effective detterent.

  22. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 8:40 pm #

    They already do, chicks have an extra orifice for storage that us guys don’t πŸ˜‰

  23. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 8:57 pm #

    Basically yeah, I think executing another human is the ultimate truth.

    It’s not something a human can decide. Even though I’m not religious in that way, I don’t think humans should ever be put in a place where they choose if others live or die.

    What makes them any different from Hitler?

  24. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 8:58 pm #

    Yeah that’s right.

    Who has the choice to kill another human just because he broke the law?

    Is it really justifiable to end this young mans life for carrying less than half a kilo of heroin?

    Singapore claims its a huge amount, but really it’s nothing, it’s small fry.

    You see the smuggling in South America, we are talking 50 tonnes, not 500grams..

  25. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 9:08 pm #

    Yah I agree, Texas is like “We have the law, why not use it?”

    Thanks for the link πŸ™‚

  26. foodcrazee December 2, 2005 at 10:35 pm #

    Depends on the charges – for DRUG trafficking, i support as i think even with 400gm of pure heroin, u could destroy more lives than a murderer. No doubt no h uman can take another human lives but the traffickers are doing just that by providing drugs to ppl that kills them slowly…which is worse ? Drug or murder ?

  27. GhOsT December 2, 2005 at 11:27 pm #

    I am AGAINST Captial Punishment!

    There is no co-relation between capital punishment and availiability of drugs.

    When a criminal commits a crime, getting caught is the last thing on his mind. so who cares about the death penalty if he isnt gonna be caught?

    An eye for an eye? Two wrongs do not make a right. Killing is killing, and no one has the power to terminate life except God.

    Capital punishment is barbaric and is MURDER under the guise of justice.

  28. ShaolinTiger December 2, 2005 at 11:29 pm #

    Honestly dude I can’t stand this kind of attitude, no offence.

    Plus 400gms is nothing, it’s not 400 kilos, or even 40 tonnes..it’s not even half a kilo.

    People make out drug traffickers to be some evil pushers selling drugs to kids in playgrounds.

    It’s just not like that, it’s supply and demand, people in the drug business are just supplying a demand that’s there..

    If people want to take drugs it’s up to them, no one forces them to, it’s the users that are the problem, they demand it, SOMEONE will supply it. They get punished for trying to make money..

    Traffickers aren’t causing the problems, they are just propogating them, and I don’t think anyone should be killed just for trying to make some money illegally…they aren’t comitting genocide, they are just giving some people something they want..

  29. ÀrchÀngël December 3, 2005 at 12:25 am #

    i just wanna say..
    drug u to death is better than hanging.. ehw..
    (0.o)

  30. Dabido(Teflon) December 3, 2005 at 5:57 am #

    I asked Camila’s horse, about that, he said ‘Neigh’.

  31. Dabido(Teflon) December 3, 2005 at 6:08 am #

    I think there is enough studies and literature to prove it’s never been a deterant. That’s why most learned pro death penalty people never use it as an arguement, becasue it falls on deaf ears.

    Last person who tried that arguement on me claimed that Vladmir Dracula (aka Vlad the Impaler) had zero percent crimes because of his ‘impaling’ policy … which was a stupid arguement as Vlad had three attempts on his own life with the last one being succssful, so it was rather ineffective even in Vlad’s case.

    Main reason it doesn’t work as a deterant, is because anyone who plans a crime does so with the intention of NOT getting caught, and anyone who does a crime which is unplanned normally had zero thought of actually committing the crime, so the punishment didn’t get a chance to go through their head either.

  32. Dabido(Teflon) December 3, 2005 at 6:21 am #

    Capital punishment is never a deterant. People never expect to get caught, so the punishment is never an issue.

    Killing Van Nguyen didn’t save any more lives than if you had of locked him up for life. So your point is rather moot.

    In fact, if they have of left him alive, then his story could have been told later on and it would have detered others from both being a drug mule or form using drugs. As it stands, he will be forgotten in a week and someone else will attempt to do the exact same thing.

    Capital Punishment is a way of removing the crime from peoples minds, rather than leaving it somewhere were we can be reminded of the consequences.

  33. Dabido(Teflon) December 3, 2005 at 6:39 am #

    As someone who used to work in Drug Rehab at Kings Cross in Sydney, I’ve seen an awful lot of pain caused by drugs. Needless to say, capital punihment is not the way to go, as most ‘drug mules’ are NOT the ones making the money.

    Capital punishment doesn’t work as a deterant (as per reasons stated above), so it does really only leave the ‘revenge’ and ‘convenience’ factors as the only two arguements.

    Still, some drug mules are forced into it, so should we kill someone who was made to do it under threat that someone they loved would be killed if they didn’t? And even killing them, how does that hurt the multi-billionaire who is sitting at the top of the drug chain in his mansion somewhere? It doesn’t, they just get some other unsuspecting fool to do the job.

    Better education is probably needed. Teach them while they are young to avoid such stupid things.

    Revenge as a motive – I’m always surprised, especially when supposed ‘Christians’ turn to the ‘eye for an eye’ argument, as it comes form the Old Testament and if they bothered to read the New Testament, you’ll see Jesus specifically superceded it with ‘Love Thy Enemy’. Most of the TV Documentaries I’ve seen on the TV always have US families quoting the Eye for and Eye bit, and then claiming they are commited Christians … sorry, but it’s not Christianity that teaches that.

    Most countries that have repealed the death penalty have done so because they kept diggin up new evidence and finding that they were executing Innocent People. At the end of the day, if ONE Innocent person has been killed, then the state has effectively committed murder in the name of justice. [Then you ahve the problem of WHEN IS IT OKAY TO EXECUTE SOMEONE? After all, locking them up indefinitely has already removed their threat to society provided you have an adaquate system to keep them locked up.]

    So, executing even the guilty does raise the question as to whether WE have the right to kill someone who is in no way a threat to anyone.

    Then, there is the possibility of studying the criminals for scientific reasons in order to get better data in order to stop the crimes in the first place. If you kill them, you have effectively REMOVED the ability to study them and prevent crimes.

    [Admittedly, there is not enough funding at present to do this – but there are some studies trying to do exactly this and if you kill off all their subjects, then we have removed the ability to prevent the same sort of crimes. Prevention is ALWAYS better than trying to fidn solutions AFTER the horse has bolted from the barn!]

  34. Pussy December 3, 2005 at 7:06 am #

    explain yourself boy, and your fantastic spelling.

  35. Tom December 3, 2005 at 7:08 am #

    Totally agree, 20 years of no front teeth and perennial sore-arse is a much bigger deterrent than a six-foot long neck.

  36. michaelooi December 3, 2005 at 7:29 am #

    drug traffickers ought to be hung and shot. period.

  37. Pussy December 3, 2005 at 12:48 pm #

    Ah, the voice of reason. Retarded pillow munching poofs who blanket judge the whole group of drug traffickers as somehow inherently evil ought to have their teeth taken away.

  38. jc December 3, 2005 at 2:58 pm #

    Laws were made and if people choose to go against it, they should accept the consequences. Lock a person up for good? Who’s going to pay for the person’s food, etc…? Is it fair to the tax payers?

  39. Andrew Lim December 3, 2005 at 4:05 pm #

    I will, as soon as you explain your fantastic name and grammar. =)

  40. Andrew Lim December 3, 2005 at 4:07 pm #

    …said the pot to the kettle. =)

  41. The Fish December 3, 2005 at 7:55 pm #

    If someone who is about to commit murder/rape/drug trafficking has no god-damn respect for the person/people he/she is going to harm, there is no reason why the law should respect his/her life. Serious crimes should be dealt with heavily, because that is the best form of deterrance. If a jail sentence is in place of the death sentence, then i dread to think how many people will commit crimes without giving a thought.

  42. Andrew Lim December 3, 2005 at 8:35 pm #

    I think the capital punishment definitely acts a deterrant. You can hardly find any drugs within Singapore because the possession of it, not just the smuggling, is a crime.

    Australia on the other hand, has lots of people doing drugs for recreation.

  43. GhOsT December 4, 2005 at 12:10 am #

    Hi. Andrew. If you know where to look, there are plenty to be found here in Sillypore.

    What our big brother do best is to sweep the dirt under the carpet.

    What about Took Leng How? He surrendered himself to be hanged? What a joke! I can say he will never be found if he stayed hidden away from Sillypore.

    So does he deserve to die?

    (I hope the Court of Appeal will over turn his judgement.)

  44. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 1:23 am #

    HI GhOsT,

    If you’re talking about ecstacy and other non-death penalty drugs, I’m aware of those.

    But can you tell me any place in Singapore where I can find heroin or cocaine?

  45. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 1:25 am #

    Here’s an interesting tidbit I learned today.

    Japan also carries out the death penalty.

    And coincidentally, they use the same method as Singapore – hanging.

    Didn’t notice anybody mentioning them, even though USA and China have been named in the media.

  46. Rambling Mind December 4, 2005 at 1:36 am #

    Ahh yes,,, the death penalty – an ever popular yet controversial topic for debate.

    Does it act as a deterrent, yes it does. Malaysia and Singapore are part of the so called “Golden Triangle” where producton and trafficking is mostly concentrated. Imagine the amount of drugs we’d have in this country if not for the death penalty.

    The Australian knew what he was in for when he tried to sneak past.

  47. me December 4, 2005 at 1:36 am #

    it’s actually not the quantity problem i see. then everybody would think, hey…i’ll only have to serve a certain amount of time in jail if i get caught. not much risk. then lotsa people are gonna take the risk. ina way, death penalty actually do scare people into not commiting crime. if the penalty for not putting on seat belt while driving is death. i’m sure everybody will be putting on their seat belt. but it doesn’t mean i’m encouraging the government to put death penalty to every crime in the law. plus, singapore takes certain crime more seriously compare to other countries.

  48. Rambling Mind December 4, 2005 at 1:56 am #

    Let me just point to Bali where drug-trafficking and consumption appear to be on the rise (or perhaps it appears to be on the rise because more people have been caught among them, surprise, surprise, 2 Australians).

    The laxaity of laws in that country has made it a haven for drugs – be it for recreational purposes or otherwise.

    Why should a country give up its sovereign right to defend its shores because of discontent from a minority who feel that its laws are restrictive?

    The law is made known to all. You traffic drugs, you die. People are given a choice. So what I don’t understand is why the outrage or condemnation of the government when offenders are caught and then executed.

    That person made a conscious choice to try to escape the law. He was caught and paid the penalty.

    Had he been successful, that would have meant 260,000 extra doses into the drugs market. If your loved ones had been one of those who took one of these 260,000 doses and was subsequently addicted, would these opponents of the death penalty still sing the same tone, I wonder.

    It’s all well and good to condemn the death penalty until you see the effect of drugs hitting those closest to you.

  49. Rambling Mind December 4, 2005 at 2:00 am #

    Dabido – actually, killing Van Nguyen did save lives. The lives of those who may have taken the drugs.

  50. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 2:47 am #

    Rambling – go back and READ what i wrote. He was already caught and the drugs taken off the market – no one was going to die from using his drugs. Killing him didn’t save lives. They could have locked him away forever – now, with him out of mind he’ll never save any lives. He’ll be forgotten in a week. Leaving him alive would have at least bought him up every now and then, and people would ahve been reminded of his example.

  51. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 2:59 am #

    I think more people have learned about him because he was sentenced to death, then would have been if he was let off.

    His death will always be a stark reminder what happens when you smuggle drugs. If he had been freed, it’d sent the wrong message to the drug smugglers.

  52. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 3:02 am #

    Anyway this Took Leng How you mentioned, he killed a 7-year old girl. So what if he surrendered himself? He’s still got to pay.

  53. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 3:08 am #

    It’s your personal opinion versus proven studies which have conclusively shown it doesn’t work as a deterant. Go read the literature.

    As for the Less Drugs in Singapore Versus Drugs in Aussie etc – you are ignoring a lot of other factors for that.

    ‘ You can hardly find any drugs within Singapore because the possession of it, not just the smuggling, is a crime’
    Well, both are crimes in Australia too.

    Did you think that maybe a higher police presence in Singapore per person might have someting to do with a lower crime rates (not just in drug trafficing but other things too)?
    Considering that Australia has the record for some of the BIGGEST drug busts in history shows that we take the problem seriously.
    Due to the vastness of our country and the low population it’s much harder to police someone trying to bring it into the country, but our police do a very impressive job of stopping it. The drug busts have resulted in many people getting harsh penalties in Aussie too, just because we don’t kill people doesn’t mean we are soft on drugs.

    Also, it’s probably less socially acceptable to use drugs recreationally in Sin, so you have cultural factors to take into account as well.

    When I used to do drug rehab, I know that the South American & Central American cartells were targetting Australia very extensively (that info came form Interpol and other OS Police), but the Aussie police have managed to keep most of it out of Australia.

    As a softer target to attack, the cartels would prefer to try to get stuff into Aussie, not because of the penalties. Their objective is to get their product into a market to make money. With Sin’s higher police presence it’s harder to get the stuff in there and make money.

    You think they prefer targetting Aussie because the mules are more likely to get live imprisonment rather than a death penalty? Either way they lose their mules so obviously it isn’t a factor to them. It comes down to plain simple logic. Easier to get the stuff in should mean greater profits. They dont’ send the stuff in in order to lose it. They’re trying to get it onto the market.
    So even if Aussie had the death penalty, they’d still target us as it’s harder to police here. The penalties have little to do with trying.

    Anyway, go off and read up about it, you’ll find death penalties are never a deterant to people. Crime rates never have anything to do with the penalties attached to the crimes.

    Removing the death penalties in countries like Australia for things like murder had no effect on the crime rate. In fact, the crime rate of murder has actually decreased since they removed the death penalty.

    Death penalty has never worked as a deterant. Go read – like I said in a previous comment, even the Pro Death Penalty peopel who are well read have stopped using the ‘deterant’ thing as a reason for having it. I’m surprised you are still trying to push this opinion considering the vast amount of proof against such an arguement.

  54. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 3:35 am #

    Andrew, DON’T try sticking words into peoples mouths. NO ONE ever said ANYTHING about setting him free.

    NO ONE ever said ANYTHING about letting him off.

    The Aussie Government argued to give him life imprissionment without parole and we would have him extradited back to Aussie so that Singapore didn’t even have to foot the bill – it would have cost Australia money to keep him locked up.

    On top of that, there has been plenty of other people sentenced to death for smuggling drugs and they have received a lot of publicity – and NOT ONE of them stays in the public mind longer than about a week.

    Guess what, if the death penalty worked as a deterant, Van Nguyen would still be alive today … didn’t work now, won’t work in the future. Won’t work in ten years time.

    His death won’t be a stark reminder as no one will remember him in a week. Same reason that we don’t remember many of those 1000 people executed in the US (let alone what they did).

  55. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 3:51 am #

    Rambling – I HAVE been in the trenches doing Drug Rehab in Kings Cross Sydney before.

    I’ve seen first hand what drugs do to people and it’s a lot worse than what you’ve seen in trainspotting and other movies.

    Guess what, NOT ONE person I used to work with was pro-death penalty. Believe me, we’ve seen a lot worse than you’d want to see.

    The point is most mules are idiots who are being used. The REAL CRIMINALS are sitting in mansions with billions of dollars knowing that if they send tenmules into a region and one of them gets caught, they can replace the one and they are still making mega millions off the rest.

    The point is, he was not successful and he was caught. The issue then is how to punish him – you say the death penalty is good … well, it obviously didn’t work as a deterant, because Van Nguyen still did the crime.

    The issue really comes down to what is considered a fit punishment for the crime. Most of the first world nations on earth have given up the death penalty as they feel it is barbaric and lowers the esteem of nations who perform it.

    Bali’s also had the death penalty for drugtrafficing for years and years – so if there is a rise in drug trafficing to there, then we must ask the question is the death penalty working there as well? Answer, ‘NO’.

    As I pointed out in one of my replies to Andrew, after they got rid of the Death Penalty in Aussie for Murder, the murder rate actually decreased.

    Before patting the death penalty on the back for the low drug smuggling numbers in countries, also look at other factors, like police pressence, cultural acceptance and other things. You might find that deciding one factor is the reason for the low numbers is a little short sighted.

  56. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 3:56 am #

    That’s called the ‘convenience argument’. In the case of Van Nguyen, you’ll find that it would have been the Aussies, as the Government wanted to extradite him and give him life in an Aussie Prison.

  57. michaelooi December 4, 2005 at 4:44 am #

    ahhh, retards… who think by disagreeing to opinions all over somebody’s blog would do justice for the good of humanity.

  58. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 6:03 am #

    Andrew, DON’T try sticking words into peoples mouths. NO ONE ever said ANYTHING about setting him free.

    I apologise. When I said “free” and “let off”, I meant keeping him alive.

    I apologise. When I said “free” and “let off”, I meant allowing him to live.

    Guess what, if the death penalty worked as a deterant, Van Nguyen would still be alive today

    I don’t understand this line of argument. Children go to school. Most do well but of course, some fail. Does this we should scrap education just because some students fail? Singapore and Australia both put thieves in jail, but there are of course still thieves. Does that mean we should stop punishing them?

    didn’t work now, won’t work in the future. Won’t work in ten years time.

    How would you know? There’s no way to know how many drug traffickers we’ve successfully deterred, since they never actually commit the crime. One thing’s for sure though, Singapore is generally drug-free.

    His death won’t be a stark reminder as no one will remember him in a week.

    Nguyen wouldn’t have gotten so much press coverage, and become a household name, if it wasn’t for the death penalty. Now at least all Australians know the consequences.

    Same reason that we don’t remember many of those 1000 people executed in the US (let alone what they did).

    But you at least recall that there are 1000.

  59. Pussy December 4, 2005 at 6:40 am #

    Yawn….got something original to opine? Then surprise me, if you can….

  60. Alice December 4, 2005 at 9:02 am #

    Small amount of drugs doesn’t mean it doesn’t hurt.. I agree that capitol punishment should not happen in a civilised country. But we are not as civilised as we think we are.. We, human being, always think we are so “civilised”? But are we?
    SO in a not so civilised country, to protect the innocence, we really need law. There is a rape case. You know what is the first thing the convict did on the first day of his release from jail? He killed the victim who exposed him. So sad. Who is the real victim here? Similarly, those traffick drug knows that that is a crime. But for money or for other reasons, they still do that. They do not care about what drugs do to those innocent peole out there? I agree capitol punishment may not solve the problem entirely.. but you cannot deny that it “does” deter certain amount of drug trafficking.

  61. ShaolinTiger December 4, 2005 at 9:07 am #

    Singapore is free of everything intersting, no big deal.

    Why not give death penalty for chewing gum too? There are still some people smuggling it in..

    Plus he wasn’t even TAKING THE DRUGS TO SINGAPORE.

    He was transitting on a flight to Australia.

    Plus following your logic, which is illogical, you can you tell me how effective it is?

    Can you show me how many millions of kilos have passed through Singapore? And how many people have actually been caught? How many people have been deterred by the death penalty?

    Well I’ll answer for you, no you can’t.

    It’s all assumptive logic.

  62. GhOsT December 4, 2005 at 9:13 am #

    I would love to point you the way to get those stuff. But I am sorry, I cant. But knowing the right people can get you everything you need.

  63. Andrew Lim December 4, 2005 at 10:14 am #

    First things first, I’d like to mention that I’m Malaysian.

    Singapore is free of everything intersting, no big deal.

    I’m assuming that was intended as an insult, but Singaporeans would actually take that as a compliment to their nation. “May you live in interesting times.” is a phrase popularised by John F. Kennedy. It’s basically used to curse a person, hoping that he may live in turbulent or troubled times. It takes a certain amount of skill to make a whole country boring.

    Why not give death penalty for chewing gum too? There are still some people smuggling it in..

    Because to Singaporeans, that would be too extreme. Despite what most think, the Singaporean government does care about popular opinion once in a while. That’s why you hear Singaporeans, even SPG, supporting the death penalty for drugs – because it’s supported by the majority.

    Plus he wasn’t even TAKING THE DRUGS TO SINGAPORE.

    He was transitting on a flight to Australia.

    If you check international laws, he was technically on Singaporean soil. Legally, Singapore had every right to arrest him. And if the Singaporeans had let him go, they would have given drug smugglers this excuse whenever they got caught: “Oh, actually I was smuggling it to another country.”

    Can you show me how many millions of kilos have passed through Singapore? And how many people have actually been caught? How many people have been deterred by the death penalty?

    As I’ve said before, there’s no way to track would-be criminals that were deterred, because they don’t commit the crime in the end. So let’s use another measuring stick then: before and after the death sentence was introduced in Singapore, the number of drug users dropped dramatically. Now you could attribute this to other factors: education, increasing wealth etc. but I’m sure the drug penalty also played a major role.

    Well I’ll answer for you, no you can’t.

    You’re right. Who can know for sure? All I know is that before the death sentence was introduced, the triads and druglords had a pretty firm base in Singapore. After the crackdowns, they’ve all but disappeared. Even the most daring of staticians won’t attribute that all to coincidence.

    It’s all assumptive logic.

    One thing we don’t have to assume: Nguyen’s drug smuggling days are definitely over.

  64. Pussy December 4, 2005 at 4:21 pm #

    my grammar can explain herself were you of the disposition to ask her; as for my name, I live by the old adage “you are what you eat.”

  65. Geraint December 4, 2005 at 4:30 pm #

    What this all comes down to, in the end, is the right of anyone to take another person’s life, be it through murder, manslaughter, war, sanctions or capital punishment. Humans are not just a means to an end, they are an end in themselves. Singapore’s (and pretty much every nation in that corner of the world) has a shocking record when it comes to human rights abuses, from physical restraints/punishment to freedom of speech. By rushing through to an advanced stage of economic and technological development it has missed out on ALL of the sociological enlightenment upon which true developed nations are built. Sticking to this utilitarian idea of killing one to save the many is blind and bigotted, and that’s not even mentioning the word SAVAGE. You can walk with the white man, talk with the white man, wear his clothes, but unless you start smartening your ideas, you’ll always be his lapdog.

  66. Dr B. December 4, 2005 at 7:41 pm #

    Ummm…you of course have made the assumption that the Nguyen would have become a professional international drug mule.

    BTW, it was the government who used to run the opium business in Singapore…the British used Singapore as a base of operation for transporting opium to China to control the workers. OH MY GOODNESS…IT USED TO BE LEGAL TO TRAFFIC IN DRUGS…must have been ok….

    Drug use in Singapore dropped because using drugs went from being LEGAL to ILLEGAL. I am guessing littering was more popular before folk got fined for doing it.

    Present some logic for supporting the death penalty…?? Let’s avoid the dicussion of a specific case…give us your philosophy on who should live & die….

    I’m not gonna argue about how bad drugs are…that’s a given. I remain unconvinced that the ulitimate penalty is the ulitmate solution…eliminating demand would be far more effective. Education…and that’s not just the government’s job…the anti-drug message falls flat when kids see their folks reaching for an after work beer “just to take the edge off” etc….

    Bloody hell…that sounds like the solution might be ‘complicated’…any space in the sand for me to stick my head?

  67. Dabido(Teflon) December 4, 2005 at 9:50 pm #

    Apology accepted.

    Education is totally different, as we aren’t trying to deter children with education. If you had used the analogy in context, you would have executed the children for failing to deter them from not studying hard enough – which is of course not what happens for obvious reasons – as soon as you kill someone they can no longer learn and can no longer contribute to society.

    If we want to see if the death penalty is working, we need to look at places which have had it and then removed it such as Australia where Violent crimes DECREASED once the death penalty was removed. Or places like Texas where they re-introduced it, and that year they had an increase in violent crimes by 45% (while the US only had an increase in 5%).

    The psychological studies show that the reason for this phenomena is because where there is a Death Penalty people start to devalue human life and where there isn’t one they hold it in higher esteem.

    The reason I know the death penalty didn’t work as a deterent was because people are still doing the crimes – and as the stats show they actually increase in places with a death penalty.

    BUT, the point I was making is it obviously did not detere Van Nguyen from doign it, so in his case it DID NOT WORK as a deterant, and there will always be people int he future who will not be detered by it.
    As we’ve said a few times, most criminals DON’T believe they will be caught, so the penalties are NEVER a deterant. A higher police prescence helps, as it increases the odds of getting caught – and that’s when criminals start looking for softer targets – but the penalty for getting caught still doesn’t deter them.

    The only reason Van Nguyen got press coverage wasn’t because of the death penalty, but because Australia made such a big deal about it. There was also an outcry as they showed an interview with the executioner who was talking about how he gets such delight in killing people … that was something Aussies found very scarey, a person who delights in killing others.

    The reasons I recall there was 1000 executed in the US, is ST’s posting is about that – it’s also made soem fo the headlines recently and been in the news. If you had of asked me before then, I would have been hard pressed to tell you how many there were (in fact, I thought they’d exceeded 1000 already).

    Did you know that one of the people to be executed this month in California is a guy who’s been nominated for Nobel Prizes??? Stan Tookie Williams – Five times Nobel Peace Prize nominee and four times Nobel Peace Prize for Literature.
    If US ‘Justice’ was as swift as the Singapore system this guy wouldn’t have had a chance to write and change other peoples lives. Now, the US system has finally got around to executing him inspite of the good he has done to the world through his example.

    Imagine if Van Nguyen had been alllowed to serve his life sentence in Aussie and was able to do the same thing as Stan Tookie Williams … but, we’ll never know, that avenue has been removed for Van, and for the rest of us.

    When they eventually execute Stan the world will be a poorer place. His example has stopped other youths from travelling down the same path as his own, which would never have happened if he had been executed.

  68. terry December 4, 2005 at 11:12 pm #

    I am against capital punishment. but the world is getting too small to host thy criminals.

    send them to moon or hide them beneath the sea, yeah….Earth’s a dump storage.

  69. Andrew Lim December 5, 2005 at 2:36 pm #

    >> Humans are not just a means to an end, they are an end in themselves.

    Exactly. But the guilty should always be punished to protect the innocent.

    >> Singapore’s (and pretty much every nation in that corner of the world) has a shocking record when it comes to human rights abuses, from physical restraints/punishment to freedom of speech

    This has little to do with geography. Even democratic societies have the death penalty. For example, USA, Japan and India. And if you wish to talk about human rights abuses, it wasn’t that long ago that Australia commited genocide against the aborigines and created the White Nation Policy.

    >> By rushing through to an advanced stage of economic and technological development it has missed out on ALL of the sociological enlightenment upon which true developed nations are built.

    What? Like genocide, war, hypocrisy, guns and drugs?

    >> You can walk with the white man, talk with the white man, wear his clothes, but unless you start smartening your ideas, you’ll always be his lapdog.

    That stinks of racial bias. Who made the white man the ideal? Don’t assume that Singaporeans, or any other race are dying to be like them. If Singaporeans were really lapdogs, they’d have given the predominantly white Australians what they wanted.

  70. Andrew Lim December 5, 2005 at 2:43 pm #

    >> Ummm…you of course have made the assumption that the Nguyen would have become a professional international drug mule.

    No, I’m just assuming he won’t be because he’s DEAD.

    >> BTW, it was the government who used to run the opium business in Singapore…the British used Singapore as a base of operation for transporting opium to China to control the workers. OH MY GOODNESS…IT USED TO BE LEGAL TO TRAFFIC IN DRUGS…must have been ok.

    Yes, the British did that before independence. Which is why *after* independence, there were still traces of the drug industry. So the death penalty was introduced and it seems to have worked so far. =)

    >> Present some logic for supporting the death penalty…??

    I’d already have. I’ve given historical and present-day reasons. All you’ve given are some arguments based on morality, which varies from place to place. Don’t assume your morality applies everywhere, ok? The holier-than-thou approach is getting annoying.

    >> I remain unconvinced that the ulitimate penalty is the ulitmate solution…

    Well nobody has found the “ultimate solution” yet. But it has worked so far, so Singaporeans are sticking with it.

  71. Andrew Lim December 5, 2005 at 2:49 pm #

    I’m just supporting the death penalty *in Singapore* itself.
    It does not matter if the death penalty doesn’t work in the USA or Australia. I’ve lived in Singapore for many years and it has worked wonderfully for the Singaporeans so far. The mistake that everybody seems to making is that they’re using statistics in other countries to argue against what’s actually working in Singapore itself.

    But you see that’s why international law exists. The Singaporeans know this and don’t try to enforce their value systems/laws on Australia, but Australia thinks that just because the death penalty doesn’t work for them, it won’t work for Singapore.

  72. Geraint December 5, 2005 at 8:50 pm #

    “Exactly, but the guilty should be punished to protect the innocent.” That’s hardly exactly, is it? One moment you agree that people are ends in themselves and the next you state that they are means. Make your mind up. Ever heard of rehabilitation? Would it not be better to turn an evil doer away from his life of crime to one which is respectable and serves society? Do you realise what a death sentence is? It means no second chances, that’s fucking it matey. Aside from being horribly anachronistic it’s also a terrible cloud to have hanging over a supposedly modern society.

    Genocide, war, hypocrisy, guns and drugs. Yes. Genocide and war have been around since the dawn of man. Hypocrisy also. Guns and drugs being technological development don’t actually belong in the category of sociology, do they?

    All these lovely examples you mention of Australia, USA, Japan, India (you might as well throw in South Africa while you’re at it) still don’t cover the simple fact that lashes with a whip for scratching up cars or a rope around your neck for selling drugs are extremely overzealous punishments that smack of a lack of true will to correct a society. Does it take more effort to extinguish a life than to save it? I think the death penalty is the final recourse for any society which has run out of ideas.

    Racial bias maybe, but an observed truth.

  73. Dr B. December 5, 2005 at 10:31 pm #

    The post-modernist argument of relative morals is pretty weak. You’ll have to do better than that… πŸ˜‰

    As Dabido has said a couple of times before…it’s the effective policing that stops crime. Heroin useage in Australia has dropped in the last 5 years because the Australia police have been able to intercept alot of the drugs and the cartels are cutting their losses. A junkies are being starved of supply…at the same time there is increased support to help the addicts clean themselves up (holistic approach…bit hippy but tends to work).

    Singapore cleaned up it drug trade by good policing. The cartels were having a significant amount of their drugs intercepted and have avoided the market (they’re in it for the money…not the fun).

    Synthetic drugs and marijauna haven’t made it into the Singaporean market because production requires space/isolation.

    I think we’re both saying that being tough on drugs is important…I just think it’s a strong police presence that the deciding factor…while you think that it’s all down to a rope & a trapdoor….

    Ultimately, the death penalty for any crime is indefensible based on the fallibility of the court system (i.e. appeals courts exist for a reason) and that it is inconsistent with the “social rule” that all human life is sacred.

    My anti-death penalty stance might be moral and holier-than-thou (btw I’m an atheist) but it’s absolute and consistent…there’s ifs, buts, excepts, maybes, what-ifs in it…..

  74. Dabido(Teflon) December 5, 2005 at 11:12 pm #

    Andrew – there is NO EVIDENCE that the death penalty works in Singapore. In fact, your arguement that the ‘Singaporeans are not enforcing their value system on the world’ is incorrect. As soon as they killed an Aussie they did exactly that.

    If they were not enforcing it on the rest of the world, they’d have one law for Singaporeans and another for foreigners. They don’t. [I’m not arguing that they should].

    All the evidence collected in the world shows the death penalty doesn’t work. You seem to believe Singapore is an exception but show no evidence to back it up.

    As I stated before, there are other factors in Singapore which lower the crime rate – such as the high police presence.

    There are only a few thousand police who have to enforce the law in the whole of WA. Have a look at the size of WA and compare it to Singapore. There is a huge difference.

    No one was making mistakes about using stats. You’ve offered no evidence other than your own personal opinion. Fact is, the death penalty didnt’ work as a deterant for Van Nguyen or anyone else who has been put to death in Singapore, and we know there have been hundreds, as the executioner was on TV bragging about how many he’s done. So Singapore itself offered the proof that the death penalty doesn’t work as a deterant. Hundreds … how many can you name other than Van Nguyen who have provided this so called example to others not to commit crimes? Have they detered others? No. Next time Singapore executes someone, remember that.

  75. Dr B. December 6, 2005 at 2:43 am #

    CRAP…usual typos…”there’s NO ifs, buts…”

  76. Andrew Lim December 6, 2005 at 8:09 am #

    I think we’re going around in circles here because we have different value systems and beliefs.

    You think the death sentence is absoutely wrong. I do not.

    You think human life is absolutely sacred. I do not.

    You think hanging is a cruel and savage act. I do not.

    And there’s no way we’re going to revolve this, since our moral values are completely different.

    Thank goodness we have legal ways of resolving these issues. We don’t break your laws, you don’t break our laws.

  77. Andrew Lim December 6, 2005 at 9:28 am #

    Most of your judgements are based on your own subjective opinions and values. Do not assume that your morality applies to, or is remotely close to mine.

    Similarly, this applies to both Singapore and Australia. How do we resolve it then? Through legal means. Singapore has done everything by the book, if Australia isn’t happy, it should stop producing drug traffickers and sending them there. Or invade Singapore and establish it’s own laws there. Until then, respect international laws.

    And also, I make it a point not to argue with racists. So this is probably my last reply to you.

  78. Lowzeewee December 9, 2005 at 4:31 am #

    Killing someone because he killed someone? Doesn’t sound right, but we have to see the circumstances. The worst punishment a human being should get for an average death penalty-warranting offence should be a 20-year jail sentence. If he still refuses to correct his ways after coming out, then give him another 20-year sentence.

    How about getting their family members to pay for their upkeeping behind bars?

  79. Lowzeewee December 9, 2005 at 4:34 am #

    If you killed someone because he killed someone, isn’t that illogical? The law is considered committing murder too. The only valid “candidates” to the death penalty would be top war criminals(e.g. WW2 commanders) and mass murderers.