Singapore will not soften its stand on drugs, Shanmugam tells UN
73 replies, posted
[QUOTE=poppyman;50177474]Dont like it, don't come to Singapore. Its really that simple.
And for the record, the drug problem in the US is hardly "better".[/QUOTE]
I'd take a country with drug problems over a country where the government executes people for nonviolent crimes any day.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50177474]Dont like it, don't come to Singapore. Its really that simple.
And for the record, the drug problem in the US is hardly "better".[/QUOTE]
Well at least we don't murder civilians for consuming drugs, also the fact that alcohol is legal there and you get murdered for 500 grams of weed is ironic as fuck.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;50177968]Yeah we fuck up peoples lives but we're slowly legalizing marijuana and we don't [b]execute people[/b] for having drugs.
Like, if the Mexican cartel ever took over the government, that's the kind of shit they would put into law. I will make sure to take your advice and never come to Singapore btw, wouldn't want someone to plant drugs on a foreigner and then be put to death.[/QUOTE]
Thank you, that will save both of us a lot of disappointment.
I think there's this misconception that Singapore is some dystopian state where you get persecuted for every small infarction, but honestly you dont even have to be open-minded to find that its really a nice and safe place to live.
I believe in a Lockean social contract, so I dont see a problem in sacrificing some of my freedoms if it means securing the rest and guaranteeing a safe (though albeit somewhat sterile) society.
Way to completely ignore what everyone has been saying.
[QUOTE=BelatedGamer;50178978]Way to completely ignore what everyone has been saying.[/QUOTE]
My friend, i'm not here to answer your whims.
Just leaving my opinion, take from it what you will.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179020]My friend, i'm not here to answer your whims.
Just leaving my opinion, take from it what you will.[/QUOTE]
"Answer to your whims"? I'm sorry, my friend, but we aren't here to believe whatever bullshit you say without backing it up. Either provide reasons for us to believe you, or quit whining that no one agrees with your opinion.
I don't get how the international community allows Singapore to practice such fascist concepts.
[QUOTE=BelatedGamer;50179034]"Answer to my whims"? I'm sorry, my friend, but we aren't here to believe whatever bullshit you say without backing it up. Either provide reasons for us to believe you, or quit whining that no one agrees with your opinion.[/QUOTE]
I am under no illusion that I will be able to convince you. I'm just stating the reasons why I think our tough laws are justified, and I was hoping you would reply in a more civilized manner instead of labeling it as "bullshit".
I'm also at a lost as to how you find that whining. Perhaps you could justify that?
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179051]I am under no illusion that I will be able to convince you. I'm just stating the reasons why I think our tough laws are justified, and I was hoping you would reply in a more civilized manner instead of labeling it as "bullshit".
I'm also at a lost as to how you find that whining. Perhaps you could justify that?[/QUOTE]
You happen to have a government triggerman behind you as you type this? There is absolutely no reason someone should be issued a mandatory execution for just a bit of weed.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179051]I am under no illusion that I will be able to convince you. I'm just stating the reasons why I think our tough laws are justified, and I was hoping you would reply in a more civilized manner instead of labeling it as "bullshit".
I'm also at a lost as to how you find that whining. Perhaps you could justify that?[/QUOTE]
Because you didn't actually respond to the biggest criticism towards your viewpoint; namely the whole execution thing. You didn't even justify your tough laws, like you just claimed to.
And when you get called out on this you say "I'm not here to answer to your whims", which is just about the whiniest edgelord thing I can think of. So yeah, whining.
[QUOTE=matt000024;50179057]You happen to have a government triggerman behind you as you type this? There is absolutely no reason someone should be issued a mandatory execution for just a bit of weed.[/QUOTE]
Why not? I believe the role of the government is to fulfill the general good. If harsh punishments fulfill that end, i think its justified, and so far we have seen no reason why that should not be the case.
Mind you, on weed I agree completely with you; the sentence is way too harsh for something that is essentially harmless: legalization is the way to go. But for harder drugs, no, we do not need these in our society.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179100]Why not? I believe the role of the government is to fulfill the general good. If harsh punishments fulfill that end, i think its justified, and so far we have seen no reason why that should not be the case.
Mind you, on weed I agree completely with you; the sentence is way too harsh for something that is essentially harmless: legalization is the way to go. But for harder drugs, no, we do not need these in our society.[/QUOTE]
Okay, but how do you go from "We do not need these in our society" to "we should execute anyone who has these in society"?
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179100]Why not? I believe the role of the government is to fulfill the general good. If harsh punishments fulfill that end, i think its justified, and so far we have seen no reason why that should not be the case.
Mind you, on weed I agree completely with you; the sentence is way too harsh for something that is essentially harmless: legalization is the way to go. But for harder drugs, no, we do not need these in our society.[/QUOTE]
So your solution to not needing harder drugs means kill them?
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179100]Why not? I believe the role of the government is to fulfill the general good. If harsh punishments fulfill that end, i think its justified, and so far we have seen no reason why that should not be the case.
Mind you, on weed I agree completely with you; the sentence is way too harsh for something that is essentially harmless: legalization is the way to go. But for harder drugs, no, we do not need these in our society.[/QUOTE]
It's a fundamental human right that punishments must fit the crime and serve a purpose. Executing someone for damaging their own body does not go along with this.
-come to think of it, this is quite dumb
[QUOTE=KonorB;50179772]Says the one with the Three Strikes Law where people can get a life sentence just because they did a minor crime 3 times.[/QUOTE]
"Oh yeah, well your dad beats you too!"
it's like when people criticize russia and then you get russian patriots coming in to say "well the US is shit too!!"
if the only defense you can muster for the shitty state of your country is "we aren't the only country this terrible" then maybe that's a sign your country is fucked up
[QUOTE=KonorB;50179772]Says the one with the Three Strikes Law where people can get a life sentence just because they did a minor crime 3 times.[/QUOTE]
Ah yes; this person is in a country that has some shitty things, so their opinion on other countries shitty things is irrelevant. Classic fallacy, well done.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50179051]I am under no illusion that I will be able to convince you. I'm just stating the reasons why I think our tough laws are justified, and I was hoping you would reply in a more civilized manner instead of labeling it as "bullshit".
I'm also at a lost as to how you find that whining. Perhaps you could justify that?[/QUOTE]
It's not really justified when other societies have managed to achieve similar levels of safety without having to resort to killing people for nonviolent crimes, or indeed killing people at all. Capital punishment as a deterrence does not work in the sense that other forms of deterrence or management are just as effective.
[editline]22nd April 2016[/editline]
And quite frankly I'm willing to have a slightly higher crime rate and more social unrest if it meant enjoying greater freedom of speech and having my basic human rights being guaranteed.
[QUOTE=BelatedGamer;50179819]Ah yes; this person is in a country that has some shitty things, so their opinion on other countries shitty things is irrelevant. Classic fallacy, well done.[/QUOTE]
So pointing out hypocrisy is now fallacy eh?
[QUOTE=KonorB;50179865]So pointing out hypocrisy is now fallacy eh?[/QUOTE]
What you did was not point out hypocrisy, it was dismissing what he said on the grounds that it's hypocritical -- which is called ad hominem by the way.
Also what he said may not even be hypocritical; he certainly didn't make that law. In fact, he may very well be opposed to it.
So not only was that a fallacy -- it was uninformed and really really stupid.
[QUOTE=BelatedGamer;50179884]What you did was not point out hypocrisy, it was dismissing what he said on the grounds that it's hypocritical -- which is called ad hominem by the way.
Also what he said may not even be hypocritical; he certainly didn't make that law. In fact, he may very well be opposed to it.
So not only was that a fallacy -- it was uninformed and really really stupid.[/QUOTE]
Actually, come to think of it, that was actually quite dumb.
But still, the point I'm trying to get across is that he who lives in a glass house(or country in this case) should not throw stones at other people.
[QUOTE=KonorB;50180010]Actually, come to think of it, that was actually quite dumb.
But still, the point I'm trying to get across is that he who lives in a glass house(or country in this case) should not throw stones at other people.[/QUOTE]
Wow, I actually respect you a great deal more now for admitting that you were acting while uninformed. It's probably more than I would do, good job.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50177474]Dont like it, don't come to Singapore. Its really that simple.
And for the record, the drug problem in the US is hardly "better".[/QUOTE]
"Don't like it, don't come to come to North Korea. It's really that simple."
Whoa, you're right, it's totally a valid argument in favor of totalitarian regimes. Works everytime.
At least the Chinese try to stand up to their oppressors from time to time. You just lap it all up and ask for more.
Maybe you should try joints sometimes, would make you less stuck up and less likely to support killing people for possessing grass when alcohol is a-ok. Do they kill you for littering, too? How many Chinese tourists do you execute per day? You've probably had slaughterhouses built for them already.
Your whole state is like a neighborhood association gone berserk.
[QUOTE=_Axel;50180094]"Don't like it, don't come to come to North Korea. It's really that simple."
Whoa, you're right, it's totally a valid argument in favor of totalitarian regimes. Works everytime.
At least the Chinese try to stand up to their oppressors from time to time. You just lap it all up and ask for more.
Maybe you should try joints sometimes, would make you less stuck up and less likely to support killing people for possessing grass when alcohol is a-ok. Do they kill you for littering, too? How many Chinese tourists do you execute per day? You've probably had slaughterhouses built for them already.
Your whole state is like a neighborhood association gone berserk.[/QUOTE]
If Singapore is a totalitarian state as you speak, there would not be any political party except the PAP. But there's a lot of other political parties in Singapore as well, one of which is PAP's biggest opponent, the Worker Party.
And it's not that Singaporeans don't try to change the government, they did and you can see here:
[T]http://www.todayonline.com/sites/default/files/styles/photo_gallery_image_lightbox/public/photos/43_images/overall_results.png?itok=pjIv1_SC[/T]
Here's the thing that's bullshit, the PAP got 69% of the popular votes but they won 93% of the seats in Parliament. The WP got 12.5% of the popular vote but they only won the other 7% of the seats.
I don't know but this whole thing just oozes with gerrymandering to me.
It doesn't helps that we have an aging population where a significant percentage of our demographic are above 60+. And we know how super conservative those old coots can be. Most of them lived through the pre independence days and supported the PAP since independence so to them, no PAP=no Singapore.
[QUOTE=_Axel;50180094]"Don't like it, don't come to come to North Korea. It's really that simple."
Whoa, you're right, it's totally a valid argument in favor of totalitarian regimes. Works everytime.
At least the Chinese try to stand up to their oppressors from time to time. You just lap it all up and ask for more.
Maybe you should try joints sometimes, would make you less stuck up and less likely to support killing people for possessing grass when alcohol is a-ok. Do they kill you for littering, too? How many Chinese tourists do you execute per day? You've probably had slaughterhouses built for them already.
Your whole state is like a neighborhood association gone berserk.[/QUOTE]
That's rich coming from a Frenchie, considering your country suffered two deadly terrorist attacks in 2015 alone; you people really do enjoy your freedoms far more than your life. I'm not saying we have the best system, but it works and it keeps us safe; you can cry all you want but the system is going to exist longer than you will. And you really should do a bit of research to find that Singapore is by no means a totalitarian state (which I believe is the message of the poster above me). Your assessment of Singapore is so uninformed its kinda pathetic.
Also, maybe if you read my posts further you would realize I think the death penalty for weed is ridiculous.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50191298]That's rich coming from a Frenchie, considering your country suffered two deadly terrorist attacks in 2015 alone; you people really do enjoy your freedoms far more than your life. I'm not saying we have the best system, but it works and it keeps us safe; you can cry all you want but the system is going to exist longer than you will. And you really should do a bit of research to find that Singapore is by no means a totalitarian state (which I believe is the message of the poster above me). Your assessment of Singapore is so uninformed its kinda pathetic.
Also, maybe if you read my posts further you would realize I think the death penalty for weed is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
What on Earth do terrorist attacks have anything to do with drug policy?
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50191370]What on Earth do terrorist attacks have anything to do with drug policy?[/QUOTE]
Nothing, I was replying to his stating that Singapore has a totalitarian regime.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50191376]Nothing, I was replying to his stating that Singapore has a totalitarian regime.[/QUOTE]
Yes, criticizing his government (that he may or may not support) because it's recently suffered terrorist attacks (which are pretty fucking unavoidable considering what's happening there) totally strengthens your position, gotcha.
[QUOTE=poppyman;50191298]That's rich coming from a Frenchie, considering your country suffered two deadly terrorist attacks in 2015 alone; you people really do enjoy your freedoms far more than your life. I'm not saying we have the best system, but it works and it keeps us safe; you can cry all you want but the system is going to exist longer than you will. And you really should do a bit of research to find that Singapore is by no means a totalitarian state (which I believe is the message of the poster above me). Your assessment of Singapore is so uninformed its kinda pathetic.
Also, maybe if you read my posts further you would realize I think the death penalty for weed is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
Hahaha yeah bring up the one topic that's completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. I'm more likely to die in a plane crash than in a terrorist attack, and I live in Paris. Regardless of that, your anally retentive interior policies wouldn't have changed anything. You think the death penalty will frighten people who want to blow themselves up in the first place? But yeah let's crack down on personal freedom as a feel-good measure. If you were French you'd probably be one of the retards who support the extension of the state of emergency.
If you really were that bothered by people being murdered for weed you wouldn't be so complacent with your current system. Anything that consider death penalty a sensible sentence is a joke of a judicial system anyway. But I guess not supporting murdering potential innocents makes me someone with no regard for my own life in your eye. It's kind of an hypocritical thing to think when someone can end your life by simply planting drugs on you.
[QUOTE=BelatedGamer;50191387]Yes, criticizing his government (that he may or may not support) because it's recently suffered terrorist attacks (which are pretty fucking unavoidable considering what's happening there) totally strengthens your position, gotcha.[/QUOTE]
Lol, get your head out of your ass. He stated his disapproval of our "totalitarian" regime, I say its not so bad because at least it keeps us safe. Whether he supports his own government is another matter.
And nothing is unavoidable, everything that happened, happened because a history of events encouraged it to (french support for syrian rebels comes to mind).
[editline]24th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=_Axel;50191395]Hahaha yeah bring up the one topic that's completely irrelevant to the matter at hand. I'm more likely to die in a plane crash than in a terrorist attack, and I live in Paris. Regardless of that, your anally retentive interior policies wouldn't have changed anything. You think the death penalty will frighten people who want to blow themselves up in the first place? But yeah let's crack down on personal freedom as a feel-good measure. If you were French you'd probably be one of the retards who support the extension of the state of emergency.
If you really were that bothered by people being murdered for weed you wouldn't be so complacent with your current system. Anything that consider death penalty a sensible sentence is a joke of a judicial system anyway. But I guess not supporting murdering potential innocents makes me someone with no regard for my own life in your eye. It's kind of an hypocritical thing to think when someone can end your life by simply planting drugs on you.[/QUOTE]
Well, you brought up the issue of totalitarianism in the first place. And if you had any reading capacity left, my position has always been that we give up some personal freedoms to secure our safety, and whatever other freedoms are left. If you dont see it that way then so be it.
I know I probably won't convince you, so lets drop the topic here. You can continue to enjoy your freedoms while living under the threat of terrorism and I can continue living in a safe yet restricted society. Just, dont ever come to Singapore, in all likelihood it won't be your cup of tea.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.