The death penalty is always a touchy subject so I'll try and ask this as carefully as possible.

Would the Australian publics reaction to this be different if the person invovled was an Australian convicted of the rape and murder of a child in America?

Yes. Though they would be wrong. A child raping priest has as much right to his life than you or I.

Wasn't the death penalty only recently re-introduced for drug related offences?

-PB

Yep lol, if anything the Death penalty just drives up the price of the product due to risk factors :lol:

-PB

The reason why this is generating such an intense public reaction is because:

1. The death penalty is wrong on principal
2. The men have successfully been rehabilitated
3. Their crime was minor in comparison.

For the hypothetical you suggested above, only number 1 would apply and so the reaction would be less intense, but we should still oppose it.

There is an Australian man who has recently been arrested in the Philippines who is charged with torturing and killing small children and running an internet child porn ring. Some in the Philippines are calling for the death penalty to be re-instated.

I'm sorry but someone who does that shit has not right to walk anywhere on this earth even in a prison.

Its hard to think of a worse crime, but a principle is a principle. He'll probably get killed in jail anyway.

Definitely not a black and white situation..

I am against the death penalty for the most part (extreme acts such as serial killing is open to debate for me) however a few things at play here.

1. What were the legal obligations of the AFP to tip Indonesia off about this? I would assume as soon as they found out they would have had to raise the issue. Knowing Indonesia's general disdain for drugs this would have been a priority issue that Indonesia would not have taken the news lightly if Australia allowed drug smugglers to successfully leave.
2. The entire Bali 9 knew what they were doing and knew what the penalty was. In the eye of the law, ignorance does not hold up very well.
3. The ringleaders have been held for 10 years and appear to have contributed to rehab programs. These guys that were 23 and 20 when committing the crime, are now 33 and 30. Plenty of time to mature. For all of this to go to waste is at best a shame.
4. Widodo is definitely no Bambang, and his hard-line stance against drugs can be seen as both a follow through on ensuring smugglers are deterred against going through Indonesia and flexing his muscle to the world. Though it may work, the reaction will be very interesting to follow.

I am going to say my view is "it's an unfortunate situation that for better or worse I hope is resolved soon"

I can sleep well knowing you've delegated to yourself the task of deciding who deserves to live or not.

I have less sympathy for these guys because they were the ringleaders of the op. Age and ignorance is no excuse. Apparently they had smuggled drugs numerous times from Indonesia so this was definitely not a one off mind snap, they were part of an international drug syndicate importing large quantities of the most devastating addictive drug of all; heroin.

Not sure if they "deserve" death but can't blame Indonesia for putting them to death when they knew exactly what the law was and they through their own choices and actions walked straight into the fire. It's great they've rehabilitated themselves but even mass murderers can theoretically rehabilitate, it doesn't mean that justice still shouldn't be done.

Funny how in countries who practice the religion of peace there seems to be a lot of killing going down.....kill them if they are gay..kill them if they are adulterers. ...kill them if they are blasphemors. .....kill them if the don't agree with my beliefs.......probably the best thing is to kill them for being uneducated and ignorant....

None of these things apply to Indonesia.

Perhaps not specifically ....but the general theme of capital punishment being acceptable is

Sleep with another man's wife? Kill them
Have oral or anal sex? Kill them
Be a married woman and don't cry out when being raped? Kill her
Not a virgin at the time of her wedding? Kill her
Accused of practising magic? Kill them
Kidnap someone? Kill them
Worship another deity? Kill them
Curse your deity, or take your deity's name in vain? Kill them
Curse a parent? Kill them

It's sure a shame all those white Christians weren't culled for being uneducated and ignorant a millennia or so ago, isn't it.

Drawing a long bow to bring Islam into the picture.

There are plenty of non-Islamic states that retain the death penalty for crime. USA, Japan, China, India, Thailand and Vietnam for example.

Also quite funny how Indonesia are strong advocates against capital punishment of their own citizens in foreign countries

The death penalty is an archaic and ineffective form of punishment, and is believed to escalate crimes rather than prevent them ("I'm going to get killed if I get caught, so I might as well kill the victim of my crime so I'm less likely to get caught. It's not like the punishment could be any different." )

It's irreversible and only serves as a vehicle for revenge (it costs more on average to execute a prisoner in the US than it does to keep them in prison for life, so it's of no financial benefit.)

Regardless of the severity of the crime, capital punishment has no place in modern society. Sadly when some of the most powerful nations in the world practice it, it's difficult to convince smaller nations that it isn't right.

Edited by Scoll: 6/3/2015 01:10:06 PM

You could say the same thing about jail couldn't you (I'm going to go to jail if I get caught, so I might as well kill the victim of my crime so I'm less likely to get caught"). Should be ban jail as an archaic and ineffective form of punishment? Is really denying one's freedom and socialising them with other like minded crooks the best way to rehabilitate them?



I don't know why some people are so outraged by the state for killing the guilty, and apparently less so when the guilty kills an innocent. May be because as the state is elected by the public, the public feels implicated in the killing of an individual, and naturally this causes people distress. Capital punishment should be used sparingly and only in response to the most heinous crime, such as first degree premeditated murder. Although it may not deter crime, it is the fitting punishment for heinous crimes where punishments like life sentences don't deliver the right amount of justice for the victims and their families. When someone takes a life and all that's taken away is their freedom that's not doing justice.

If nothing else can convince, I really find murderers and such fascinating. Keep the bastards alive and just study them.

Because what compels someone to kill another human is something that needs to be minimalised.

Bzzt, nope. Jail terms have varying degrees of severity. Death has one degree. "I'm going to jail for 2-5 years" is nowhere near on par with "I'm going to jail for the rest of my life". The prison system is heavily flawed, particularly in the US, but it reforms far more people than executions do.


How about people are against anyone killing anybody? Being a state power shouldn't give you any power over life and death within the state above that of a citizen. Plus being adjudged guilty doesn't mean the verdict was correct. The state, as with individuals, is fallible.

Your "equitable justice" argument is bullshit too, give up your freedom and see how you enjoy being confined for the rest of your life. Death is a straight up end of consciousness which is hardly equitable to what the families of victims will suffer through the rest of their lives. If anything, proponents of equitable justice should be all about prolonging the suffering of offenders.

Your armchair psychology is patently flawed, but I'm hardly surprised.

Edited by Scoll: 6/3/2015 03:18:30 PM

Heaven forbid that we expect the state to be a model citizen and therefore be better than a criminal that commits murder :roll:

The recidivism rate in the US is about 70%, it actually churns more criminals back into society than it does reform people. I can totally see the logic of getting free food, free accommodation and hanging out with crooks all day being conducive to rehabilitation. Why would a death sentence be more of an incentive to commit a murder than life imprisonment, with possibly parole in x years? If already facing a lengthy jail term taking a punt on killing the victim in order to avoid capture may be more incentive than the marginal "escalation" to their sentence if they get convicted of murder.



I'm confused by the mix messages you're sending. On one hand you argue the state is fallible and wrongly executes people, on the other hand you argue prison is a worse sentence than death. Why then if the state is fallible is it OK to burden potentially innocent people to prolonged suffering and anguish (no doubt magnified by their innocence) but not mere straight up painless end of consciousness? If indeed jail is the worse punishment, wouldn't death be more humane?

If you're against anybody killing anybody, are you against going to war too? You have to be absolute about these sorts of things rather than cherry picking your morality. I'm against killing too but some crimes are so heinous, do depraved, the only reasonable, fair punishment is death. Call it retribution, revenge, eye for an eye, whatever you want, but life imprisonment is a soft, weak sentence for someone who commits multiple murder or rapes and kills and child. They might not get their "freedom" but they can still do more than a dead child can; play pool, get an education, breathe oxygen, eat, drink, reminisce, watch tv, hope for release some day. Life, even behind bars, is better than death, and so life granted can't be considered equitable when life is taken.

The difference is the murderer is guilty while their victim isn't

Its not that cut and dry rusty.

TLDR not sure if anyone has mentioned that the most severe form of punishment in any culture/time period is life in isolation, not exile not death but locking someone in a room and throwing the key away
Its a very grey area calling isolation imprisonment humane but a death sentence inhumane

^ this . Hell some people in jail in america who have been in long term isolation and end up getting realeased end up in the mental ward of hospitals as being isolated has made them a shell of themselves

Revenge or retribution as a motivation for punishment is very bad.

The role of the prison system is to protect the public first, to rehabilitate the offender second and to act as a deterrent third.

Free west papau?

Justice is just a more palatable way of saying revenge.