Drug dealers/couriers/etc are mass murders and should be treated as such.
Possible Death Penalty for Drug Smuggling Housewife
- Thread starter The Halk
- Start date
Drug dealers/couriers/etc are mass murders and should be treated as such.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,927
- Location
- South East
She was smuggling Cocaine. Far more people die from the likes of Alcohol than Cocaine use.
For example, according to the Telegraph article below, only 196 people in England and Wales died as a result of Cocaine use in 2007.
I appreciate there are other factors, but in terms of actual lives lost from use, it's not that bad. Heck, most drugs are safer than alcohol.
Sources, slightly old, but it's a start:
http://www.drugscope.org.uk/resources/faqs/faqpages/how-many-people-die-from-drugs
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/2...-reach-highest-level-since-records-began.html
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Is there a single thread these days that doesn't contain at least one bizarre anti-everything-down-with-the-establishment style post?
Only if it was all taken by 1 person
In reality that amount of drugs would have caused a lot of euphoria, great sex and good nights out for a lot of people.
ubersonic said:
what? So lets include all breweries and tobacco growers in that definition then...since they kill many magnitudes more people than all illegal drugs combined...since the legal status of a substance is irrelevant when looking at the social damage a substance causes.
But what happens if we factor in even remotely similar amount of users. Alcohol and tobacco are the most dangerous, as they are also the most used. Which does squew the results somewhat.
devils advocate here: while a properly weighted mortality rate (e.g. % of drug users who die) of drug usage would enable comparisons with the equivalent of alcohol relate mortality rate, there is also the counterargument that deaths due to drug use would probably decline if it was made legal as users would know how to use it properly, with safety and less danger to their health.
On the original topic though, I have no sympathy for people who break the law in such a way and without knowing the specifics I can't tell whether she did it because she felt she had no choice or it's just a made up story.
However, I don't agree with the death penalty for that type of crime, I find it grossly excessive as I do think the person can be rehabilitated.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 9,707
- Location
- North
Just 1 unnecessary death is 1 too much. If you think 196 dead people as a result of cocaine abuse is "not that bad" then you need your head checking out.
If alcohol was deemed a Class A drug, was a banned substance, and she was caught smuggling that then she also deserves the punishment that is set.
Edit: Also taking into factor Cocaine is a banned substance, is very difficult to get hold of and is very very expensive so is only used by a fraction of the population. Whereas alcohol is easily accessible, cheap and used by a majority of the population. If we apply this to cocaine making it cheap, legal, available in supermarkets, corner shops etc im sure the death statistics would be higher than the ones from alcohol abuse
Last edited:
I suppose the other thing in her favour that I'd not really considered before is that she helped catch the other three and is 'singing' all she knows about them.
Had she been a proper drug smuggler, rather than a idiot, I'm sure they would grass her up in return if she was.
Had she been a proper drug smuggler, rather than a idiot, I'm sure they would grass her up in return if she was.
So 1 person dies to stop £1.6M of cocaine which thus would kill over 150+ people more then likely. I think that's fair, but we don't live in the old age where capital punishment was acceptable. Stick her in jail for the rest of her life, problem solved.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 3,177
but in the movies the cops arent usually criminally incompetent, which you can often find with police in real life. no offence to the decent coppers out there but there are plenty who i wouldnt trust to wipe my arse.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 3,177
as are tobacconists and people who make alcohol.... your point being? if we could regulate and tax we wouldnt be in the mess we are now. more people seem to die from these legal high that E etc. a lot of the issues are down to purity and the high level gangs bringing stuff in or out.
the war on drugs is lost. some people will always want to get high.
bringing pot into the country can get you the same prison sentence as a multiple offender paedophile murderer. how is this right?
Bees kill more people than Ecstasy and i seem to remember so do peanuts.
Ok, so I quoted actual statistics of people found innocent who had been executed.
You say, "the death penalty would certainly reduce crime rates" - do you have any evidence to back this up?, as the USA has the death penalty & a much higher crime rate.
The nations with the lowest crime rates also happen to have the more liberal criminal justice systems.
On the subject of capital punishment overall - firstly, the proposed scenario isn't likely to occur any-time soon (no corruption) & secondly - I don't think the state should be given the power to execute citizens .
These scientific study's on the effects of drugs & alcohol (believe it or not) have already taken that into account.
They are most dangerous per % of users for alcohol (for violence it's the highest) - only heroin is worse for health over booze & fags.
This isn't some two bit report by newspapers, these are the results of real scientists (who are ignored by our leaders).
No it wouldn't - according to the results of the scientific research on the subject.
Only heroin is considered to be more dangerous (IIRC).
1. It's far more common than you think.
2. It's far less dangerous than you think.
3. Alcohol is far more dangerous than you think.
4. Alcohol is one of the most factors for random assault or domestic abuse.
45 per cent of all violent crimes, the victims believed their attackers had been drinking
37 per cent of domestic violence cases involve alcohol
2007-08, more than a million crimes involved alcohol use in some way
This pretty much.
We are not only wasting prison spaces on people who just like to smoke pot, but we are also providing a massive income for organised criminals which funds other more damaging activities.
On-top of that the government is missing out on an enormous tax revenue (part of which could do towards the treatment & aid towards those addicted, just as we do with alcohol & fags).
I don't know about you, but I can't think of the last time a group of stoned people have tried to kick my head in - they are too busy eating cakes & laughing.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 3,177
didnt the last government employ a series of experts to look into drugs and they said alcohol was only less dangerous than crack (which is different from normal coke) and heroine. they all got sacked.
drug policy in the UK is ridiculous.
Presumably you don't walk, run, drive or ever leave the house, and are never in the house.
196 per year is NOT bad, not at all. It'd not good, but you're much more likely to die in a car crash, for example.
That figure would also be much lower, as the most common cause of death is from the stuff that it's mixed with (to cut down on the purity to increase profit).
This would not happen if it was legal, it would all be tested & regulated.