Russian siblings’ bodies recovered in Chon Buri forest

Dead men walking. Hopefully

I believe that anyone who commits the unprovoked, premeditated murder of an innocent person forfeits all human rights—including the rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture. All of them.

By this, I mean the deliberate and unlawful killing of an innocent, nonthreatening person without justification, excuse, serious provocation, or substantial mitigating circumstances. I am not referring to every unlawful killing or even every act legally classified as murder. A person who kills the man who raped his daughter is not morally equivalent to someone who calmly plans and carries out the murder of an innocent stranger.

I also think states need to handle unprovoked, premeditated murder differently than they have. Once a person has been proven beyond doubt to have committed such a murder, the state routinely violates that person’s right to liberty and sometimes takes their life, while continuing to recognize them legally as human.

Instead, upon conviction for the unprovoked, premeditated murder of an innocent person, the subject should have his or her citizenship revoked, accompanied by a formal declaration that the subject has forfeited legal humanity and, therefore, all human rights. The subject would become property of the state, no different in legal status from a government desk or chair. An inventory barcode would then be branded onto the subject’s forehead.

Yes, this would be permanent and irrevocable—but so was the destruction of the innocent life, or lives, taken by the murderer. Anyone who argues that such a murderer can or should be rehabilitated and eventually allowed to return to a normal life is morally bereft, a complete idiot, and should be slapped. The life that was taken represents an infinite debt to society and humanity, one that can never be repaid.

Once a state adopts this framework for dealing with unprovoked, premeditated murder, however, it creates an opportunity for some good to come from the tragedy.

Medical science currently relies heavily on animal experimentation in its search for treatments for human conditions. Yet animals often respond differently to treatments than humans do, frequently enough to create a serious problem. A new treatment is generally tested on human volunteers only after it has been shown to be safe and effective in animals. As a result, potentially valuable treatments that might be safe and effective in humans may be abandoned because they were either unsafe or ineffective in the test animals.

This problem could be addressed by performing such testing on convicted murderers who fall within this narrowly defined category. The government could loan its property to pharmaceutical companies and research institutions, with a portion of any resulting profits going to the victims’ families. The ethical concerns that would normally prohibit such activities would be resolved by the fact that the test subjects were no longer legally human. They would, of course, remain biologically human and would therefore still be scientifically valuable test subjects, even though their legal status had changed.

The reduction in human pain and suffering made possible by treatments developed through testing on these murderers could be substantial. It could allow at least some good to come from the damage they caused.

If a murderer survived a lifetime of numerous testing programs and eventually became too old to remain scientifically useful, the state could dispose of its property as it would an old chair—by tossing it into a wood chipper.

Disclaimer: I originally wrote this entire post in my own words. I then asked AI to clean up the grammar and wording while retaining my ideas and voice. All points are mine and I stand by them until someone changes my mind with a rational argument.

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by Sup3rfarang
Clarified definition of murderer. Added AI use disclaimer

So the killers have confessed but do we know why the two left at 4 AM for the 7-Eleven?

3 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Listen, Thailand ist quite safe compared to other so called developed countries as US calls itself.

Daily shootings and killings is in US genes, not in Buddhist's

It's a part of a mental illness, and nothing to do with US genes. People kill others here, and have been all along, for trivial matters. Daily shooting and killings happen here, along with monthly mass shootings. Yes, the US has more of them, but it happens quite a lot here, and has been for centuries. Killing people has nothing to do with Buddhism but many aren't practicing it here, especially these four examples of human garbage. Life isn't as precious here as it is in the west. Karma and detachment, or fatalism.

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by fredwiggy

UPDATE

Pattaya court denies bail to four murder suspects

1 hour ago, VocalNeal said:

So the killers have confessed but do we know why the two left at 4 AM for the 7-Eleven?

is it relevant whether they wanted to buy a drink or a snack or pay an electric bill?

Perhaps they told their mother, as she seemed to know where they had gone.

But also, at their age, they might have told her they were going to 7, but actually wanted to go clubbing.

I mean, it may never be known why they were on that road at that particular time, but whatever the reason, I can’t see that it should have resulted in their deaths in this fashion.

1 hour ago, VocalNeal said:

So the killers have confessed but do we know why the two left at 4 AM for the 7-Eleven?

What a silly question....the only ones that can answer that are unable to...

4 hours ago, riverhigh said:

"The aunt said she knew nothing about police uniforms or equipment reportedly found at the home, and did not know whether anyone was behind the alleged crimes. She also said: "Pong seems to have been born to kill.""

This important information was not mentioned in the original article. Impersonating an officer in uniform and equipment for the purpose of commiting murder is SIGNIFICANT. Aunt's comment will be SIGNIFICANT in court. Prime Minister and Minister of Interior to inspect the scene is SIGNIFICANT too. Strong case for the death penalty under Aggravated Murder (Section 289).

What is also significant, is that it was mentioned that Pong sold drugs on behalf of a policeman...

Off topic posts about US crime figures removed

30 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Killing people has nothing to do with Buddhism

That's what I said. But killings are more with Christianity as it is in US. So in matters of religion I guess Buddhism is much more advanced and developed.

But I agree with you.

Scumbags and riffraff everywhere up to the highest ranks

1 minute ago, newbee2022 said:

That's what I said. But killings are more with Christianity as it is in US. So in matters of religion I guess Buddhism is much more advanced and developed.

But I agree with you.

Scumbags and riffraff everywhere up to the highest ranks

Christianity isn't the reason for killings in this modern time. It's always been a mental issue, and that starts at home with abusive and or neglective parenting. Religions are supposed to be peaceful. Idiots twist things around to suit their narratives.

In this case, abusive parenting then raised by an aunt, who likely came along much too late to turn thinking around, as she herself said they won't help with bail. Life means less when you're beaten by parents, thinking it's a normal thing.

10 hours ago, Woke to Sounds said:

TH is not so safe anymore.

I always counsel my clients to have a plan B and plan C that involves leaving Thailand.

The two scumbag killers ought to get the death penalty.

Rubbish comment. Gruesome murders happen all over the world.

Serial killers.

The police should be looking hard at their location history for missing people and unsolved murders.

They can start with recovering the firearm used and looking for ballistic matches.

Deeply saddening outcome, albeit not unexpected after their motorcycle had been found buried. RIP.

2 minutes ago, Caldera said:

Deeply saddening outcome, albeit not unexpected after their motorcycle had been found buried. RIP.

Yeah after they found the bike, it became irrational to have any hope.

R.I.P. kids.

I hope the worlds press gets into this one.

Edited 11 hours ago11 hr by rocketboy2

4 minutes ago, rocketboy2 said:

R.I.P. kids.

I hope the worlds press gets into this one.

I hope the worlds press gets into this one.

How would it help these children, their families and friends?

We all know what the "world's press" is!

It turns out that his ex-wife has been talking to the police saying he once dug a hole and told her to get in it and she pleaded with him not to do it.

She never mentioned it due to fear he would kill her

He would watch all the crazy beheading/torture videos and made her watch them

He told her he wants to kill and bury someone years ago but she didn't think he would

It had nothing to do with wanting the bike .both of them should get the death penalty maybe Japan death row style and you never know until 30 minutes before when it's your day.

This is all so sad. So pointless. Poor youngsters. And it looks like this bunch just killed willy nilly whenever they felt short changed by life.

Even as an opponent of capital punishment, there are moments where I think a case could easily be made for extremely cruel and unusual punishment, stretched out over an inordinately extended period of time (I'm talking weeks here at least), after the injection of pain enhancing drugs, which ultimately leads to a miserable, lonely and inhumane death in the deepest possible screaming agony and isolation.

10 hours ago, smew said:

How does it happen? How were these animals released from jail before?

Which parole board done this crime?

It isn't like the West.

In Thailand, a fixed-term prison sentence can often be reduced through a combination of good behaviour remission and royal amnesties granted on occasions such as the King's or Queen's birthday.

Prisoners are therefore given a release date, although that date may change if they become eligible for sentence reductions.

In some cases, particularly in more recent years, offenders have also been released under home detention with curfews and electronic monitoring. Former Prime Minister Thaksin is a well-known example of this.

However, given the seriousness of these men's previous offences, they would not have been eligible for those types of early release arrangements.

We do not know, and it has not been publicly stated, exactly how long he spent in prison, but considering the severity of his previous crimes, it would almost certainly have been a substantial period.

Edited 7 hours ago7 hr by Scouse123

8 hours ago, flaming dragon said:

To paraphrase George Carlin "think of how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of the people out there are more stupid than that". These murderers must be at the bottom end of the scale of human intelligence to think that they'd get away with killing foreign kids. There's a reason the boy was hogtied and the young lady's hands were bound behind her back but her legs were free and it wasn't for ease of transportation.

Yeah,

Bearing in mind their past offences and track records.

That was in my thoughts too, and I wondered if the RTP were keeping a lid on any of those possible aspects with a view to protecting the tourism numbers. Let's see what the autopsy says, and hope that isn't a whitewash or gloss over.

Without sounding flippant (because I am genuinely gutted by the senseless deaths of two kids starting out in life), they can't find a Burmese scapegoat for this one!

3 hours ago, BusyB said:

This is all so sad. So pointless. Poor youngsters. And it looks like this bunch just killed willy nilly whenever they felt short changed by life.

Even as an opponent of capital punishment, there are moments where I think a case could easily be made for extremely cruel and unusual punishment, stretched out over an inordinately extended period of time (I'm talking weeks here at least), after the injection of pain enhancing drugs, which ultimately leads to a miserable, lonely and inhumane death in the deepest possible screaming agony and isolation.

Yes,

Some argue about the length of time people spend on death row in the USA before being executed. I know it's expensive, but I'm all for it, as those on death row are in isolation and have very limited communication with the outside and are kept segregated for years.

Let this filth stew and stew before carrying out a death sentence.

I would make sure there were no respite such as TVs or anything, the bare minimum would be given to survive.

That can be achieved in US prisons with the space and Super max jails etc.

Unfortunately, with the wimps in government in Europe and human rights bull<deleted>, etc it's not possible in the EU or the UK.

14 hours ago, Chivas said:

Russians aren't known to be tolerable at the best of times

Really?

I think this is an invalid generalization.

I find some of their greatest composers to be quite tolerable.

1 hour ago, Beat666 said:

I reckon, that these evil criminals won`t survive very long in prison. The inmates will take care of them and hand down their own sentence on them.

Cowardly killing children will not be tolerated by the inmates. It`s just sick and evil.

I think you're overestimating the code of honor in these institutions. It wasn't toddlers who were murdered, but young people. These prisons are full of scumbags of the same ilk. I think the majority of their fellow scumbags couldn't care less.

8 hours ago, Sup3rfarang said:

I believe that anyone who commits the unprovoked, premeditated murder of an innocent person forfeits all human rights—including the rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture. All of them.

By this, I mean the deliberate and unlawful killing of an innocent, nonthreatening person without justification, excuse, serious provocation, or substantial mitigating circumstances. I am not referring to every unlawful killing or even every act legally classified as murder. A person who kills the man who raped his daughter is not morally equivalent to someone who calmly plans and carries out the murder of an innocent stranger.

I also think states need to handle unprovoked, premeditated murder differently than they have. Once a person has been proven beyond doubt to have committed such a murder, the state routinely violates that person’s right to liberty and sometimes takes their life, while continuing to recognize them legally as human.

Instead, upon conviction for the unprovoked, premeditated murder of an innocent person, the subject should have his or her citizenship revoked, accompanied by a formal declaration that the subject has forfeited legal humanity and, therefore, all human rights. The subject would become property of the state, no different in legal status from a government desk or chair. An inventory barcode would then be branded onto the subject’s forehead.

Yes, this would be permanent and irrevocable—but so was the destruction of the innocent life, or lives, taken by the murderer. Anyone who argues that such a murderer can or should be rehabilitated and eventually allowed to return to a normal life is morally bereft, a complete idiot, and should be slapped. The life that was taken represents an infinite debt to society and humanity, one that can never be repaid.

Once a state adopts this framework for dealing with unprovoked, premeditated murder, however, it creates an opportunity for some good to come from the tragedy.

Medical science currently relies heavily on animal experimentation in its search for treatments for human conditions. Yet animals often respond differently to treatments than humans do, frequently enough to create a serious problem. A new treatment is generally tested on human volunteers only after it has been shown to be safe and effective in animals. As a result, potentially valuable treatments that might be safe and effective in humans may be abandoned because they were either unsafe or ineffective in the test animals.

This problem could be addressed by performing such testing on convicted murderers who fall within this narrowly defined category. The government could loan its property to pharmaceutical companies and research institutions, with a portion of any resulting profits going to the victims’ families. The ethical concerns that would normally prohibit such activities would be resolved by the fact that the test subjects were no longer legally human. They would, of course, remain biologically human and would therefore still be scientifically valuable test subjects, even though their legal status had changed.

The reduction in human pain and suffering made possible by treatments developed through testing on these murderers could be substantial. It could allow at least some good to come from the damage they caused.

If a murderer survived a lifetime of numerous testing programs and eventually became too old to remain scientifically useful, the state could dispose of its property as it would an old chair—by tossing it into a wood chipper.

Disclaimer: I originally wrote this entire post in my own words. I then asked AI to clean up the grammar and wording while retaining my ideas and voice. All points are mine and I stand by them until someone changes my mind with a rational argument.

too long to read

sad, not the ending I was hoping for :( wonder why they both went out so late at night?

10 minutes ago, vangrop said:

too long to read

“The person who won’t read has no advantage over one who can’t.”