Planetarion Forums

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 12:44

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4585295.stm

Having watched this on the tv the family, friends and well nation of australia come across as being slightly chavish. There seems to be an element of 'omg the wogs are actually daring to put on trial one of our girls'.

Summanus · 27 May 2005, 12:53

That's the sound of me not complaining. She should be shot tbh. Not because she's guilty or innocent, just because the whore is everywhere over here

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 12:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

20 years is pretty steep though.

Not when the alternative is death. But i get your meaning it was 'only' weeeed. Still the way the relatives/friends/australia come across is a bit cheap.

Summanus · 27 May 2005, 13:10

And now there's calls for us to boycott Bali and Indonesia, and saying that because we gave them humanitarian aid after the tsunami they should release her, saying crap like 'they abandoned us in our time of need'

Simple fact is your bring drugs over there, you get sent away or shot. She was found to have brought drugs over there. Let her appeal, let their system work it out, let her do some time over here afterwards. But any talk of a boycott or this being Indonesia snobbing Australia is dumb, populist drivel concocted by the media tbh. (The media have given her family and lawyers contracts btw)

Deepflow · 27 May 2005, 13:20

yet another example of absurd drug laws. All this woman wanted to do was make a quick buck by selling something to people that they wanted and which almost certainly wouldnt do mental harm and is incapable of doing physical harm. 20 years of her life gone, because of that.

oh well

it happens every day, what an awful world.

oh, and i don't believe for a second the drugs weren't hers. I find it very hard to envisage a scenario where a large amount of marijuana is given to some random person.

Ninja_spammer · 27 May 2005, 13:44

Yet another absurd example of someone not able to realise that some countries actually enforce their laws.

Since Indonesia usually executes drug smugglers she should be happy that all she gets is 20 years, posibly even in an aussie prison, 9 lbs is a fair sized whack of weed.

Deepflow · 27 May 2005, 14:09

why should she be HAPPY that she got 20 years?

all she wanted to do was sell drugs, something which isnt even morally wrong (objectively lol), and now she has to spend TWENTY YEARS in prison. Just think for a second how long that actually is.

pablissimo · 27 May 2005, 15:26

Lady who broke law in foreign country shocked at existence of sovereignty non-story.

G.K Zhukov · 27 May 2005, 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by pablissimo

Lady who broke law in foreign country shocked at existence of sovereignty non-story.

Amen. Stupid people go to jail, we have heard it before.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deepflow

why should she be HAPPY that she got 20 years?

all she wanted to do was sell drugs, something which isnt even morally wrong (objectively lol), and now she has to spend TWENTY YEARS in prison. Just think for a second how long that actually is.

Regardless of whether the law is right or wrong (I believe it is wrong) she knew what she was doing. She knew the penalties and decided to risk it anyway. You win some, you lose some. Maybe next time she'll think twice about smuggling weed into a country with stupidly harsh drug penalties.

Edit: It's also not like she was breaking the law for any other reason than making money. Her greed cost her her freedom.

wu_trax · 27 May 2005, 16:16

if you break a law you have to deal withz the consequences. that's it. 20 years seems a lot, but if you are in another country its their laws that count, not you own standards. if there is no serious doubt that she really knew of those drugs, calling for boycotts and stuff really sounds somewhat stupid.

Ste · 27 May 2005, 16:19

harsh if she isn't at fault.
fair enough if she's actually guilty.

it wouldn't have been worthwhile money wise if there wasn't a risk involved. and if you take the risk you deal with the consequences.

Deepflow · 27 May 2005, 16:19

i dont disagree with all that, just saying the law is stupid.

sorry, this stuff just makes me angry

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 16:20

Don't commit crimes in the third world, kids.

I assume there's no basis for this smuggling allegation? One suspects that if there was, it would have been talked up more in the report.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 16:28

Surely those are arguments for the legalisation of drugs rather than continuing to wage a 'war' that can't be won.

Ste · 27 May 2005, 16:30

nantoz - it's only like that because they are illegal.
If they were legal then the drug lords wouldn't make as much money, rehabilitation would be easier, money could be made from taxing them (there is a massive profit made from them, they aren't expensive to produce), and a lot of the side effects are because of the poor quality of product.

Of course certain extremely addictive drugs I wouldn't like to see widely available but soft drugs that are no more harmful than ones legally available should be controlled legally without cracking down on users.

At the same time, different countries have different views on it and if you purposefully break the law you should accept the consequences as i said before.

Deepflow · 27 May 2005, 16:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

How can you say that?
From an utilitarian point of view the consequenses of drug abuse/ drug sales are often severe - the druglords using the monies to wage wars, etc. Families being broken up. Society having to use it's resources on rehabilitation/treatment.
Since the consequenses are bad, the act is bad.
Likewise both deontology and virty ethics would probably condmen drug sales.

The use of drugs is a somewhat different matter, though.

Wheter drugs harm people or not, it doesn't mean that they should be illegal. Of course they do some harm, but i believe that people should have the right to do what the hell they want to their own body/mind. If you have some kind of different viewpoint there, thats ok, but thats where im coming from.

About the druglords waging wars etc... what do you think does more damage to peoples lives: the occassional deaths and bad consequences of drug dealing (which only exists due to drugs illegality anyway) or the hugely widespread practice of putting people in prison simply for supplying something which there is a demand for.

There might be a slightly different argument for drugs like heroin and crack which are highly addictive (although i don't think it makes THAT much difference), but with marijuana and pretty much any other drug, its purely a recreational thing with very low risk attached to it. Now, i don't know if you have done many drugs, but trust me, they are fun, lots and lots of fun. People like me are being made criminals because we like to enjoy ourselves, and the glorious, wonderful people who supply us run huge risks. Granted, its for money, you can't really claim drug dealers are altruistic, but, whatever way you look at it, they spread far far more joy than misery throughout the world, and are locked up or killed for it.

sorry for the long post, its my pet subject :/

Loz · 27 May 2005, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

Regardless of whether the law is right or wrong (I believe it is wrong) she knew what she was doing. She knew the penalties and decided to risk it anyway. You win some, you lose some. Maybe next time she'll think twice about smuggling weed into a country with stupidly harsh drug penalties.

exactly. She's lucky with 20 years tbh when she could have had the death penalty. It really annoys me that Australia don't seem to be able to accept that she might actually be guilty.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 16:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loz

It really annoys me that Australia don't seem to be able to accept that she might actually be guilty.

I don't think any country actually can accept that. If the government did it would probably be seen as a type of 'betrayal'.

lokken · 27 May 2005, 16:41

People who break laws in other countries when they know what they are doing is illegal deserve to be locked up for stupidity.

Getting yourself locked up abroad FFS, especially in a country like Indonesia.

Loz · 27 May 2005, 16:42

I see what you mean there, and I didn't mean the government in particular, I meant more the general public. It does beg the question though, if someone like Harold Schipman (sp?) was tried and found guilty in another country, would we have accepted it?

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 16:44

I doubt there was ever any chance that she would have recieved the death penalty. So in a way it's essentially a maximum sentence.

lokken · 27 May 2005, 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loz

I see what you mean there, and I didn't mean the government in particular, I meant more the general public. It does beg the question though, if someone like Harold Schipman (sp?) was tried and found guilty in another country, would we have accepted it?

I think in some cases people focus on that country's human rights record rather than whether the person involved actually 'did it'.

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Don't commit crimes in the third world, kids.

.

I think thats unfair, as far as i can tell the trial has been conducted openly with the australians behaving like muppets. I agree that 20 years is harsh for marijuana, but thats just our judgement on what drugs are 'allowable' and what ones aren't and what time constitutes 'ok'.

Khat is legal in the UK but carries the same criminal implications as heroin/cocaine in the US. The Indonesians didn't go for the death penalty but relative to their judicial system the far more lenient 20 years, i think thats a far better indicator of their conduct than 'omg third world show trial' which isn't very far from saying 'how dare they put one of ours on trial, those turdworldians'

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nusselt

I think thats unfair, as far as i can tell the trial has been conducted openly with the australians behaving like muppets.

Sorry. That was a bit ambiguous. I wasn't really refering to the quality of the procedure here, but rather the length of the sentence.

Apothos · 27 May 2005, 16:55

She looks stoned in the picture with the article.

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Sorry. That was a bit ambiguous. I wasn't really refering to the quality of the procedure here, but rather the length of the sentence.

Ah gotcha

im kinda wondering what the australians reaction to all this would have been if she'd been caught smuggling 9 illegal immigrants into their country.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nusselt

I think thats unfair, as far as i can tell the trial has been conducted openly with the australians behaving like muppets. I agree that 20 years is harsh for marijuana, but thats just our judgement on what drugs are 'allowable' and what ones aren't and what time constitutes 'ok'.

Khat is legal in the UK but carries the same criminal implications as heroin/cocaine in the US. The Indonesians didn't go for the death penalty but relative to their judicial system the far more lenient 20 years, i think thats a far better indicator of their conduct than 'omg third world show trial' which isn't very far from saying 'how dare they put one of ours on trial, those turdworldians'

It's still good advice though, especially when you consider how abysmal conditions in third world jails are percived to be.

G.K Zhukov · 27 May 2005, 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loz

exactly. She's lucky with 20 years tbh when she could have had the death penalty. It really annoys me that Australia don't seem to be able to accept that she might actually be guilty.

That's becouse she is white, and they are brown.

(The first one to claim that Australia is a rascist-free country, will get a neg-rep from me.)

Loz · 27 May 2005, 17:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

That's becouse she is white, and they are brown.

(The first one to claim that Australia is a rascist-free country, will get a neg-rep from me.)

hehehe, point taken. I kinda suspected it but it's pretty crap of Australia.

djbass · 27 May 2005, 17:23

Tonight I lost my faith in GD

I'm as anti-drug as they come, I'm all for stricter laws against them, but I do feel the death penalty is a bit extreme.

I think people in here are being a bit harsh, placing judgements against someone they nor I even know other than what they've seen in the media. Saying 'lol.. lol! stupid bitch she deserves it..' etc places you lower on the social rung IMO.

Given the above it would be cynical of me to assume I know her and say she's innocent (or guilty for that matter). What I do know though is that nothing about the circumstances that lead to all this add up. Most Australians are aware of Indonesia's strict drug laws, it would be pretty damn stupid to even attempt smuggling that quantity of drugs in your luggage. Once again, I do not know her, but druggy or not she does not seem the type that would be silly enough to try this. I do genuinely believe she is innocent.

As for Nusselt's initial comments I do not expect you to understand unless you're Australian (and also not evidently an arrogant sydney'sider). We are a very patriotic nation, we stick together, it's one of the rarer qualitys that makes us a great country. When one of our own falls into bad territory, especially one that enforces the death penalty you can damned well expect we'll do anything in our power to fight it.

As for whether there's any basis to smuggling operations? Damn straight there is!
I geuss this isn't any different to most other countries, but drug smuggling in Australia is a huge, outright massive industry. The Australian customs office seem very effiecient in foiling the plans of drug importers who seemingly will do anything to get the drugs across. Do I think it's possible they stash drugs into random peoples luggage? Hell yeah! They aint stupid,they know they'll get the death penalty if caught, it's far more worth it risking them on a fall person and 'possibly' losing some rather expensive drugs than to have their whole operation at risk.

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 17:33

Erm she isn't going to be killed.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 17:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

Tonight I lost my faith in GD

I'm as anti-drug as they come, I'm all for stricter laws against them, but I do feel the death penalty is a bit extreme.

How dare people provide what others want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

I think people in here are being a bit harsh, placing judgements against someone they nor I even know other than what they've seen in the media. Saying 'lol.. lol! stupid bitch she deserves it..' etc places you lower on the social rung IMO.

If she did it then those comments are perfectly acceptable, if a bit crude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

Given the above it would be cynical of me to assume I know her and say she's innocent (or guilty for that matter). What I do know though is that nothing about the circumstances that lead to all this add up. Most Australians are aware of Indonesia's strict drug laws, it would be pretty damn stupid to even attempt smuggling that quantity of drugs in your luggage. Once again, I do not know her, but druggy or not she does not seem the type that would be silly enough to try this. I do genuinely believe she is innocent.

You do not know her, so you cannot really say she does not seem the type. Criminals are rarely the stereotypes the media portray.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

As for Nusselt's initial comments I do not expect you to understand unless you're Australian (and also not evidently an arrogant sydney'sider). We are a very patriotic nation, we stick together, it's one of the rarer qualitys that makes us a great country. When one of our own falls into bad territory, especially one that enforces the death penalty you can damned well expect we'll do anything in our power to fight it.

there is a thing as too much patriotism, especially when it begins vo interfere with the legal systems of other countries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

As for whether there's any basis to smuggling operations? Damn straight there is! I geuss this isn't any different to most other countries, but drug smuggling in Australia is a huge, outright massive industry.

Why not make it legal?

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

The Australian customs office seem very effiecient in foiling the plans of drug importers who seemingly will do anything to get the drugs across.

Being on an island and all....

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

Do I think it's possible they stash drugs into random peoples luggage? Hell yeah! They aint stupid,they know they'll get the death penalty if caught, it's far more worth it risking them on a fall person and 'possibly' losing some rather expensive drugs than to have their whole operation at risk.

It is possible they were stashed, but wat are they oing to do then? Mug her? there is quite a lot, it's not ike they dropped a baggie with a quarter into her pocket is it?

djbass · 27 May 2005, 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

How dare people provide what others want.

I'm not sure I understand this comment. Is this meant to be pro-drug or something? That wasn't the intention of my post to debate drug legalities and such, but since you ask... of course people want them, they're addicted, that's the nature of drugs. They are a social problem, of course explaining this to a druggie is futile though. If I could I'd even make ciggerettes illegal.

Quote:

If she did it then those comments are perfectly acceptable, if a bit crude.

Well that's the thing, there's no solid evidence she did.

Quote:

You do not know her, so you cannot really say she does not seem the type. Criminals are rarely the stereotypes the media portray.

I was profiling her as a typical Aussie rather than a druggie. I live in a town where I'd easily say 1 in 5 people I know are doing drugs of some variety. Most of them pretty ordinary people, but once you know what to look for there are very subtle personality traits I notice in a lot of them.

Quote:

there is a thing as too much patriotism, especially when it begins vo interfere with the legal systems of other countries.

I wont disagree with that. However, you can not expect a country that does not support the death penalty to sit aside and allow a legal system in another country that does pass judgement on one of its own. To put Nusselt at ease, I'm aware she did not get the death penalty, and I'm happy enough with that, but had Australia not intervened I feel that could have been very different.

Quote:

Why not make it legal?

Why so? Ciggerettes are legal, it hasn't made it any less of a social problem though has it?

Quote:

It is possible they were stashed, but wat are they oing to do then? Mug her? there is quite a lot, it's not ike they dropped a baggie with a quarter into her pocket is it?

You can't have been following the news too well then to not know th answer to that. They insert the drugs at one end and extract it at the other. They do this either by a contact gaining access to the rather poorly gaurded baggage at the other end, or luggage handlers that are a part of the operation that do it for them. Even still, I would not put it past them to simply mug her either.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

I'm not sure I understand this comment. Is this meant to be pro-drug or something? That wasn't the intention of my post to debate drug legalities and such, but since you ask... of course people want them, they're addicted, that's the nature of drugs.

that's a very nieve way of looking at it, especially as the vast majority of drug users are not addicts and use them recreationally.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

They are a social problem, of course explaining this to a druggie is futile though. If I could I'd even make ciggerettes illegal.

What about alcohol?

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

I was profiling her as a typical Aussie rather than a druggie. I live in a town where I'd easily say 1 in 5 people I know are doing drugs of some variety. Most of them pretty ordinary people, but once you know what to look for there are very subtle personality traits I notice in a lot of them.

Smuggler doesn't automatically equal druggie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

I wont disagree with that. However, you can not expect a country that does not support the death penalty to sit aside and allow a legal system in another country that does pass judgement on one of its own.

Would be thinking the same if she had been given 20 years for murder in texas rather than the death penalty?

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

Why so? Ciggerettes are legal, it hasn't made it any less of a social problem though has it?

Depends what ou mean by 'social problems'. Could you define it please?

Quote:

Originally Posted by djbass

You can't have been following the news too well then to not know th answer to that. They insert the drugs at one end and extract it at the other. They do this either by a contact gaining access to the rather poorly gaurded baggage at the other end, or luggage handlers that are a part of the operation that do it for them. Even still, I would not put it past them to simply mug her either.

to be perfectly honest I've not followed this story at all but I do have a contempt for the press and the such in this type of situation. there is a tendency to assume that anyone convicted of a crime outside of their country (especially outside or Europe) is innocent or has been set up.

Nusselt · 27 May 2005, 18:33

Im still unsure why exactly australia is so shocked by the case. I understand she is presumumed innocent i can't find any real evidence to back that up all people seem to be saying is 'shes a good girl shes one of us she wouldn't do that', which is hardly a concrete foundation for an appeal. Is there any credible evidence of her being set-up?

The only fair way that the sentence can be judged (outside an objective worldwide legal system that doesn't exist) is to compare the time she got relative to what the maximum and the norm are. 20 years for 9lbs is a long time in the uk but compared to what is the norm and max in Indonesia i hardly think the book has been thrown at her.

As far as i can tell the real grievance of the australians is that the indonesians have dared to put on trial one of 'their' girls.

All Systems Go · 27 May 2005, 18:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

The principles of autonomy are important, that is true. But people must sometimes be protected against themselves and their poor reasoning.
If society is to allow the use of all drugs, then IMO society should also refuse to take any responsibilty when someone takes an over-dose, needs rehabilitation or treatment.

But if their taxes pay for these things, like smokers paying more tax towards the NHS, why should they be refused help?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Simply because there might be a demand for something, we shouldn't automatically try to supply that demand. Certain people want to make and sell child pornography - but we have to judge them and their actions.
Not all believes/demands are equal or worthy of support!

the creation and use of drugs does not automatically result in the explitation and abuse of people. Child porn is a very different situation with the ause of children inherent from the beginning. You could however, make a case for the creation of child prnography in the form of animation which could calm a paedophiles cravings (or whatever you want to call it) and would not harm any children.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Should the goverment in your opinion be the one to make/grow drugs and then sell them through state controlled 'pharmacies' of some sort?

I don't see the problem with making them in the same way tobaco is made, but the sale should be regulated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Money isn't everything, the consequesns would simply be too grave. Many goverments have rules concerning where they can invest their money - this often include production of land mines, businesses that might use child labour, the sex industry, etc.
But you are saying drugs are OK, because you think they are fun - atleast you think so now....

Irrisponsible drug use (like obsessive binge drining) is stupid and if you do so you know the risks ou are running. It's all about personal responsibility. Again, landmines and child labour cannot be compared in the slightest to the production and sale of drugs.

pablissimo · 27 May 2005, 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Should the goverment in your opinion be the one to make/grow drugs and then sell them through state controlled 'pharmacies' of some sort?
Money isn't everything, the consequesns would simply be too grave.

Which consequences?

Edit: To clarify, I've many a friend who use recreational drugs on nights out and yet manage to refrain from mugging old women, turning up to work stoned and jumping from balconies, I'm having genuine difficulty seeing the 'grave consequences' of allowing the restricted sale of high-quality drugs through licensed vendors.

JonnyBGood · 27 May 2005, 18:58

Ban alcohol.

This has been a vaguely coherent point in yet another thread. Thanks for reading.

lokken · 27 May 2005, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Ban alcohol.

This has been a vaguely coherent point in yet another thread. Thanks for reading.

Ban Stupidity

I win!

LHC · 27 May 2005, 20:50

ban australia

edit: i mean everything

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokken

Ban Stupidity

I win!

If stupidity was banned, then half of the people posting on GD would end up in Strangeways.

Bashar · 27 May 2005, 21:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

20 years is pretty steep though.

Let's assume she did it, and that her story of a plant is false (purely for the purposes of my point, not as any judgement).

The law is there, she went into the country knowing the law, knowing what she was doing and knowing the punishment. Under this situation, she still chose to do it. As a result, it is not steep, she knew the consequences, and by way of still breaking the law, accepted the consequences should she be caught. Complaining about the punishment is like claiming that it was unfair that you hit the ground that hard after jumping off a building.

lokken · 27 May 2005, 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

If stupidity was banned, then half of the people posting on GD would end up in Strangeways.

You're saying this as if it's a bad thing dear

Tactitus · 27 May 2005, 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bashar

The law is there, she went into the country knowing the law, knowing what she was doing and knowing the punishment. Under this situation, she still chose to do it. As a result, it is not steep, she knew the consequences, and by way of still breaking the law, accepted the consequences should she be caught.

Exactly. Everyone knows that Indonesian courts hand out unusually harsh sentences. Even Abu Bakar Bashir, the head of the Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist organization, got a whopping 30-month sentence for his involvement in blowing up a mere 202 infidels.

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 22:23

What?

Phang · 27 May 2005, 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Exactly. Everyone knows that Indonesian courts hand out unusually harsh sentences. Even Abu Bakar Bashir, the head of the Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist organization, got a whopping 30-month sentence for his involvement in blowing up a mere 202 infidels.

hay guys another country has a different legal system obviously the rule of law shouldnt apply

quite seriously, what was your point there?

Stew · 27 May 2005, 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phang

hay guys another country

Weren't both in Indonesia?

Marilyn Manson · 27 May 2005, 22:30

Well, it might have been relevant if she had been an Indonesian militant involved in blowing up 200 people, and then recieved this sentence; then there would have been an obvious disparity in the sentences. But she wasn't, and didn't. She was a foreigner caught trafficking drugs, on which Indonesia has been toughening up extensively in recent years, and which can carry a maximum penalty of death - which, I believe, has happened before today for some foreign traffickers.

So the original point about Indonesia having consistently harsh penalties for this type of crime, which any trafficker must be aware of, still kind of stands. In fact, she actually got a fairly lenient sentence for this kind of crime, by Indonesian standards.

Tactitus · 27 May 2005, 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phang

hay guys another country has a different legal system obviously the rule of law shouldnt apply

quite seriously, what was your point there?

My point is that there seems to be a double standard for criminal sentencing in Indonesia. One which applies to muslim clerics who lead terrorist organizations which blow up foreigners and another which applies to foreigners who smuggle marijuana. I'm not impressed with a legal system where the later get prison sentences eight times longer than the former.