Indonesian caught at Phuket airport with Bt15.6m in cocaine

[ICECOOL]

Kind of amusing that people still call for legalizing coke etc as the solution. We already have a number of legal drugs (alcohol tobacco pain killers) and they still cause massive problems from illegal production to massive health issues and tax avoidance. As for crying about the death penalty. Its a fact some countries have it. I have little sympathy for people who get caught in countries with it because its not a secret. As for people saying he was probably poor and needed the money I say there are millions of poorer people who not choose to carry drugs for a big payout.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Yes there are massive health problems, but vastly focused on the consumer, who own their own bodies.

Production, it is not a problem in itself, aside from perhaps some environmental issues, but the main problem with illegal production is that it is illegal - ie: unregulated.

In terms of tax, with one of the examples you mention, studies show that it is a huge net gain in terms of taxation. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-842X.1996.tb01074.x/abstract - probably similar reports regarding alcohol and I would suspect the same result.

Yes there would be people that try to work outside of legislation for the purpose of avoiding tax, but that's precisely how it works at the moment, except all of the trade avoids tax, instead of part of it.

As you might have guessed, I'm on the legalise and regulate wing of this

I do agree that people who smuggle in the current system have only themselves to blame though.

Edited April 21, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[cracker1]

There is something wrong with this story.

There are no Police in the background of the photo (or anywhere in the photo. and the man does not appear to be pointing at anything ?

[ICECOOL]

Yes there are massive health problems, but vastly focused on the consumer, who own their own bodies.

Production, it is not a problem in itself, aside from perhaps some environmental issues, but the main problem with illegal production is that it is illegal - ie: unregulated.

In terms of tax, with one of the examples you mention, studies show that it is a huge net gain in terms of taxation. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-842X.1996.tb01074.x/abstract - probably similar reports regarding alcohol and I would suspect the same result.

Yes there would be people that try to work outside of legislation for the purpose of avoiding tax, but that's precisely how it works at the moment, except all of the trade avoids tax, instead of part of it.

As you might have guessed, I'm on the legalise and regulate wing of this

I do agree that people who smuggle in the current system have only themselves to blame though.

Am sure nothing I say will change your attitude but fyi I dealt with illegal tobacco production first hand and it never stopped and included growing and importation from unregulated factories. If your happy for your kids to get access to unregulated tobacco alcohol drugs or whatever then thats fine.

What I am saying is just because you legalise something does not stop illegal and unregulated activity. It happens with tobacco alcohol many prescription drugs. If you legalised cocaine do you think cutting the product with dangerous substances would stop? It would be cheaper so more people would use it including younger and more vulnerable people. If they taxed it to increase the price etc then you would have the same problem you have with tobacco and alchohol (illegal production) so you have another substance to impact health on a large scale basis. The heath and social service systems cant cope now and you want to add cocaine and other crap.

I have friends who did drugs when younger and I can see the impact now as they age. That is an additional cost society will pay through extra care etc. The taxes collected no matter how much NEVER find their way to support the problem and even if they did ..why would you deliberately make something legal that you know will have a long term negative impact on society...oh I forgot they have already in the US....lets follow them

[Friendly Stranger]

With that much powder, would Thailand even consider...

I guess the shoe is on the other foot. It's your move Indonesia.

[jacko45k]

An old guy, most likely poor, got a family and kids to support, been trying to get ahead his whole life, manipulated into taking a huge, stupid risk for one payday that would have changed his family's life. Now a son, brother and father will be imprisoned for life in a hell hole due to the ridiculous and unnecessary war on drugs.

It has been 14 years since Portugal decriminalised all drugs. Drug abuse is down by half and drug related crime has also fallen massively.

Wake up people. Open your eyes. The war on drugs is always a war on the most oppressed and marginalised members of society. If the rich and powerful never profited and only the poor drug runners made well out of it, do you really think it would be illegal?

Decriminalising carrying drugs will reduce the drug related crimes statistics don't you think?

Similar to increasing the speed limit to 200 mph, would vastly reduce speeding tickets.

Portugal is hardly a roaring economic success story is it? Too lazy to pay their own way and pursue criminals it appears.

Edited April 21, 2015 by jacko45k

[lvr181]

He had flown to Singapore from Bogota, Colombia, the world capital of cocaine production and sales, and home to some of the world’s most powerful drug cartels.

Suicide

Police have stated that Jermani was due to deliver the drugs to a dealer in Khao Lak.

Why didn't the BIB let him deliver the drugs to Khao Lak and bust the top guy.

Any way death penalty would be appropriate.

The weird thing about your post is the obvious contradiction caused by your social conditioning and media manipulation of your mind.

You almost got it when you said: why didn't the BIB let him deliver the drugs to Khao Lak and bust the top guy..

You then failed by saying: Any way, death penalty would be appropriate.

Sit down and think about those two statements. Soon a light bulb will come on.

Imagine if he was your son, or your father.

Huh? Are you suggesting that a criminal, who is a son or father is a reason not to be punished? A criminal is a criminal is a criminal, full stop!

But I am surprised he was not picked up in Singapore or leaving Bogota. Could have been a bomb he was carrying to be detonated on board the aircraft. Are these airports that lax with security screening?

[SoFarAndNear]

Interesting what knowledge of drugs many here are showing...

I would have guess a kilo of cocaine about 100.000USD

[canman]

He's lucky they didn't catch him in Singapore.

Maybe not. Singapore has quietly reformed it's prison system, I would much rather be incarerated in Singapore than Thailand.

Singapore has also quietly reformed the death penalty. Two were hung last August but they were the first since 2011.

[rwdrwdrwd]

Yes there are massive health problems, but vastly focused on the consumer, who own their own bodies.

Production, it is not a problem in itself, aside from perhaps some environmental issues, but the main problem with illegal production is that it is illegal - ie: unregulated.

In terms of tax, with one of the examples you mention, studies show that it is a huge net gain in terms of taxation. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-842X.1996.tb01074.x/abstract - probably similar reports regarding alcohol and I would suspect the same result.

Yes there would be people that try to work outside of legislation for the purpose of avoiding tax, but that's precisely how it works at the moment, except all of the trade avoids tax, instead of part of it.

As you might have guessed, I'm on the legalise and regulate wing of this

I do agree that people who smuggle in the current system have only themselves to blame though.

Am sure nothing I say will change your attitude but fyi I dealt with illegal tobacco production first hand and it never stopped and included growing and importation from unregulated factories. If your happy for your kids to get access to unregulated tobacco alcohol drugs or whatever then thats fine.

What I am saying is just because you legalise something does not stop illegal and unregulated activity. It happens with tobacco alcohol many prescription drugs. If you legalised cocaine do you think cutting the product with dangerous substances would stop? It would be cheaper so more people would use it including younger and more vulnerable people. If they taxed it to increase the price etc then you would have the same problem you have with tobacco and alchohol (illegal production) so you have another substance to impact health on a large scale basis. The heath and social service systems cant cope now and you want to add cocaine and other crap.

I have friends who did drugs when younger and I can see the impact now as they age. That is an additional cost society will pay through extra care etc. The taxes collected no matter how much NEVER find their way to support the problem and even if they did ..why would you deliberately make something legal that you know will have a long term negative impact on society...oh I forgot they have already in the US....lets follow them

I think the crux of my stance is that the war on drugs has completely failed, and that it is better to have an attempt at regulation and to earn income from taxation than to have all consumption be from unregulated untaxed sources. The world followed the US into this war in the first place, so the fact they are slowly backing out of it (to huge taxation game, in the case of marijuana, I should add) shows just how ill-advised it was.

I think it's a strawman argument to suggest ongoing unregulated production and distribution as an argument against legalisation and regulation, given that the current legal position promotes exactly this, and it's the situation we are presently in. Just because legalisation would not stop illegal production doesn't suggest to me that legalisation should simply be off the cards. Despite an ongoing unregulated black market, stats show that smokers are a 2x net contributor in terms of tax, that includes healthcare costs, not sure why any other drug would be different.

The illicit trade in cut tobacco, or even alcohol, is rather a standalone scenario when juxtaposed with alcohol or illegal drugs, counterfeit cigarettes are successful in parallel with legal ones because tobacco has a subtle immediate effect and consumers do not notice a vast drop in quality alongside a vast drop in cost. This is less so the case with alcohol and even less with many other drugs, and is why the instances of fake alcohol, whilst they do exist, are far less than those for cigarettes.

In the case of Cocaine, it costs less than a dollar a gram to produce, and is sold (bearing in mind that it is presently cut 40 - 50%) for $100. If this was properly regulated and taxed, it would either lead to huge tax gains if distributed at the current value, with a noticeably better (both in effect and side effects) end product compared to the current product out there, or it would serve to drive down the retail cost and render the illicit market far, far less lucrative. It would also provide oversight and the ability to monitor usage and addiction.

Legalisation would also vastly reduce the number or incarcerations (50% of prisoners are in for drug offences http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/war-on-drugs-prisons-infographic_n_4914884.html and added to this would be a good portion of the 8% that are in for robbery and burglary). Prison is extremely expensive to the taxpayer.

Finally, on the point of 'long term negative impact on society' - I don't think somebody that uses drugs, beyond the actions that occur as a direct result of them being illegal, are an especially negative impact. The vast majority of the current negative impact is imo a direct result of illegality and lack of regulation. I certainly don't care if someone takes coke, so long as they don't burgle my house to pay for it, or drive around on it. - beyond that, I see it as their body and their choice, and that alowing them to do it in exchange for tax revenue and a reduced prison cost can only be a positive thing.

Edited April 22, 2015 by rwdrwdrwd

[kennypowers]

Yes there are massive health problems, but vastly focused on the consumer, who own their own bodies.

Production, it is not a problem in itself, aside from perhaps some environmental issues, but the main problem with illegal production is that it is illegal - ie: unregulated.

In terms of tax, with one of the examples you mention, studies show that it is a huge net gain in terms of taxation. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-842X.1996.tb01074.x/abstract - probably similar reports regarding alcohol and I would suspect the same result.

Yes there would be people that try to work outside of legislation for the purpose of avoiding tax, but that's precisely how it works at the moment, except all of the trade avoids tax, instead of part of it.

As you might have guessed, I'm on the legalise and regulate wing of this

I do agree that people who smuggle in the current system have only themselves to blame though.

Am sure nothing I say will change your attitude but fyi I dealt with illegal tobacco production first hand and it never stopped and included growing and importation from unregulated factories. If your happy for your kids to get access to unregulated tobacco alcohol drugs or whatever then thats fine.

What I am saying is just because you legalise something does not stop illegal and unregulated activity. It happens with tobacco alcohol many prescription drugs. If you legalised cocaine do you think cutting the product with dangerous substances would stop? It would be cheaper so more people would use it including younger and more vulnerable people. If they taxed it to increase the price etc then you would have the same problem you have with tobacco and alchohol (illegal production) so you have another substance to impact health on a large scale basis. The heath and social service systems cant cope now and you want to add cocaine and other crap.

I have friends who did drugs when younger and I can see the impact now as they age. That is an additional cost society will pay through extra care etc. The taxes collected no matter how much NEVER find their way to support the problem and even if they did ..why would you deliberately make something legal that you know will have a long term negative impact on society...oh I forgot they have already in the US....lets follow them

I think the crux of my stance is that the war on drugs has completely failed, and that it is better to have an attempt at regulation and to earn income from taxation than to have all consumption be from unregulated untaxed sources. The world followed the US into this war in the first place, so the fact they are slowly backing out of it (to huge taxation game, in the case of marijuana, I should add) shows just how ill-advised it was.

I think it's a strawman argument to suggest ongoing unregulated production and distribution as an argument against legalisation and regulation, given that the current legal position promotes exactly this, and it's the situation we are presently in. Just because legalisation would not stop illegal production doesn't suggest to me that legalisation should simply be off the cards. Despite an ongoing unregulated black market, stats show that smokers are a 2x net contributor in terms of tax, that includes healthcare costs, not sure why any other drug would be different.

The illicit trade in cut tobacco, or even alcohol, is rather a standalone scenario when juxtaposed with alcohol or illegal drugs, counterfeit cigarettes are successful in parallel with legal ones because tobacco has a subtle immediate effect and consumers do not notice a vast drop in quality alongside a vast drop in cost. This is less so the case with alcohol and even less with many other drugs, and is why the instances of fake alcohol, whilst they do exist, are far less than those for cigarettes.

In the case of Cocaine, it costs less than a dollar a gram to produce, and is sold (bearing in mind that it is presently cut 40 - 50%) for $100. If this was properly regulated and taxed, it would either lead to huge tax gains if distributed at the current value, with a noticeably better (both in effect and side effects) end product compared to the current product out there, or it would serve to drive down the retail cost and render the illicit market far, far less lucrative. It would also provide oversight and the ability to monitor usage and addiction.

Legalisation would also vastly reduce the number or incarcerations (50% of prisoners are in for drug offences http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/war-on-drugs-prisons-infographic_n_4914884.html and added to this would be a good portion of the 8% that are in for robbery and burglary). Prison is extremely expensive to the taxpayer.

Finally, on the point of 'long term negative impact on society' - I don't think somebody that uses drugs, beyond the actions that occur as a direct result of them being illegal, are an especially negative impact. The vast majority of the current negative impact is imo a direct result of illegality and lack of regulation. I certainly don't care if someone takes coke, so long as they don't burgle my house to pay for it, or drive around on it. - beyond that, I see it as their body and their choice, and that alowing them to do it in exchange for tax revenue and a reduced prison cost can only be a positive thing.

After reading all those Nazi style "execute him" posts yesterday, it is so refreshing to read this and be reminded that amidst all the ignorant, self-serving, bigoted, 'bitter at their lives' foreigners living here there are a solid few decent humans with an ounce of intelligence and a vision for a fairer, more compassionate world.

[NamKangMan]

Let me guess, this Indo guy life's is expendable and not worth the chair he sits on, he's a smuggler's

fodder who couldn't give a toss what will happened to him, as he's only the mule here....

Yes. Looks like Grandfather has taken a red card fo the team.

The family in Indo has probably got a new piece of land, better school for the kids, maybe even a new motorbike, for one of them to "do the run."

Thai Customs may have caught the drugs, but not much else.

[Docno]

Something strange about this story... He flies from Colombia (a major drug producer) to Singapore (a technologically advanced country having one of the strictest anti-drug policies in the world)... not a place I'd choose for a stop-over if I was in his line of business. Then Singapore, for all of its hard-ass policies and technological wizardry, fails to detect the concealed drugs; however, they are detected at lil' ol' Phuket airport. Half the time when I fly into Singapore from Thailand (about 6 times a year), all passengers have to go through a full screening upon leaving the plane... I imagine that stowed luggage is also carefully checked. And I would suspect that any plane coming from Colombia would attract extra interest from the authorities. Since the destination was Phuket, there must have been a change of planes and transfer of luggage, at which point the luggage would have been closely checked (I've read previously that many smugglers arrested in Singapore are only in transit). What are the chances that someone in Phuket gave the police a heads-up on this...

[LivinginKata]

Something strange about this story... He flies from Colombia (a major drug producer) to Singapore (a technologically advanced country having one of the strictest anti-drug policies in the world)... not a place I'd choose for a stop-over if I was in his line of business. Then Singapore, for all of its hard-ass policies and technological wizardry, fails to detect the concealed drugs; however, they are detected at lil' ol' Phuket airport. Half the time when I fly into Singapore from Thailand (about 6 times a year), all passengers have to go through a full screening upon leaving the plane... I imagine that stowed luggage is also carefully checked. And I would suspect that any plane coming from Colombia would attract extra interest from the authorities. Since the destination was Phuket, there must have been a change of planes and transfer of luggage, at which point the luggage would have been closely checked (I've read previously that many smugglers arrested in Singapore are only in transit). What are the chances that someone in Phuket gave the police a heads-up on this...

I assume he was 'in transit' passing through Singapore. You really think hold baggage would be screened ? I don't think so.

[jackanapes]

its good to see the police are doing their duty arresting drug smugglers good luck to them.