82% of Thai convicts are in for drugs - now they can get their sentences reduced - "War on Drugs" failure highlighted

[giddyup]

19 minutes ago, Smithson said:

So it's a normal rural Thai family?

No, it's not. My parners family are all from rural Issaan, all hardworking people, not a drug addict or user among them.

[Smithson]

2 minutes ago, giddyup said:

No, it's not. My parners family are all from rural Issaan, all hardworking people, not a drug addict or user among them.

No smokers or drinkers?

[giddyup]

Just now, Smithson said:

No smokers or drinkers?

What does that have to do with anything? They have a party, alcohol is consumed, no different than anywhere else.

[Longwood50]

5 minutes ago, Bert got kinky said:

I would explain differences to you but i have neither the time nor the crayons

It would be "nice" if you pointed that out in the original post.  I am talking about LEGAL executions.  

From the sounds of the article which PS was 2004 or 17 years ago these "extra judicial" homicides were not entirely drug related. 

I am not for vigilante justice.  However I am totally for execution of those found "guilty" in court and proved beyond a reasonable doubt they are drug traffickers.   Touting that  3,000 people killed in 2004 in a program that has long since ended has proved that it does not stop today's drug problem is nonsensical.  But I have neither the time or crayons to explain that to you. 

 

[Smithson]

5 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

It would be "nice" if you pointed that out in the original post.  I am talking about LEGAL executions.  

From the sounds of the article which PS was 2004 or 17 years ago these "extra judicial" homicides were not entirely drug related. 

I am not for vigilante justice.  However I am totally for execution of those found "guilty" in court and proved beyond a reasonable doubt they are drug traffickers.   Touting that  3,000 people killed in 2004 in a program that has long since ended has proved that it does not stop today's drug problem is nonsensical.  But I have neither the time or crayons to explain that to you. 

 

I think you're the only one talking legal executions, it's not what I was referring to when I bought up the deaths. There is only one developed country in the world that still executes, doesn't seem to do much good, as it's also got the world's largest prison population and a massive drug problem. Some call it the Land of the Free, but they're joking.

 

Executing drug dealers didn't solve the problem, but for those who believe killing is the answer, the next logical step is to go extra judicial. Which didn't work here, but they still adopted it in the Philippines.

 

It's disturbing that people are so keen to see others dies over what is a health problem, while ignoring other successful strategies.

[Smithson]

32 minutes ago, giddyup said:

What does that have to do with anything? They have a party, alcohol is consumed, no different than anywhere else.

Alcohol? It's a drug (didn't you know?), probably the most damaging to society (not just the individual).

[Scott Tracy]

2 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

You want to control illegal drugs, you make the punishment severe enough to deter people from using the drugs and selling the drugs. 

To do otherwise is to trivialize the seriousness of the offense. 

But still, people make, sell and transport illegal drugs. Where there is a market, there will be people to fulfil it.  There is no conclusive that death sentences are a deterrent. Unless you know differently.

[MrJ2U]

YaBa and crystal meth is wreaking havoc in Thailand.

 

Its endemic in Issan.

 

 

 

 

[Longwood50]

30 minutes ago, Smithson said:

It's disturbing that people are so keen to see others dies over what is a health problem, while ignoring other successful strategies.

Oh you mean like the "enlightened" policies in the USA or perhaps the Netherlands.  

If you want to stop money laundering, you make the penalties for getting caught severe.  If you want to stop speeding you make the penalties severe.  If you want to stop drunk driving, you make the penalties severe.  And if you want to stop drug trafficking you make the punishment so severe that few will want to risk it. 

That is just common sense.  You ought to try that sometime too. 

[Longwood50]

3 minutes ago, Scott Tracy said:

But still, people make, sell and transport illegal drugs.

Yes there are those who want to make, sell and transport.  However there will be fewer of them and the price of drugs will rise as supplies are curtailed resulting in fewer people being addicted because there are fewer available drugs and the cost of those available is more than many can afford. 

 

[IvorBiggun2]

3 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

If you want to stop money laundering, you make the penalties for getting caught severe.  If you want to stop speeding you make the penalties severe.  If you want to stop drunk driving, you make the penalties severe.  And if you want to stop drug trafficking you make the punishment so severe that few will want to risk it. 

That is just common sense. 

In the US, and a few other countries, murder carries the death penalty but it doesn't stop people committing murder.

[Orinoco]

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

Are you saying these were executions?  If so, you are sadly mistaken.  In 7 decades there is a total of only 320 executions for ALL OFFENSES

 

Mate, go have a look on google about this in Thailand.

Some of us were here when it went on.

Not that long ago.

We are not on about executions by the court system.

 

 

 

[BostonRob2]

2 hours ago, mahtin said:

These are just the ones whose family couldn't come up with the few thousand Baht necessary to make the charges go away.

Pay up or lockup.

Drugs charges don't go away for a few thousand baht. Utter drivel. 

[Orinoco]

16 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

That is just common sense.  You ought to try that sometime too. 

Looks like you maybe lacking in this area. 

[thaichina]

34 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Yes there are those who want to make, sell and transport.  However there will be fewer of them and the price of drugs will rise as supplies are curtailed resulting in fewer people being addicted because there are fewer available drugs and the cost of those available is more than many can afford. 

 

You see, you explain exactly what you think work, and doesn t work for 50 years all around the world. Yet you want more of it...

[Bert got kinky]

37 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

No you are the one who brought up the idea that 3,000 deaths back in 2004 was somehow "proof" that tough laws such as Singapore's were not effective in the war on drugs.  

Perhaps in 2004 the government used the excuse of a war on drugs to have killings that were unrelated to drugs but that is an apples to oranges comparison. 

As stated several times, I don't give a <deleted> about the "rights" of drug traffickers.  I am however concerned with the lives and life's of those who do not want to suffer from the consequences of a permissive drug culture.  In the USA Chicago is a perfect example where shooting occur each day killing people including innocents because of waring drug traffickers.  That says nothing about the lives lost and ruined because unscrupulous drug traffickers are allowed to operate knowing at worst they get get thrown into prison for a few years. 

The country with the least problem per capita is Singapore.  The country with the toughest laws on drug trafficking is Singapore.  By contrast the countries in Europe such as the Netherlands that are the "most progressive" that is lax in terms of punishment of drug traffickers are the ones who have the biggest problems in their country with drug use. 

The question is, do you really want to stop drug trafficking.  If yes then you can not just slap them on the wrist and tell them they are bad people and expect them not to do it again.  The money in trafficking is just too large to ignore unless that person has to weigh the consequences of being caught and being executed.  

 

Realy, show me where I bought up 3,000 deaths.

I was correcting you (as most on this thread have) on your reply to Smithson.

At no time did I mention Singapore, their tough laws nor their effectiveness in the war on drugs.

 

So far everyone has refuted your posts as nonsence but you still try to make out that you have an idea what you are talking about.

Do you really believe that you are the only member on this board who knows anything, despite obviously not being here at the time of the extra judicial killings.

 

Don't bother replying, you have already  made enough of a fool of yourself.

 

 

[Orinoco]

18 minutes ago, Bert got kinky said:

Realy, show me where I bought up 3,000 deaths.

I was correcting you (as most on this thread have) on your reply to Smithson.

At no time did I mention Singapore, their tough laws nor their effectiveness in the war on drugs.

 

So far everyone has refuted your posts as nonsence but you still try to make out that you have an idea what you are talking about.

Do you really believe that you are the only member on this board who knows anything, despite obviously not being here at the time of the extra judicial killings.

 

Don't bother replying, you have already  made enough of a fool of yourself.

 

 

The worst day was when they loaded about 74 people 

hands tied behind there backs, like logs of wood in the back of a Truck, most just died of suffocation.  (outrageous behavior)

 

Ps could be wrong about the numbers, but loads died.

[mtls2005]

Hard to believe that 

 

arson; assault and battery; bribery; burglary; child abuse; counterfeiting; cybercrime; embezzlement; extortion; forgery; fraud; hijacking; homicide; incest; kidnapping; larceny; organized crime; perjury; piracy; prostitution; rape; robbery; sedition; smuggling; terrorism; theft; treason; usury; and white-collar crime

 

only account for 18%?

 

 

Something is wrong with this picture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Smithson]

42 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Oh you mean like the "enlightened" policies in the USA or perhaps the Netherlands.  

If you want to stop money laundering, you make the penalties for getting caught severe.  If you want to stop speeding you make the penalties severe.  If you want to stop drunk driving, you make the penalties severe.  And if you want to stop drug trafficking you make the punishment so severe that few will want to risk it. 

That is just common sense.  You ought to try that sometime too. 

I'm curious where your from to have such antiquated ideas that have long been given up on in most places because they are ineffective. Maybe it's your age?

[mikebike]

2 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

However I am totally for execution of those found "guilty" in court and proved beyond a reasonable doubt they are drug traffickers. 

Perfect. Let's start with the ones we don't even have to look for... Perdue pharma, I'm lookin' at you.

[mikebike]

4 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

You "kill" the drug dealers and severely punish those who are caught with illegal drugs.  The fact that 3,000 people died from overdose is not any sort of deterrent. 

You kill drug dealers and there is a line around the block to take their place. You legalize, tax and treat and there is no incentive for drug dealers.

[giddyup]

2 hours ago, Smithson said:

Alcohol? It's a drug (didn't you know?), probably the most damaging to society (not just the individual).

Yes, well it's legal, and not everyone who uses it is an alcoholic. Perhaps you want Prohibition to be re-introduced, after all that worked really well didn't it?

[mikebike]

2 minutes ago, giddyup said:

Yes, well it's legal, and not everyone who uses it is an alcoholic. Perhaps you want Prohibition to be re-introduced, after all that worked really well didn't it?

I think he is implying that everything should be treated like alcohol, not the other way around...

[Smithson]

1 hour ago, Orinoco said:

The worst day was when they loaded about 74 people 

hands tied behind there backs, like logs of wood in the back of a Truck, most just died of suffocation.  (outrageous behavior)

 

Ps could be wrong about the numbers, but loads died.

I think that's Tak Bai

[metisdead]

A post with content from the Bangkok Post has been removed as well as the replies:

 

26) The Bangkok Post and Phuketwan do not allow quotes from their news articles or other material to appear on ASEANNOW.com. Neither do they allow links to their publications. Posts from members containing quotes from or links to Bangkok Post or Phuketwan publications will be deleted from the forum.

 

Some inflammatory posts, baiting posts and the replies have been removed. 

[The Hammer2021]

The war on drugs is a war on the people carried out by the corrupt, by knaves and cynics.

[digger70]

6 hours ago, Smithson said:

This is simply wrong, a war on drugs here killed around 3,000 in as many months. Still plenty of drugs around.

The penalty isn't harsh enough yet ,Be serious No one forces people to take drugs 

Up the Ante  Harsher penalties are in order.

[daveAustin]

4 hours ago, Longwood50 said:

If you want to stop money laundering, you make the penalties for getting caught severe.  If you want to stop speeding you make the penalties severe.  If you want to stop drunk driving, you make the penalties severe.  And if you want to stop drug trafficking you make the punishment so severe that few will want to risk it.

Should make penalties for processing and selling alcohol severe too then since it is more harmful and causes more strife than all combined. Millions dead per year. 

Or, why not let people do what they want in a free world and have supply/quality controlled. People will still die of course but that’s what people do, but it will curtail the scumbag barons and pushers. Until humans have true free will we will not move on as a species. 

[Enoon]

Drug legalisation creates as many "problems" as it solves.

 

It encourages use and that adds to the damage caused by the currently legal drug.......alcohol.

 

Broader usage creates more problems with personal relationships. (No violence required)

 

Broader usage creates more problems relating to neglect and abuse of personal health and family responsibility..... health and social services get those. (No violence required)

 

Broader usage multiplies the problems that scare me.........those relating to "operator" errors. The big ones being transport of all kinds. The legal system and, once more, health services get those (No proactive/deliberate violence required, but there is still violence)

 

Does anyone think those sort of problems will actually diminish with greater access to a drug which is constantly excused (oversold), by its proselytisers, because of its "beneficial non-violence", while neglecting its other effects?

 

Alcohol, weed, whatever............drugs.

 

 

 

 

[Purdey]

18 hours ago, rosetintedspecs said:

Beer Chang and Singh don't want them around, even though in reality they are not competition for CRAFT beer at all.

No, because Thais aren't demanding craft beer. If they were don't you think the majors would want to make money from it?