This is awful.

I think they will shoot him.


Quote:

SCOTT Rush, the young Australian on death row in a Bali prison for drug smuggling, yesterday pleaded with Indonesian authorities to spare him the horror of death by firing squad, telling a panel of judges he frequently thought about dying in a hail of bullets. The emotional testimony from a deeply apologetic Rush came as the judges overruled objections from prosecutors and allowed Rush's defence team to call witnesses, paving the way for Australian Federal Police Deputy Commissioner Michael Phelan to make an unprecedented appearance in a foreign court on behalf of Rush. Rush was arrested more than five years ago with heroin strapped to his body at Denpasar airport. His father, Lee Rush, had attempted to stop him from making the highly suspicious trip to Bali by alerting the AFP and begging it to intervene...........

http://www.theage.com.au/national/remorseful-rush-pleads-for-his-life-in-bali-court-20100826-13u5o.html?autostart=1

firing squad is a pretty bad arse way to be executed

i dont think i would want it any other way

if they do that they are going to create a lot of ill-feeling among Australians who abhor capital punishment.
When it comes to stuff like this, that is one thing that Australians have a long memory about, and although largely unspoken, it will reach from the community level right up through the government ranks.
Australia holds a humanitarian position regarding punishments for crime.
It is a cornerstone of Australian culture.

The problem I see though is the complete hypocrisy of some in Australia - the media included.

The same people who lauded the Indonesian death penalty when Amrozi and co were given death sentences by the authorities abhor the very same system which has handed admitted drugs criminals the sentence.

you don't actually know if that was the case.
and the severity of the crimes in each case are vastly different as well.
if amrozi had done that in Australia he would not have been executed.

Actually, people in the situation of Rush in particular would be particularly useful to Australia. The Australian government should have been saying to the Indonesians for years now that Indonesia should not be having to foot the bill for Australians in their prisons where the crime is alleged to have arisen in Australia (eg drug importation). In those cases, where an Indonesian sentence was imposed, the Australian government should have invited the return of those prisoners to Australia to serve their sentences, where they could also act as ongoing "anti drug ambassadors", as Scott Rush now wants to be.

It would be a very good ongoing deterrent to others who might be like minded in Australia.

Andrei, I have a problem equating Amrozi and his murderous pals with Rush, a dumb mule.  Maybe, you can assist me deal with that?  Do you see any distinction?

Aussie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:43pm:

Andrei, I have a problem equating Amrozi and his murderous pals with Rush, a dumb mule.  Maybe, you can assist me deal with that?  Do you see any distinction?

To you he is a dumb mule.
To others, me included, he was complicit in a drug running scenario which would have seen more drugs deliberately brought into the country and to blight further lives.

How was he dumb?
He didn't know it was wrong?
He didn't see the SIX signs between the airport entry and the point he was arrested which declare "DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG TRAFFIKING"?

Ask the families of drug addicts and drug deaths if this is a victimless crime?

To you the penalty is severe.

To South East Asian nations, Australia is a push-over.

Asians and Middle Eastern countries are honestly baffled as to why we allowed people to get light sentences on a range of crimes and why we allow minorities to dictate to us.

Do you see the same in their countries?

Sorry the law isn't special for Scott Rush. He knew the law in Indonesia when he arrived, he knows the law now too.

"to south east Asian nations, Australia is a push-over"

Australian culture has at its foundation an humanitarian, progressive attitude to punishment for crime. It comes from our history and our cultural memory of the injustice of systems in Britain which were like the ones you are describing are still today.
It is a proud and honourable attitude to have as a country. Death penalties bring down the country which exercises them. It is psychologically damaging to the national psyche to do and allow those sorts of inhumane penalties.
Don't worry about south east Asian nations. Most of them know Australia and Australians are not "push overs", as many of them have witnessed as our allies and our opponents.
It is a brave thing to do not to impose the death penalty even for crimes where death has been occasioned.
Most other countries in the world have not risen to that stage yet, and need to make some serious psychological changes to do that.
Australia already has.

More of the same old hypocrisy.

This guy and his gang of drug peddlers have probably been responsible for more deaths and family breakdowns and other grief in society than the Bali bombings and 9/11 put together.

You just wanna go soft on him cos he's "one of us". You're a flamin' hypocrite.

Drugs cause far far more evil in the world than "terrorism" does.

Wake up to the reality.

Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem.
Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you?
LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton.

It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that.
It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone.

We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not.

LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN;
and learn.

officially sanctioned killing brings a national psyche down to the lowest level. It is destructive and depressing to a country to do that; and as you may have noticed, nowhere does it stop the crimes.

July 29 2010
My daughter, I desire that you make known to My people in the Americas that I, Jesus, desire they participate in bringing about a number of underground shelters for the safety of those who are to be the remnant of salvation.  Soon, very soon, the world will be plunged into the black apostasy that will engulf the world.  There will be war and through the availability and use of nuclear power, the annihilation of many parts of the world and its inhabitants will be brought about.  God does not to desire you to fear.  He desires your response and your swift action to bring about this work.

My daughter, I desire you make this known throughout the world.  The world's powers are in the grasp of a great unrest and the preparation of war is now a reality in union with antichrist.  He is about the create a great abomination.  The world as you know it will become changed and disfigured.  World powers are at work, drawing upon the forces of evil to cause destruction.  All transactions through banks and all government services throughout the world will be make powerless.  The leaders of all nations will be rendered helpless to intervene.  Food will be limited.  Hunger and death will be everywhere.  Great calamities and disasters will befall the world. The waters will be poisoned.  

             Make preparation now.  The world is about to fall into the depths of its own sin.  All that you have will be seized.  Your money will be worthless.  There will be death all around you.  God's mercy will be there if people turn to Me but it grieves Me that their hearts will not choose to partake in My Mercy.  Rather they will prefer to squirm in conforming to man's way.  I am He who is Alpha and Omega for ever and ever.  How I still yearn for people to respond to Me rather than die.  My Sacred Heart will draw all those who desire to respond for the purpose of ensuring the continuance of the work of salvation.  The time is here when all men will be tempted to think only of self.  The sea will cover much land and many people will be lost because they choose to remain blind to the call of My Mother and their denial of Truth.  My daughter, you will receive much mockery from those who do not want to respond.  Soon they will cry out and seek you out to help them but it will be too late for many.  The waters of death have moved and moved quickly.  Time has been set for the world's destruction.  Its perversion is limitless.  My daughter, be at peace.  Make known all I tell you.  Those who can recognize Truth will respond.  I desire you to guide My people through My working in you.  You are in the time of the 'opening of the door and the closing of the gate' - the great tribulation.

Fear not, My daughter, I am with you.  In your heart let My guidance abide.

My  blessings be upon you.  Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

The death penalty is wrong in all instances. Through the good works of Amnesty International and other like minded organisations, more and more countries abolish the death penalty as a means of punishment.

Each year, more countries will join the long list of those that have abolished the death penalty.

Come on Indonesia, your turn.

Encore: -


Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 6:38am:

The death penalty is wrong in all instances. Through the good works of Amnesty International and other like minded organisations, more and more countries abolish the death penalty as a means of punishment. Each year, more countries will join the long list of those that have abolished the death penalty. Come on Indonesia, your turn.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:38pm:

Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem. Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you? LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton. It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that. It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone. We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not. LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN; and learn.

The 'real suppliers' or in this case the people fronting the money and hiring the drug mules......are in the next cells on Death Row in Indonesia...

He was pretty silly. Last time he appealed he got the death penalty.
He should have shut his mouth and taken his punishment.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:23am:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:38pm: Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem. Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you? LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton. It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that. It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone. We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not. LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN; and learn. The 'real suppliers' or in this case the people fronting the money and hiring the drug mules......are in the next cells on Death Row in Indonesia...

Yes, but I see not distinction between the mules and the pushers. They should all get exactly the same sentence. Renae lawrence should be facing the DP too, or none of them.

Deborahmac09 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 12:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:23am: shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:38pm: Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem. Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you? LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton. It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that. It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone. We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not. LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN; and learn. The 'real suppliers' or in this case the people fronting the money and hiring the drug mules......are in the next cells on Death Row in Indonesia... Yes, but I see not distinction between the mules and the pushers. They should all get exactly the same sentence. Renae lawrence should be facing the DP too, or none of them.

I agree, I would see all of them executed.

Some of you are inhumanly simplistic in your judgments.
Well it’s easy to do when your life is not in jeopardy.
He is a young man, naturally with strong desire to live so it’s not easy for him to accept an eminent execution.
Buddha says that desire is a cause for all suffering; I wouldn’t exclude arrogance as well.

Quote:

and the pushers.

"Pushers". I love that term. It brings up images of shady characters approaching you from a dark alley and saying stuff like "'ere luv, best you be trying some of this" when the reality is that the only "pushers" - i.e. the ones who urge people to try drugs - are invariably a person's friends or friends of friends and not actually somebody within the drug trade.

Quote:

We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not.

Are we? A quick look through our history at the treatment of Indigenous Australians and refugees puts the lie to that.

athos wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 1:32pm:

He is a young man, naturally with strong desire to live so it’s not easy for him to accept an eminent execution.

You are correct he is a young man.

You seem to however missed out the bit where he is a convicted drugs traffiker.

They haven't just picked a young man off the street here you know....

He walked past SIX signs at Dengpasar Airport which state "DEATH PENALTY FOR DRUG TRAFFIKING"

Now is he registered blind?

the punishment does not fit the crime.
hate to be a c^nt, but indonesia should be nuked from the air.
after, of course, all aussie's are retrieved.
then those aussie's should be rewarded here for exceptionally good taste in subverting indo law.
these ppl are monkeys.
i'm really gonna be politically out of line here in saying "bomb the hell out of 'em."
you may be aware by now that i hate the ppl (ie:the gov't) and their politics.
xxx,
j.

Does the punishment for child abusers in Australia fit their crime? What about rapists?

I've heard so many people on this forum whining about immigrants and tourists respecting our laws when coming to Australia - it's hypocritical to suggest something different for us when we visit other countries.

I hope Rush's death sentence is overturned, but it's ridiculous to argue that he's a victim here.

When I worked as a Nurse, I watched many kids come in after having strokes from Drugs. Half their sides gone limp and the only hope they had was because they were young and could eventually recover after 5 years. Most died though. Old people hardly ever recover from a stroke, but they ain't gonna put their faith in a Drug Pusher.

Drug dealers/pushers should die from Lethal Injection ...I would gladly support the execution of someone who has probably killed thousands around the world.
I don't give a rats arse if he considers himself an 'Aussie' - to me, he ain't no AUSSIE, he's a Cancer that needs to be annihilated !
>:(
KILL HIM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The punishment in this case certainly does not fit the crime, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily care about this guy. Annie is correct that he is scum, but he is also idiotic scum; the Indonenesians are actually doing us a favour eliminating him from our gene pool.

death penalties can be abused to kill the innocent.

So can life sentences. Like being locked up for the rest of your life and being raped every few weeks and then dying in your cell an innocent man is exactly a great thing to happen to you either. Asking for a perfect system of dispensing justice simply cannot be done.

Quote:

Like being locked up for the rest of your life

Especially in prison systems like Indonesia's. Jail time hasn't exactly been a cakewalk for Shapelle Corby.

Deborahmac09 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 12:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:23am: shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:38pm: Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem. Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you? LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton. It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that. It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone. We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not. LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN; and learn. The 'real suppliers' or in this case the people fronting the money and hiring the drug mules......are in the next cells on Death Row in Indonesia... Yes, but I see not distinction between the mules and the pushers. They should all get exactly the same sentence. Renae lawrence should be facing the DP too, or none of them.

That's not it..
Initially only the 2 ring leaders got the DP.. The other 7 (including Rush) were given life sentences.

Four of them appealed and got their sentences reduced to 20 yrs..
Then Scott Rush appealed too..

There is apparently a law in Indonesia, along the lines of :if you appeal and lose...your sentence may be increased.

Rush appealed, lost...the Prosecutors wanted to give him a Life sentence, but for some reason, the Judge imposed the DP....

Quote:

There is apparently a law in Indonesia, along the lines of :if you appeal and lose...your sentence may be increased.

Not a law, it's the same everywhere, even here. If you appeal the severity of your sentence you may end up with it being increased.

except we don't have the death penalty.
Once they're gone, even if new evidence came to light that showed the person was innocent, too late.
e.g. Lindy Chamberlain.
That's exactly why you should not have a death sentence.

Life_goes_on wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 2:35pm:

Quote: There is apparently a law in Indonesia, along the lines of :if you appeal and lose...your sentence may be increased. Not a law, it's the same everywhere, even here. If you appeal the severity of your sentence you may end up with it being increased.

Really???.....Hadn't heard that. In most Western countries, if you lose the appeal the sentence stay what it was....

Although that could just a 'custom' not a law...

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 2:43pm:

except we don't have the death penalty. Once they're gone, even if new evidence came to light that showed the person was innocent, too late. e.g. Lindy Chamberlain. That's exactly why you should not have a death sentence.

Well with Lindy Chamberlain.....I still don't believe it was dingo....

It 'may' not have been Lindy.....But it sure wasn't a dingo or a feral dog....

yes really. In Australia if you appeal and lose, your sentence can be increased. The difference is, in Australia, if you have a life sentence and appeal and lose, there is no death penalty that can be handed out.
That is because, historically, in this country the people and their representatives fought to have death penalties abolished.
The last death penalty in Australia was in 1967 when Ronald Ryan was hung in Melbourne despite nationwide protests right up to the day. The Victorian Premier at the time Henry Bolte refused to be dissuaded from the death penalty. Subsequently, parliament abolished the death penalty. Bolte is now dead as well. Has crime stopped? Nooooo.

Quote:

Really???.....Hadn't heard that. In most Western countries, if you lose the appeal the sentence stay what it was....

It happens more often (getting an increased sentence) than what you'd think, especially for those who go against legal advice and still appeal their sentence.


Quote:

You should be aware that because these appeals are fresh hearings, there is also the potential for you to receive an increased sentence on appeal. Should you wish to abandon the appeal, you must do so withint 30 days of lodging the appeal, or the judge can continue with it regardless of your wishes. - activistrights.com.au

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 2:56pm:

yes really. In Australia if you appeal and lose, your sentence can be increased. The difference is, in Australia, if you have a life sentence and appeal and lose, there is no death penalty that can be handed out. That is because, historically, in this country the people and their representatives fought to have death penalties abolished. The last death penalty in Australia was in 1967 when Ronald Ryan was hung in Melbourne despite nationwide protests right up to the day. The Victorian Premier at the time Henry Bolte refused to be dissuaded from the death penalty. Subsequently, parliament abolished the death penalty. Bolte is now dead as well. Has crime stopped? Nooooo.

But on the other hand...Has Ronald Ryan killed any more people???

It doesn't matter whether you believe it was a dingo. That's the problem with people speculating about things like that. In the Lindy Chamberlain case nearly the whole damn country said that. How can you get a fair trial when that sort of sentiment is plastered all over the country.
The woman was proved to be INNOCENT!
Someone, or more than a few people actually did know what happened, and subsequently new evidence came to light. If Australia had a death penalty at that time, it would have been too late.
Politicians can't even get government right, and you want to trust them with a death penalty??  Talk about a hung parliament! Good.

There are many more murders now than in those days.
Death penalties don't stop crime. That's why enlightened countries don't have them.
Ronald Ryan was in prison and if he had a life sentence he wouldn't have killed anyone anyway. Why do you presume that the guy was guilty anyway? Same as the dingo theory eh>?

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:01pm:

Death penalties don't stop crime. That's why enlightened countries don't have them.

The most technologically advanced country in the world. The country that also has more Nobel Prize winners than every other country added together has RE-INTRODUCED the death penalty and it enjoys widespread support in many states.

So your argument is completely flawed.

the motivation for crime is not whether there is a death penalty or just a life sentence. People who are going to commit serious crime don't actually think like that. Hardened criminals don't give a damn about dying.
People who are going to take a gamble like Scott Rush allegedly did, are doing so for money, probably because he is poorly educated and perhaps not the best at making the right decisions and he's been hanging around for most of his life with the wrong crowd and getting the wrong ideas into his head but he thinks that those ideas are just normal.
People get a cynical sort of attitude about money, and develop a sort of "Robin Hood" attitude - "we're poor and hard done by by all those horrible rich people, so we need justice, the system can't give it to us, so we will do it ourselves and take the money, or sell the drugs, or whatever". That's more like how people think, and they think it is normal.
That sort of thinking is not addressed whatsoever by a death penalty, and that's why death penalties never stop crime rates increasing.

it is not enlightened to have a death penalty. It is a retrograde step. It doesn't matter whether a country is wealthy or poor, technologically advanced or not to be unenlightened.
Nazi Germany was technologically advanced too, and it had a death penalty, and it was used against innocent people. Millions of them.

People who are humanitarian do not support death penalties.

I don't think Drug Trafficking is a Legal problem > imprisonment
Or a Military problem > firing squad.

I think the Medical Industries around the world have to step up and not only set the world a good example of Health and proper use of proper drugs.
But when you live in a country that takes Medical empowerment from two nations that are more apt at winning wars (US/UK) just because they speak the same language - you tend to get a restrained Medical system and a free-roaming Drug Dealer who also gets his Ekkies with 'Made in America' stamped on the bag.
By putting yellow-bins in public toilets and public hospitals, this nation is saying "Drugs are a socially accepted fact", why Diabetics get sweet FA.
Australia is a Drug Trafficker more so these days, than a inventor of Penicillin.

taking drugs comes from a mindset. That issue is not being addressed and as far as I know never has.

I do not take drugs, never have, and don't feel the need to. But that appears to be seriously out of fashion in this country.
Sorry about that. They can stick their drugs up their bums. (Hey, don't they actually do that anyway?)

If this country is serious about doing something about drugs it really need to look at why people take them, and try to do something about that.

In many countries, especially conservative ones such as in Asia, if you take drugs you are looked upon as a complete failure. Why is it not like that in Australia and other western countries? What messages are being circulated in these countries to lead people to think that this is smart and a good thing to do?

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:01pm:

There are many more murders now than in those days. Death penalties don't stop crime. That's why enlightened countries don't have them. Ronald Ryan was in prison and if he had a life sentence he wouldn't have killed anyone anyway. Why do you presume that the guy was guilty anyway? Same as the dingo theory eh>?

LOL Ryan was executed for killing a guard while escaping prison....
So the life sentence doesn't really work, does it.....he escaped once (committing murder in the process) so why assume he wouldn't have done EXACTLY the same thing during a life sentence????

No, the dingo theory is valid.....unless you care to provide a dingo that can undo buttons, undress a baby and fold up a jumpsuit.....

I had no trouble explaining to my children why drugs are a bad idea. I just said that you do not put anything into your mouth that other people want you to, because what they really just want is your money. They may seem friendly and all smiles, but they want your money, and they don't care if what they give you hurts you.
Drugs are a con job. And I just kept saying it, regularly, from when they were old enough to understand, and pointing out that just because something is shown on a television screen or in a music video clip doesn't mean it isn't a con job.
They want your money; they don't care about you.
You have to fight the propaganda from when children are very young, because it is being fed to them from all sides, including their indoctrinated "friends".

you are how many decades out of date with the Chamberlain case??
Go and read the evidence, you clearly haven't. Duh, yes that's right, dingos don't fold up clothing do they. What happened to the dingos that were around that campsite on the night? Were they ever seen again?
Thinking, thinking....tick tock, tick tock.
Go and read the story mate rather than go off half cocked.

Quote:

Death penalties don't stop crime. That's why enlightened countries don't have them.

Nor do prison sentences. We lock a lot of prisoners up every year and yet, crime, or rather, behavior deemed criminal in practically every civilized society on the face of the earth, remains rampant. Saying that just because the death penalty doesn't "stop crime" is a good reason why it shouldn't be practiced is the same as saying that because incarceration or any kind of punishment doesn't stop crime, therefore, nobody should be punished for any transgression. That doesn't make any sense.

I don't know why you equate punishment via execution with a lack of "civilization". Civilization has nothing to do with that. Civilization is about order, not the espousal of touchy-feely squeamish progressive values.

Quote:

There are many more murders now than in those days.

There aren't.

We averaged well over 300 homicides per year during the 1980s. For the past few years the figure has dropped down to below 300 (283 in 2007).

you can't possibly be that dense, so you must be sh*t stiring.
Custodial sentences are only given in extreme cases, literally to prevent people from re committing offences. In that lumpen sense, they do actually stop one offender when nothing else appears to work. People who get prison sentences usually have a pretty long history of crime. You appear to have a mindset that those nasty, horrible people in charge are just going around locking everyone in prison.

The point is, apparently it has to be said again, and again, and again - is that death penalties are final and should evidence come to light that the person was innocent -WHICH IT DOES E.G. LINDY CHAMBERLAIN - then it is too late, the person is gone; death penalty can be abused by a political system, it does nothing to address the real reasons for crime, it isn't humanitarian, and it damages the national psyche by dragging the whole system down to a bestial killing mentality.

You can't be humanitarian and support a death penalty, it doesn't matter how much money you've got or how advanced are the technological advancements in your kitchen.

i am not touchy feeling squeamish, imp. I know that Australia was built on the lash that took every bit of skin off one's back right down to the bone. One only needs to know of the horrors of the Australian colonial prisons, which was the very reason the place was populated by Britain in the first place. The screaming madness of the prisoners chained on the treadmills on Norfolk Island every day of their lives. The maggot infested flogged backs that could only be relieved by the prisoners having to urinate on the floor of their black cells and lay their backs in the urine for some relief from the agony - and the death penalties that were handed out.

That sort of thing damaged Australia and the Australian psyche right down to the present day. The people finally prevailed and removed this barbarity from our beautiful country; and it will not be brought back. Not in this country, not ever.

Quote:

it does nothing to address the real reasons for crime,

Actually it does. The "real reason" for crimes warranting of punishment as severe as death is often psychopathy. The death penalty eliminates the cause of psychopathy at its root; by extinguishing the particular genetic mutations that give rise to it from the gene pool.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:31pm:

you are how many decades out of date with the Chamberlain case?? Go and read the evidence, you clearly haven't. Duh, yes that's right, dingos don't fold up clothing do they. What happened to the dingos that were around that campsite on the night? Were they ever seen again? Thinking, thinking....tick tock, tick tock. Go and read the story mate rather than go off half cocked.

Let me try and explain..

1) The 'dingoes' around the camp site are not, in fact pure-blood dingoes...they are dingo/domestic dog crosses...and domestic dogs that were 'dumped' by their owners (or had run off..i.e Ferals)
2) Pure-blood dingoes generally won't come within 200 metres of humans...as WE are the only threat to dingoes
3) While a dingo (or indeed a feral dog/x-cross breed) 'might' consume the dead body of a baby...if it was left in the scrub, it's very unlikely to enter a tent(surrounded by humans) and carry off a living child
4) Predators...like dogs/dingoes..do NOT carry small prey by the head....they grip small things like rabbits, hares and children....around the middle..at the point of balance
5) The Chamberlains were from the City..neither of them could have told the difference between a dingo, a cross-breed or a feral dog if it had bitten them on the arse
6) NO dog (whether dingo, cross-breed or feral) could have, or would have UNDRESSED Azaria, before consuming the body...

Possibly Azaria died of an accident.....but it was an accident caused by HUMAN action...

The last 'theory' I heard on the subject was that 'possiblly' one of her brothers was involved and the parents covered it up.......which, in truth, I wouldn't blame them for doing...

But one thing is certain.....while a feral/wild dog 'may' have eaten Azaria, it sure didn't kill her.....

Quote:

The death penalty eliminates the cause of psychopathy at its root; by extinguishing the particular genetic mutations that give rise to it from the gene pool.

And what if they could invent a simple blood test to test for psychopathy?

Let's say that test could be done at birth.

and that presumes that psychopathy is genetic, which if it is not, then the "cure" is completely misguided.

Criminality is more likely attitudinal in a huge number of cases, possibly the vast majority. That is why custodial rehabilitation actually works. What is missing in this country is rehabilitative measures in the general community to catch the dysfunctional kids, teenagers, parents and families who have been victims of whatever deprivations in their lives that lead them to these attitudes and practices. There are many more of those in the pipeline than people in prison who might end up getting executed by the government.
It does not, and never has cured the cause among the general population, that is why you still have crime in countries that do have the death penalty.
You need to get out of your lower middle class lifestyle and get out onto some mean streets. (not that there are that many in this country.)

Life_goes_on wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 4:12pm:

Quote: The death penalty eliminates the cause of psychopathy at its root; by extinguishing the particular genetic mutations that give rise to it from the gene pool. And what if they could invent a simple blood test to test for psychopathy? Let's say that test could be done at birth.

Wouldn't that STILL be a death penalty???.....Killing a baby for a crime it MIGHT commit is less heinous than killing an adult for a crime he/she DID commit????

Quote:

and fold up a jumpsuit.....

It's a myth that the jumpsuit was found folded.

Maybe a 'dna' test of the parents.....and a ban on having children IF they have the 'psychopathy' gene or blood type???

Even then....some group will STILL complain...

Quote:

Wouldn't that STILL be a death penalty???.....Killing a baby for a crime it MIGHT commit is less heinous than killing an adult for a crime he/she DID commit????

I wasn't offering an opinion, just asking a question.

double post, delete this

Life_goes_on wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 4:29pm:

Quote: and fold up a jumpsuit..... It's a myth that the jumpsuit was found folded.

No it isn't...it was entered as evidence in the first trial...

And the matinee jacket was used in the second trial...

Quote:

And what if they could invent a simple blood test to test for psychopathy? Let's say that test could be done at birth.

Nothing should be done? Wouldn't it be better in this case to treat people for what they do rather than what they could do?

no, because you are not catching all the criminality either literally or in treatment, and it is like a cancer that spreads.
You can't cure a whole disease by knocking out one cell.

in fact, it would be better not to get the disease at all, rather than have to knock it all out once you get it.
That is called disease prevention, not symptom control. That's what's wrong with our western medical system, and our legal system, and our political system, and our social system, and our family systems.
Big problem.
Death penalties have not solved them, nor even slowed them.

aikmann4 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 4:39pm:

Quote: And what if they could invent a simple blood test to test for psychopathy? Let's say that test could be done at birth. Nothing should be done? Wouldn't it be better in this case to treat people for what they do rather than what they could do?

Yes it IS far better to punish people for what they HAVE done, rather than what they ''might" do....

If you try to punish for 'criminal thoughts'...then every person in Australia would be in prison......

That still doesn't mean that things can't be done. I have absolutely no problem with the provision of financial incentives for abortions. An 'abortion bonus' is more sensible than a 'baby bonus' for a lot of people.

somehow I thought you wouldn't.
Isn't it tragic how so many people want to have babies and can't.
It is a big problem in this country and other western ones. What is going on?

Not enough viagra.

keep it up.

;D

Abu told us:


Quote:

More of the same old hypocrisy. This guy and his gang of drug peddlers have probably been responsible for more deaths and family breakdowns and other grief in society than the Bali bombings and 9/11 put together.

Given that 9/11 is why we are at War with terrorists, and why the World will never be the same for Muslims and non Muslims, I find that an extraordinarily stupid comment.

Tell you what Abu.  I'd rather shelter a Muslim drug pedlar, or an idiot like Rush than a Muslim suicide bomber/pilot, any day.

While what he did was stupid, I don't believe he deserves to die. I am strongly opposed to the death penalty. I don't care what crime you have committed, no one deserves to be executed for their crimes.

That said, I believe that the AFP (Australian Federal Police) should take most of the blame for this. They could have stopped the Bali 9 before they left Australia. Instead, they allowed them to head over to a country which has a hard line against drugs, knowing full well what they would likely face. The AFP sent Rush to his death, and they must bear the consequences.

I don't believe Rush's appeal will be successful. I believe he will die. The Indonesians hate drug dealers and users, but they are happy to give a murderer or a rapist a few short years in prison.

Quote:

That said, I believe that the AFP (Australian Federal Police) should take most of the blame for this. They could have stopped the Bali 9 before they left Australia. Instead, they allowed them to head over to a country which has a hard line against drugs, knowing full well what they would likely face. The AFP sent Rush to his death, and they must bear the consequences.

This should never be forgotten.  Australia's own....Mick Keelty....sent his fellow Australians,  Rush et al to their Indonesian fate, while at all relevant times, he could have arrested them here.

Keelty is just a bloke like the rest of us, but he has the fate of these idiots to deal with for the rest of his life.

Whatever the blood is, he has it on his hands.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:23pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 3:01pm: There are many more murders now than in those days. Death penalties don't stop crime. That's why enlightened countries don't have them. Ronald Ryan was in prison and if he had a life sentence he wouldn't have killed anyone anyway. Why do you presume that the guy was guilty anyway? Same as the dingo theory eh>? LOL Ryan was executed for killing a guard while escaping prison.... So the life sentence doesn't really work, does it.....he escaped once (committing murder in the process) so why assume he wouldn't have done EXACTLY the same thing during a life sentence????

Correction !!! .... Ronald Ryan was convicted of killing a prison guard based 'solely' on unsigned unrecorded unproven allegations of verbals/confessions said to have been made by Ronald Ryan to police. Fact is, there were no scientific ballistic forensic evidence to prove Ronald Ryan fired a shot. There were many ambiguities in the case, missing pieces of vital evidence that would have cleared Ronald Ryan, serious wide-spread inconsistencies by all witnesses for the prosecution and a prison guard's testimony that he (Paterson) fired the one and only single shot heard by hundreds of witnesses. If that wasn't enough to cast doubt, most of the 12-man jurors who convicted Ryan of murder, later made several pleas to politicians not to execute Ronald Ryan. The jurors stated that they would never have convicted him, had they known he would be executed. Ronald Ryan was probably hanged an innocent man.

Vanessa wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 7:48pm:

While what he did was stupid, I don't believe he deserves to die. I am strongly opposed to the death penalty. I don't care what crime you have committed, no one deserves to be executed for their crimes. That said, I believe that the AFP (Australian Federal Police) should take most of the blame for this. They could have stopped the Bali 9 before they left Australia. Instead, they allowed them to head over to a country which has a hard line against drugs, knowing full well what they would likely face. The AFP sent Rush to his death, and they must bear the consequences. I don't believe Rush's appeal will be successful. I believe he will die. The Indonesians hate drug dealers and users, but they are happy to give a murderer or a rapist a few short years in prison.

Only to a point...after all...the various members of the Bali 9 had NOT committed ANY crime in Australia Territory....

Simply 'planning' to import drugs, or whatever isn't a crime under Australian law.....they would have needed to actually commit a crime, before they could be arrested....

Bring back the death penalty in Australia ! How a society can call itself enlightened and not have the death penaly is beyond me.

He is unfortunately someone who has made a very bad judgement call. The lure of course for criminal activity is the disproportional reward for the smallest amount of effort...if he had made it he would probably been laughing and partying for weeks or months and then planning the next load of killer poo to come in. Mule is not something I would opt for the death penalty here for generally. Certainly for the ringleaders.

He's young and silly and probably a history criminal delinquent. He took that life choice to another country with a different set of rules. So be it.

Try and think of the politician you have the absolute least respect for, and picture giving them the right to choose who lives and dies, because if we get the death penalty back, that is effectively what you are doing.

I understand the theoretical reasoning for the Death Penalty, but remember the actual way it was used, politically, and because of that, remain opposed to it in fact, whilst supporting it in theory.

I understand what you are say Mozz but my point of view is that an enlightened society is not the one that abolishes the dealth penalty but the one that accepts that

1) there are individuals that are so dangerous that they should never be released

2) there are individuals that have no remorse or desire to alter their attitude and therefore offer considerable risk to the community upon release or are career and multiple offenders.

3) individuals that rape and murder ruin entire lives and I have no problem expressing that I think these serious crimes should have the death penalty as an option. In the case of crimes against children it should be mandatory.

I don't actually have much sympathy for drug pushing vermin nor for the users that steal my or my families hard earned belongings.

So, a drug smuggler gets a nice easy death sentence, while dumb kids die slow, miserable deaths as useless drug addicts.

Scott Rush? - Tell someone who cares.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:38pm:

Executing one drug mule is not going to solve the problem. That is a simplistic, very unsophisticated approach to the problem. Get to the REAL suppliers. You don't hear much about them do you? LOOK INTO IT, and stop being a simpleton.

I bet it has reduced the number of idiot young Australians volunteering to be drug mules out of Asia. And his execution will make it all new and fresh in the eyes of these morons. Problem solved?? No. Problem reduced?? I recken so.


shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:38pm:

It is nothing to do with "one of us". No one gets the death penalty in Australia any more, and it was a long hard fight to achieve that. It stands as a monument of our culture and it will not be changed back again. It does not matter how bad is the crime in Australia, the nation is not brought down to the same level by officially killing someone.

I didn't fight for it. In fact if I had been old enough II would have fought against it. I think it could be won back as well but we need to grow up a bit first. We confused being suckers for being enlightened.


shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:38pm:

We are a humanitarian people. Most countries are not. LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY - HUMANITARIAN; and learn.

What's your definition of humanitarian?

BTW don't you vote Liberal?? Sorry if I have you confused with someone else.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:40pm:

officially sanctioned killing brings a national psyche down to the lowest level. It is destructive and depressing to a country to do that; and as you may have noticed, nowhere does it stop the crimes.

But it does stop crime.

Case in point....Ned Kelly has not held up a single solitary seven-eleven since being hanged.

ergo his criminal activity "stopped".

If Denis Ferguson was hanged tomorrow..not a single more child need be afraid of HIM unfortunately he wasn't executed many years ago so he not only damaged more than he ever should have been allowed to but some of those damaged ones are statistically likely to carry on his work. We could have saved them and their future victims.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:12pm:

it is not enlightened to have a death penalty. It is a retrograde step. It doesn't matter whether a country is wealthy or poor, technologically advanced or not to be unenlightened. Nazi Germany was technologically advanced too, and it had a death penalty, and it was used against innocent people. Millions of them. People who are humanitarian do not support death penalties.

Explain why you say it is not enlightened to have the death penalty for heinous crime, unrepentant and habitual criminals and the irreversibly insane. I will argue that enlightenment is the opposite.

locutius wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 2:51pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 3:12pm: it is not enlightened to have a death penalty. It is a retrograde step. It doesn't matter whether a country is wealthy or poor, technologically advanced or not to be unenlightened. Nazi Germany was technologically advanced too, and it had a death penalty, and it was used against innocent people. Millions of them. People who are humanitarian do not support death penalties. Explain why you say it is not enlightened to have the death penalty for heinous crime, unrepentant and habitual criminals and the irreversibly insane. I will argue that enlightenment is the opposite.

I agree Locutious....it's ALL about being responsible for ones own actions....

Well the reason people argue against it Locutious is that your argument relies on being the greatest good, for the greatest number, which also includes killing the terminally ill, the severely brain damaged, or severely physically disabled amongst others, as killing these people will deliver cost benefits at the very least.
There are arguments in favour of such ideas, but not well enough developed to ever be a serious question in my lifetime.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 3:15pm:

Well the reason people argue against it Locutious is that your argument relies on being the greatest good, for the greatest number, which also includes killing the terminally ill, the severely brain damaged, or severely physically disabled amongst others, as killing these people will deliver cost benefits at the very least. There are arguments in favour of such ideas, but not well enough developed to ever be a serious question in my lifetime.

No it doesn't....it relies on killing the terminally violent and evil....

Look at Ivan Milat...he was convicted of killing 7 backpackers, but the police where sure there were MORE...
And on Sunday, some trail bike riders found human bones in Belanglo Forest......want to bet who killed THIS victim?????

Fair enough Gizmo, there are also those who do not care about the greater good argument, and just want to kill for vengeance sake, which is also understandable, but a personal decision whether or not you wish to  choose that reason.

When people are repeat offenders, obviously killing them after they are convicted of a first offense precludes other victims falling prey to them, and I do not think anybody argues that is not the case, but most people prefer permanent jail sentences for such high risk offenders to killing them, it is just where we are as a society.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 3:45pm:

Fair enough Gizmo, there are also those who do not care about the greater good argument, and just want to kill for vengeance sake, which is also understandable, but a personal decision whether or not you wish to  choose that reason. When people are repeat offenders, obviously killing them after they are convicted of a first offense precludes other victims falling prey to them, and I do not think anybody argues that is not the case, but most people prefer permanent jail sentences for such high risk offenders to killing them, it is just where we are as a society.

Well even though I support the DP for serial killer, child killers, pattern killers and serial rapists etc....you can't really identify a serial or pattern criminal after 1 crime...that's very true...

However, once you DO indentify the pattern or serial killer....wouldn't it be better for society as a whole, to make sure they don't repeat offend???

If Ivan Milat (for example) had been caught, tried and executed after his 3rd kill....then there'd be 15 or 20 backpackers STILL alive.....

I do understand the argument about mistakes being made.....
But that's not so much an indictment of the DP, it's more a problem with 'sloppy' investigations/forensics.......If the investigation and the science are done correctly, then the courts can be sure they have the right person...then there shouldn't be a problem with the DP...

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 3:28pm:

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30th, 2010 at 3:15pm: Well the reason people argue against it Locutious is that your argument relies on being the greatest good, for the greatest number, which also includes killing the terminally ill, the severely brain damaged, or severely physically disabled amongst others, as killing these people will deliver cost benefits at the very least. There are arguments in favour of such ideas, but not well enough developed to ever be a serious question in my lifetime. No it doesn't....it relies on killing the terminally violent and evil.... Look at Ivan Milat...he was convicted of killing 7 backpackers, but the police where sure there were MORE... And on Sunday, some trail bike riders found human bones in Belanglo Forest......want to bet who killed THIS victim?????

As gizmo correctly points out it does not say that.

Certainly the terminally ill, that have contributed to this country should be offered whatever comforts them including euthinasia. And the severly physically disabled may very well still contribute to society. Stephen Hawking. Also these are people that have not abused, violated and murdered others. In a real sense they are victims.

I is not just about utilitarian issue although I will say that ultilitarian motives are NOT irrevevent. But it is also about what works. What can stop the cycle? What can be done to shrink the cycle.

I do actually have some sympathy to some criminals as they are just passing on the abuse they suffered...many of them were once doe eyed trusting good natured little children who were abused and damaged. That is why I say that torture serves no enlightened purpose.

So when reading about a grown man inflicting prolonged and deliberate harm and finally death on a small innocent little body. My gut instinct is to say visit the same if not more on to that piece of filth.

But being enlightened I can say the best that can be done is to tell them that we are sorry that it has come to this, that their own damaged lives (not always) bought them to this point but we need to end this particular thread of events. So long. BANG. And let the Bulldozer cover the pit.

Then be glad of heart for making children's live just a little bit more safe. Take a nap.

In all seriousness, I'd like to be able to walk home from the pub at 3am without being grabbed by some nutter who wants to torture me to death (which, admittedly, probably won't happen..cause I'm an ugly bastard)...but I'd like my daughter and my nieces to ALSO be able to walk home from the pub, the movies or school without having to worry about some loony nutter kidnapping, raping and torturing them to death...

The best way to arrange THAT seems to be to execute the loony nutters as soon as we find them.....

I think that we could probably do more to promote safety by creating a more caring and inclusive society.
Look at those dogs/trash/scum, whatever label you wish to apply to them, who raped aussie girls because of their upbringing, and the lack of respect for women who do not follow the code of conduct laid down as being appropriate by the people who raised them.
Should we kill them, or the people that raised them to think that they could self justify their behaviour?

The trouble with sanctioning state killings is knowing where to stop.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 5:14pm:

I think that we could probably do more to promote safety by creating a more caring and inclusive society. Look at those dogs/trash/scum, whatever label you wish to apply to them, who raped aussie girls because of their upbringing, and the lack of respect for women who do not follow the code of conduct laid down as being appropriate by the people who raised them. Should we kill them, or the people that raised them to think that they could self justify their behaviour? The trouble with sanctioning state killings is knowing where to stop.

No, 'State sanction killings' can be limited by legislation....

If you limit the DP to repeat killings, or torture killing and killing police and/or witnesses to murders then the IS a limit to executions....

what about pedos?, I mean they are the worst of the worst in my book, often far more deserving of death than some kid who gets led astray by the wrong crowd and impulsively kills from fear or stupidity?
Surely we should be allowed to kill pedos?
Plus some rapist/sex offenders are off the chart sickos, we should get rid of them too, just because a value judgement comes into it should not mean we ignore these worst of the worst, should it?

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 5:34pm:

what about pedos?, I mean they are the worst of the worst in my book, often far more deserving of death than some kid who gets led astray by the wrong crowd and impulsively kills from fear or stupidity? Surely we should be allowed to kill pedos? Plus some rapist/sex offenders are off the chart sickos, we should get rid of them too, just because a value judgement comes into it should not mean we ignore these worst of the worst, should it?

Sure, if you want to include pedos and rapist/sex offenders in the legislation.....I won't vote 'agin' it....the point is...all DPs are under fairly strict and specific legislations....in other words....WE get to decide which particular crimes classify as DP crimes.....

Quote:

I understand what you are say Mozz but my point of view is that an enlightened society is not the one that abolishes the dealth penalty but the one that accepts that 1) there are individuals that are so dangerous that they should never be released 2) there are individuals that have no remorse or desire to alter their attitude and therefore offer considerable risk to the community upon release or are career and multiple offenders. 3) individuals that rape and murder ruin entire lives and I have no problem expressing that I think these serious crimes should have the death penalty as an option. In the case of crimes against children it should be mandatory

Exactly. Our first responsibility as a society should be to protect our innocents. As long as the death penalty is carried out in an humane manner, I support it completely for serial rapists, pedophiles and in some cases, murder.

Quote:

Possibly Azaria died of an accident.....but it was an accident caused by HUMAN action...

We believe that too. Not necessarily the parents.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 4:29pm:

In all seriousness, I'd like to be able to walk home from the pub at 3am without being grabbed by some nutter who wants to torture me to death (which, admittedly, probably won't happen..cause I'm an ugly bastard)...but I'd like my daughter and my nieces to ALSO be able to walk home from the pub, the movies or school without having to worry about some loony nutter kidnapping, raping and torturing them to death... The best way to arrange THAT seems to be to execute the loony nutters as soon as we find them.....

Since the lefty soft c0ck judges and magistrates have a real aversion to even locking up serious crimminal offenders, even if we had the DP, it would never get used anyway.

Maybe if these judges were held accountable for their decisions and had to reapply for their jobs every few years, this would change.

Australia is a safe haven for any serious criminal, just ask that american who killed his wife in Townsville 2 years ago, got 18 months gaol and a guarantee that QLD would not help the US prosecutors  if he faced the DP when he went back home.

Deborahmac09 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 10:59am:

Quote: Possibly Azaria died of an accident.....but it was an accident caused by HUMAN action... We believe that too. Not necessarily the parents.

I was at Ayres Rock two weeks after that incident, hadn`t heard or seen any news & was unaware of the incident.  There was a big Abo camp just east of the rock, I`ve no idea how many big starving dogs they had, but there wouldn`t have been a dingo within miles of the rock.  I wouldn`t  trust those dogs though.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 2:05pm:

Does the punishment for child abusers in Australia fit their crime? What about rapists? I've heard so many people on this forum whining about immigrants and tourists respecting our laws when coming to Australia - it's hypocritical to suggest something different for us when we visit other countries. I hope Rush's death sentence is overturned, but it's ridiculous to argue that he's a victim here.

yeah, but our laws are fair.
Indonesia? corruption plus.
i know this to be true.
i've met one of the police chiefs.
anything for an extra buck.
i'll bet you cannot name 5 Indo top achievers in the world scene.
prolly not even one.
anyway, our politics here flies in the face of theirs.
they'd overrun us tomorrow given the chance.
victim, no.
desperate, yes.
another fact, one out of 3 ppl i've met in australia over the last 45yrs is a pot smoker.
that includes pollies, lawyers, doctors, artists, actors, musos, blue and white collars.
our laws are hypocritical.
the politics between us and these indos is tenuous at best.
j.

Australia has had its share of corruption, especially in the police force.

You've just said our laws are fair, and then described them as hypocritical in the same post.

Nobody forced these drug mules to fly to Indo. Rush and co new the consequences of what they were trying to do.

BigOl64 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 11:29am:

Since the lefty soft c0ck judges and magistrates have a real aversion to even locking up serious crimminal offenders, even if we had the DP, it would never get used anyway.

I've got to agree with that, in part.

Though I'd use that as a reason to push for an overhaul in sentencing, which would allow us to avoid what I believe to be the folly of capital punishment.

It's expensive. It doesn't stop those crimes in question. It creates further victims.

(by the way, howdy folks).

Jaykaye_09 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 1:51pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Aug 31st, 2010 at 11:29am: Since the lefty soft c0ck judges and magistrates have a real aversion to even locking up serious crimminal offenders, even if we had the DP, it would never get used anyway. I've got to agree with that, in part. Though I'd use that as a reason to push for an overhaul in sentencing, which would allow us to avoid what I believe to be the folly of capital punishment. It's expensive. It doesn't stop those crimes in question. It creates further victims. (by the way, howdy folks).

Hi jaykaye...

The question I've always wondered about is this...
Is the DP more expensive than having to feed, cloth and house a convicted (and guilty) person for anywhere from 25 to 60 years????

djrbfm wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 1:44pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 2:05pm: Does the punishment for child abusers in Australia fit their crime? What about rapists? I've heard so many people on this forum whining about immigrants and tourists respecting our laws when coming to Australia - it's hypocritical to suggest something different for us when we visit other countries. I hope Rush's death sentence is overturned, but it's ridiculous to argue that he's a victim here. yeah, but our laws are fair. Indonesia? corruption plus. i know this to be true. i've met one of the police chiefs. anything for an extra buck. ]i'll bet you cannot name 5 Indo top achievers in the world scene. prolly not even one.[/b] anyway, our politics here flies in the face of theirs. they'd overrun us tomorrow given the chance. victim, no. desperate, yes. another fact, one out of 3 ppl i've met in australia over the last 45yrs is a pot smoker. that includes pollies, lawyers, doctors, artists, actors, musos, blue and white collars. our laws are hypocritical. the politics between us and these indos is tenuous at best. j.

Krakatoa! :)

locutius wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 1:58pm:

djrbfm wrote on Aug 31st, 2010 at 1:44pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 2:05pm: Does the punishment for child abusers in Australia fit their crime? What about rapists? I've heard so many people on this forum whining about immigrants and tourists respecting our laws when coming to Australia - it's hypocritical to suggest something different for us when we visit other countries. I hope Rush's death sentence is overturned, but it's ridiculous to argue that he's a victim here. yeah, but our laws are fair. Indonesia? corruption plus. i know this to be true. i've met one of the police chiefs. anything for an extra buck. ]i'll bet you cannot name 5 Indo top achievers in the world scene. prolly not even one.[/b] anyway, our politics here flies in the face of theirs. they'd overrun us tomorrow given the chance. victim, no. desperate, yes. another fact, one out of 3 ppl i've met in australia over the last 45yrs is a pot smoker. that includes pollies, lawyers, doctors, artists, actors, musos, blue and white collars. our laws are hypocritical. the politics between us and these indos is tenuous at best. j. Krakatoa! :)

Megawati sukarno putri has to be in the top 5 best names!

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 1:57pm:

Hi jaykaye... The question I've always wondered about is this... Is the DP more expensive than having to feed, cloth and house a convicted (and guilty) person for anywhere from 25 to 60 years????

Certainly in the United States (which would be most comparable to uor own system).

Granted, much of the cost comes from inefficiencies within the system, but these stem from processes which I don't think any of us would want to see removed (or made more "cost efficient" in the manner we generally tend to).

I should highlight though, that my opposition of the DP is primarily based on those factors outside of cost.

Jaykaye_09 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:00pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31st, 2010 at 1:57pm: Hi jaykaye... The question I've always wondered about is this... Is the DP more expensive than having to feed, cloth and house a convicted (and guilty) person for anywhere from 25 to 60 years???? Certainly in the United States (which would be most comparable to uor own system). Granted, much of the cost comes from inefficiencies within the system, but these stem from processes which I don't think any of us would want to see removed (or made more "cost efficient" in the manner we generally tend to). I should highlight though, that my opposition of the DP is primarily based on those factors outside of cost.

But I thnk were the American system falls down is too many appeals...

I think some states allow 10 or 12 appeals, and each one costs over $150k...

That's really just a silly idea.....Unless there is new evidence, or reasonable evidence of mistakes etc, what's the point of representing the exact same evidence from a trial that the convict has already lost.....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:05pm:

But I thnk were the American system falls down is too many appeals... I think some states allow 10 or 12 appeals, and each one costs over $150k... That's really just a silly idea.....Unless there is new evidence, or reasonable evidence of mistakes etc, what's the point of representing the exact same evidence from a trial that the convict has already lost.....

I've heard of multiple appeals, yes, but never that many (where nothing new is brought to trial)...?

It would also be difficult to establish what is deemed valid grounds for an appeal - a process in itself which delays execution and increases costs - however, this is surely something that must remain.

Jaykaye_09 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:12pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31st, 2010 at 2:05pm: But I thnk were the American system falls down is too many appeals... I think some states allow 10 or 12 appeals, and each one costs over $150k... That's really just a silly idea.....Unless there is new evidence, or reasonable evidence of mistakes etc, what's the point of representing the exact same evidence from a trial that the convict has already lost..... I've heard of multiple appeals, yes, but never that many (where nothing new is brought to trial)...? It would also be difficult to establish what is deemed valid grounds for an appeal - a process in itself which delays execution and increases costs - however, this is surely something that must remain.

I think it varies from state to state....the average is about 7 or something....I'm not sure, but I'll look it up.

I do know that some Death Row inmates can delay execution for 10 years, just by the appeals process....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:15pm:

I do know that some Death Row inmates can delay execution for 10 years, just by the appeals process....

Aye, some have sat on death row for ridiculously long periods of time.

Incidentally, Wikipedia has some links to additional resources concerning the process involved with the DP and subsequent appeals.

Jaykaye_09 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:29pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Aug 31st, 2010 at 2:15pm: I do know that some Death Row inmates can delay execution for 10 years, just by the appeals process.... Aye, some have sat on death row for ridiculously long periods of time. Incidentally, Wikipedia has some links to additional resources concerning the process involved with the DP and subsequent appeals.

Cool, thanks for that..

Quote:

Exactly. Our first responsibility as a society should be to protect our innocents. As long as the death penalty is carried out in an humane manner, I support it completely for serial rapists, pedophiles and in some cases, murder.

I don't care about execution with humanity. I'd be in favour of gladitorial combat for convicted felons and public executions again.

i would suggest forgiveness.

how is it that major nations do not get done for trafficking drugs?

the US proven drug runners air america in vietnam.

now they admit growing opium in afghanistan so the taliban

do not get the drugs....such a deception again.

and the masses once more fooled by the despots

however

the LIGHT burns BRIGHT now on mother earth and many are

awakening to the hoodwink

namaste

aikmann4 wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 2:56pm:

Quote: Exactly. Our first responsibility as a society should be to protect our innocents. As long as the death penalty is carried out in an humane manner, I support it completely for serial rapists, pedophiles and in some cases, murder. I don't care about execution with humanity. I'd be in favour of gladitorial combat for convicted felons and public executions again.

Absolutely...put the baddest of the bad on an island, last man standing wins his freedom.  
Of course, if he's THAT bad, he'll be back in the clink in no time.

But yeah, this 'humane' execution bizzo is just garbage.  Just kill the fker...they're not on death row for being great guys.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30^th, 2010 at 5:34pm:

what about pedos?, I mean they are the worst of the worst in my book, often far more deserving of death than some kid who gets led astray by the wrong crowd and impulsively kills from fear or stupidity? Surely we should be allowed to kill pedos?

Disgusting as the crime may be, the perpetrators have often had their brains addled by experiences in their own childhood. Some people survive the trauma, in other cases victims become predators in later life.  Should we kill pedos totally regardless of what kind of horrors they suffered in their childhood?

I don't know the answer to that, and I wouldn't be too fast to make the call.

As far as Scott Rush is concerned.... Scott Who? Isn't there something more important to discuss? Leave  the Indonesian legal system to find justice. There is nothing we can or should do.

Going back to pedophiles, how many of them are spurred on to commit their crimes as a result of taking illegal drugs. Should we be tackling the causes (of brain addling) as opposed to the symptoms?

I oppose the death penalty on principle, but maybe drug dealers and couriers should have harsher punishments. Maybe Indonesia hasn't got it all wrong.

What did Scott Rush get on his IQ Test?
..drool

muso wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 5:40pm:

mozzaok wrote on Aug 30th, 2010 at 5:34pm: what about pedos?, I mean they are the worst of the worst in my book, often far more deserving of death than some kid who gets led astray by the wrong crowd and impulsively kills from fear or stupidity? Surely we should be allowed to kill pedos? Disgusting as the crime may be, the perpetrators have often had their brains addled by experiences in their own childhood. Some people survive the trauma, in other cases victims become predators in later life.  Should we kill pedos totally regardless of what kind of horrors they suffered in their childhood? I don't know the answer to that, and I wouldn't be too fast to make the call. As far as Scott Rush is concerned.... Scott Who? Isn't there something more important to discuss? Leave  the Indonesian legal system to find justice. There is nothing we can or should do. Going back to pedophiles, how many of them are spurred on to commit their crimes as a result of taking illegal drugs. Should we be tackling the causes as opposed to the symptoms?

And 'some of them aren't 'spurred on by anything'...in some cases there is NO chemical or enivronmental reasons for what they do....

With some of the pedophiles, they are just evil bastards.....

The problem with the argument that attempts to ascribe pedophilia to childhood experiences with molestation is it has not properly ascertained the genuine line of causation. If, and it is a perfectly reasonable "if", sexual attraction to children is partially a genetically inherited disposition, it should only be expected that many pedophiles would have been molested in their youth, as their fathers were also pedophiles. It's a chicken and egg problem that can be better disentangled using studies of people who have NOT been molested, born to convicted pedophiles, who were adopted into functional households. Studies like this have been done concerning criminality, for instance.

scott rush - oh boy, what an unfortunate surname............

i really don't care what he or the other eight did.
THEY ARE OURS.
each Australian, no matter what color, creed, or disposition, is worth 10 Indonesians.
and that's any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
these ppl politically are our worse enemies.
look past what these poor souls have done and into the politics in this region.
WAKE UP.
they are ours, like it or not.
and yet we turn our backs on them.
it our shame, not theirs.
THERE'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH OUR EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM HERE
IF THESE MISGUIDED YOUNGSTERS HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TO MAKE MONEY.
J.

djrb - it's a bloody great trajedy.
It's terrible.
But Scott is outside of Aussies powers now, there's nothing we CAN do.
Nothing anyone can do.

It's a complete loss to all.

djrbfm wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 11:31pm:

scott rush - oh boy, what an unfortunate surname............ i really don't care what he or the other eight did. THEY ARE OURS. each Australian, no matter what color, creed, or disposition, is worth 10 Indonesians. and that's any day of the week and twice on Sundays. these ppl politically are our worse enemies. look past what these poor souls have done and into the politics in this region. WAKE UP. they are ours, like it or not. and yet we turn our backs on them. it our shame, not theirs. THERE'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH OUR EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM HERE IF THESE MISGUIDED YOUNGSTERS HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TO MAKE MONEY. J.

"THERE'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH OUR EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM HERE
IF THESE MISGUIDED YOUNGSTERS HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TO MAKE MONEY."

No, Scott Rush and his group are low life crimials. They only have themselves to blame for the position they`re now in.  

djrbfm wrote on Aug 31^st, 2010 at 11:31pm:

scott rush - oh boy, what an unfortunate surname............ i really don't care what he or the other eight did. THEY ARE OURS. each Australian, no matter what color, creed, or disposition, is worth 10 Indonesians. and that's any day of the week and twice on Sundays. these ppl politically are our worse enemies. look past what these poor souls have done and into the politics in this region. WAKE UP. they are ours, like it or not. and yet we turn our backs on them. it our shame, not theirs. THERE'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH OUR EMPLOYMENT SYSTEM HERE IF THESE MISGUIDED YOUNGSTERS HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TO MAKE MONEY. J.

I have about as much time for Indonesia as I do for drug pushers. They can have each other as far as I'm concerned.

Is he dead yet?

The problem with the death penalty is it fails to achieve what it is meant to.....it is not a deterrent.....we see dictators and corrupt governments using the death penalty to silence dissent and control the population.....and you cretins support this barbaric act.....you have nothing to be proud of and are supporting the sanctioned killing of innocent people.....the death penalty does not discriminate....it kills the innocent as well as the guilty!!!

philperth2010 wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2010 at 10:04am:

The problem with the death penalty is it fails to achieve what it is meant to.....it is not a deterrent.....we see dictators and corrupt governments using the death penalty to silence dissent and control the population.....and you cretins support this barbaric act.....you have nothing to be proud of and are supporting the sanctioned killing of innocent people.....the death penalty does not discriminate....it kills the innocent as well as the guilty!!!

Apart from that, once the sentence is delivered, there is no going back in the light of new evidence.

philperth2010 wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2010 at 10:04am:

The problem with the death penalty is it fails to achieve what it is meant to.....it is not a deterrent.....we see dictators and corrupt governments using the death penalty to silence dissent and control the population.....and you cretins support this barbaric act.....you have nothing to be proud of and are supporting the sanctioned killing of innocent people.....the death penalty does not discriminate....it kills the innocent as well as the guilty!!!

Of course I would prefer that it does act as a deterrent as well because obviously I would prefer that there is no victim and no crime to begin with. That is the best case scenario.

Failing that it's use as a deterrent no longer applies and I have very little problem of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. Dead killers and kiddie rapists don't reoffend...good riddance to bad rubbish.

Yes we do see the death penalty used by dictators and corrupt governments but we don't see that here.

No I am supporting the killing of guilty people, by your reluctance to deliver appropriate punishment to drug barons, murderers and child rapists you are actually the one supporting the killing of innocent people.

Don't be too hard on yourself, not everyone is mature enough to think this way.