Possible Death Penalty for Drug Smuggling Housewife

I'm still waiting for a single rational & scientific reason as to why alcohol should be legal & cannabis illegal.

No matter which way anybody trys to swing it, it's a stupid law.

All we are doing is putting money into the hands of crime gangs, losing out on tax, curbing the freedoms of our population & wasting precious prison spaces which would be better used for housing violent criminals.

As I've stated before, I don't get why people who claim to hate "government interference" & want a "small government" (same in the USA tbh) when they want the government to dictate every single part of life.

To ban anything they don't like, to deny the rights of minorities to have equal freedom (Gay marriage) - it's funny that the so called "Libertarians" are actually the most authoritarian.

When most people say they are in favour of small government of libertarianism - they actually mean I want to personally pay less tax, but still want the government to ban everything I dont like.

Just like the people who moan about welfare, but then cry if they are expected to pay for the care of elderly relatives.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so depressing.
 
elmarko1234 said:
I'm still waiting for a single rational & scientific reason as to why alcohol should be legal & cannabis illegal.
Click to expand...

oh that's easy, the vast majority of the public believe it should be that way and this is reflected in their votes.

There you go :)
 
Tefal said:
says who?

All the systems are small and private the richest ******* has the biggest private army and then he makes the rules.
Click to expand...

You are describing government. But anyway... Why on earth would people support that business with their money?

Tefal said:
The police services provided by the current biggest richest *******, the government also backed up by the army.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why anyone would support a murderous police force when there would be alternatives.

Tefal said:
Because security companies are world renowned for being corupt and well mercenaries are hardly unlikely to turn down a lot of money because some smaller firm may take issue.
Click to expand...

Why would you hire those people? The people of the police force would offer a protection service, no?

Tefal said:
Who would they be employed by though, and are you sure they'd want to work as private security?
Click to expand...

They would be employed like anybody else. I thought the motivation for going into the police was to make society nicer and safer... why wouldn't they want to protect people?

Tefal said:
Why do you think this is ending in court
Click to expand...

Opposed to where?

Tefal said:
or even more amusingly why do you think lying in court in the past would have a bearing on a future separate case?
Click to expand...

I'll go with a...

> or even more amusingly why do you think not paying off a loan in one bank would have a bearing on a future loan at a different bank?


Tefal said:
Great so why don't i just pay the judge to decide the verdict i want? ...
Click to expand...

I gave my answer to this in my last post~

Tefal said:
You want an example of what would happen then lets use the current situation, currently a very rich/powerful organization (government) employs the police as it's security force, snow these police are required to up hold the law put down by their employer.
Click to expand...

Well there's a few differences. We would not be stolen from to support that one, single force. Nor would we get to make our own laws.

Tefal said:
Currently you disagree with paying taxes so you choose not to pay you're going to get arrested and charged and put in jail.
Click to expand...

Disgusting isn't it? For the record, I don't avoid paying.

Tefal said:
All you'll be doing is replacing one great big employer with one rule set with lots and lots of little ones (and some massive ones that would very rapidly grow in such a market) Why don't you think the same would happen?
Click to expand...

Well, firstly more be doing more than that since we wouldn't be put in a cage for not rolling over and having our private property taken from us by force.

I don't think the same would happen because nobody would put their money into a system that hurts them. Nor would there be an incentive to start a business like that because people would not support it.
 
Tefal said:
oh that's easy, the vast majority of the public believe it should be that way and this is reflected in their votes.

There you go :)
Click to expand...
Who said public opinion makes something right?, or that we should live in a system of a tyranny of the majority?.

Or that going by what the mob wants is logical?

I'm sure we don't think public opinion in Iran on how to treat homosexuals should be listened to, or public opinion in Germany in the 40's on the Jewish people.

If people want to have say in how something is done then I expect them to do the legwork involved in understanding the basics of the subject matter - as the public clearly are not willing, they should be ignored on most subjects.

I don't expect anybody to listen to me on the subjects of dance, sports, antiques, law, biology/medicine & others - I don't posses the required level of understanding of these areas to give a worthwhile opinion - this should apply to everybody on all topics they know nothing about.
 
Last edited:
Tefal said:
oh that's easy, the vast majority of the public believe it should be that way and this is reflected in their votes.

There you go :)
Click to expand...

I find it hilarious how people think they have the right to dictate what other people can do with their own bodies.

But I suppose in a system where we're all equal because we all willingly pay taxes and generally live in harmony, we have to put up with each other and the damage they do to OUR health system.

This whole system totally stunts freedom and does away with personal responsibility and choice and replaces it with this failing piece of **** we have right now.

I more than welcome the discussion and criticism btw... my views are not set in stone.
 
Last edited:
elmarko1234 said:
Who said public opinion makes something right?
Click to expand...

You said you wanted a "rational & scientific reason" why it is the way it is.

THAT is the way it is, any other reason" is ********, it's the way it is because the people who disagree don't get in power to change it.

Just because you don't like the reason doesn't mean it's not the reason.

Plus it's a good thing, would cost a ****ing fortune if you had to pay tax on that as well as the baccy...
 
Last edited:
steve-h said:
I find it hilarious how people think they have the right to dictate what other people can do with their own bodies.

But I suppose in a system where we're all equal because we all willingly pay taxes and generally live in harmony, we have to put up with each other and the damage they do to OUR health system.

This whole system totally stunts freedom and does away with personal responsibility and choice and replaces it with this failing piece of **** we have right now.

I more than welcome the discussion and criticism btw... my views are not set in stone.
Click to expand...

While i agree with a lot of your viewpoints especially regarding the Monarchy, big government, dragging us into wars etc i don’t think you have thought through your anti-establishment plans.

In my opinion without authority there's only chaos, as reflected by the riots of 2011. When the police backed off all the plebs took over, that’s not a place where i would want to be. Quite frankly i don’t have faith in people to police themselves, you only have to look outside to see why.

Your ideas regarding privately owned roads is just insane and would NOT work. You say if you don’t like the rules of said road owner don’t use the road, then how the hell would you get anywhere? Your reply will to this is if everyone refuses to use said road the owner would go out of business, am i correct? Maybe the owners rich and couldn’t care less about shutting down the M5, what are we do to then?

You are anti-authority yet everything you have said will require some sort of authority, whether it is from private individuals or companies, which kind of defeats the purpose. I can imagine after a while the public would elect a representative to handle such decision as it’s not manageable to make such decision on a daily bases just to get from A to B, that would only be the start of things. These elected representatives will ultimately behave like the government wouldn’t they in effect so would be fruitless exercise as the end result will be the same.
 
Freakbro said:
Ok then, lets see what the independent scientific committee on drugs, set up by the government said.
Click to expand...

Thats the opinion of one group, im sure your also aware of the numerous bodies that are against the legalisation of drugs. For every source you provide i could counter with another, its not a cut and dry situation, so is pointless even bringing up.

Nicely summed up below

It is irresponsible and stupid to make other harmful drugs freely available to add to the misery and tragic consequences caused by the 2 we already have, alcohol and tobacco (nicotine).

All of them would have to be legalised and to all ages, otherwise dealers would simply push the others.
Click to expand...



He is a politician, he is going to say what people want to hear rather than the truth. :p
Click to expand...

Exactly he's expressing the will of the people, it is a democracy after all. We are intelligent enough to make such decision or have this viewpoint. Who better to listen to than the people who will have seen how crystal meth destroys communities?
 
Last edited:
Craterloads said:
In my opinion without authority there's only chaos, as reflected by the riots of 2011. When the police backed off all the plebs took over, that’s not a place where i would want to be. Quite frankly i don’t have faith in people to police themselves, you only have to look outside to see why.
Click to expand...

We would still have police, they just wouldn't be employed by a government. I can't say if they would act any differently though... I think standing off and identifying everyone involved was a pretty good tactic.

Craterloads said:
You say if you don’t like the rules of said road owner don’t use the road, then how the hell would you get anywhere? Your reply will to this is if everyone refuses to use said road the owner would go out of business, am i correct? Maybe the owners rich and couldn’t care less about shutting down the M5, what are we do to then?
Click to expand...

What if someone buys every building in London and leaves it empty? There's no incentive to do that. But if it were to happen then it would be quickly replaced since it would obviously be massively profitable. And since that's the case, I can't see anyone buying it just to leave it there... not to mention how they would need to keep people from using it via policing.

Craterloads said:
You are anti-authority yet everything you have said will require some sort of authority, whether it is from private individuals or companies, which kind of defeats the purpose.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. You have the choice to not support those individuals or companies, unlike now.

Craterloads said:
I can imagine after a while the public would elect a representative to handle such decision as it’s not manageable to make such decision on a daily bases just to get from A to B, that would only be the start of things. These elected representatives will ultimately behave like the government wouldn’t they in effect so would be fruitless exercise as the end result will be the same.
Click to expand...

Well it wasn't so long ago that I thought we needed governments, heavy regulation, a minimum wage and so on... just because that's how it's always been.
 
Headline News today that the Grandmother has been given the death sentence, despite prosecutors only asking for a 15 year prison sentence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21137649

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ntenced-death-Indonesia-drug-trafficking.html

I would imagine the judges who decided to issue such a sentence did it to send a message, which I believe they have succeeded with by making British headlines. However, I also think that sentencing somebody to death and possibly executing them is hardly doing any favours for tourism of your country either.
 
I think this will get overturned on appeal, mainly because she's British and we'll pressure them.

It does seem very harsh but at the same time what she did was massively stupid.
 
Skull said:
The word on the street is that she's well known in the area as a drug dealer...
Click to expand...

Her own Mother's comments, which weren't known last year, really don't paint her very well either. She is always in debt and so her Mother has effectively severed all contact with her because of her always doing nothing but begging for money, she didn't even know she had been arrested.

I think that gives a lot more weight to her story of being forced into it by people threatening her son as a bit rubbish. She clearly has had money issues for a long time and thought that if this worked, she could solve her problems.

Obviously she is not the ring leader or even that involved, she is just a mule and it was a risk she was willing to take. I'm not feeling much remorse for her, but the death sentence is a hefty punishment.
 
British woman sentenced to death in Bali

I know you will all know the story but thought I'd start a topic. So apparently Lindsay Sandiford has 24 hours before going up against a firing squad. So barbaric. Any thoughts?
 
No thoughts, just as she didnt have any thoughts/respect for the law/practices in that country.

This is along the right lines of punishment we need in the UK. Serves her right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom