Thread: They've been shot dead

I do not condone capital punishment. I agree with FenceFurniture; it does not give a positive outcome for anyone.

However, the Bali Nine were well aware of what the possible consequences of their actions could be and they still went ahead and attempted to smuggle 8kg of drugs that could have ruined many lives in Australia. The reason Chan and Sukumaran were the two who were sentenced to death was that they were the organizers and had coerced the other seven into participating by threatening to harm their families if they did not cooperate.

The death penalty has done nothing to change that but they knew what the risks were when they did the deed. I also have concerns about what will happen if Tony Abbot and Julie Bishop do anything more threatening to the Indonesians other than jumping up and down and swearing at them.

Cheers

Doug

Well there is a surprise, they have been shot dead.

Have to agree with Doug on this, you play with fire you get burnt.

They knew the consequences right from the get go.

My question is who was paying for all these extra court cases to try and get them from this sentence , these lawyers do not work for free.

They also took to the grave the names of the people who they were working for, these are the ones who should have been standing alongside them, but they sit in their ivory towers in Sydney laughing.

We heard lots on tele until about 6 weeks ago then it all stopped.
I wonder why that happened?

Even if Indonesia wanted to reduce their sentence they wouldn't do it.
They will have done it to spite Australia, "They will not tell us what to do in our own country".
We are pulling out the ambassador, Indonesia don't care, "They will come back and we will be the winner".

In general and in my opinion you can't trust Indonesia as far as you can poop yourself when you have the trots.

Peter

Who cares, cause I like many many others don't give a rats.

Originally Posted by _fly_

We heard lots on tele until about 6 weeks ago then it all stopped.
I wonder why that happened?

...

Peter

Something to do with ordinary people getting sick of the whole shebang, methinks

I had been toying with starting a thread on this subject myself, but while I procrastinated, FF has gone and done it.

It is a very emotive and controversial issue and that's probably the only real truth. So what are the pros and cons for the execution?

Pro

This is the law in Indonesia.
The drug runners knew this.
Why do we think we have the right to interfere in Indonesia's policies (compare to America's interference in other countries: A right royal f**k up)?
Their drug dealing has the potential to perpetuate huge amounts of misery and social turmoil.
They conscripted moles possibly under duress.
The lesser minions in their operation also suffered as a consequence.
They were indeed the ring leaders.

Cons

The death penalty for running narcotics is rare in civilised countries (about a handful).
The two men showed considerable remorse and had apparently reformed.
They would not have been apprehended if it were not for a tip off from the AFP (Good reason for requesting clemency by Australia).
It is not like they were going to get off Scott free. Twenty years in an Indonesian prison is not like being incarcerated in Club Med.
Some allegations of corruption during the original trial and now under investigation.
What purpose does the death penalty really serve in this instance?

My take on this is that Indonesia is telling Australia, and indeed the rest of the world, to butt out of their affairs: Not to meddle and manipulate. From reports I have read the Indonesian president Widodo is currently unpopular and this refusal to grant clemency is to bolster his rating amongst both his own party and the populace.

If this is true, it means that Chan and Sukumaran are in reality the victims of a political agenda.

Now the big question is how this will impact on relations between Indonesia and Australia. It is naive to imagine there will be no impact and yet the prspect of an impact because of two drug runners (criminals if you like) is bizarre. I am not suggesting there will be a war, at least not in terms of fisticuffs, but economic? Maybe.

I watched Julie Bishop last night on 7.30. The body language was interesting. She was agitated, particularly for her.

There may be more at stake here than we first imagine. Perhaps this is the catalyst to unleash underlying tensions.

Possibly the only things that is certain is that this act by the Indonesian government and especially the Indonesian President is unrevokable.

Regards
Paul

Originally Posted by rod1949

Who cares, cause I like many many others don't give a rats.

There plenty who do care, such as their innocent families who have been given a very torrid time. If it was your son you may have a different opinion?

Originally Posted by _fly_

We heard lots on tele until about 6 weeks ago then it all stopped.
I wonder why that happened?

Even if Indonesia wanted to reduce their sentence they wouldn't do it.
They will have done it to spite Australia, "They will not tell us what to do in our own country".
We are pulling out the ambassador, Indonesia don't care, "They will come back and we will be the winner".

In general and in my opinion you can't trust Indonesia as far as you can poop yourself when you have the trots.

Peter

Don't blame Indonesia for this, 9 Australians went to their country and knowingly broke their laws.

They were caught, with the help of Australian law enforcement.

The Indonesian law they knowingly broke carries the death penalty, which 2 of them subsequently got handed out.

Indonesia has consistently said they would carry out this sentence, despite heaps of people outside their country jumping up and down demanding they change their mind. This included our Prime Minister and our Foreign Minister, both should have known better.

Now that they have been executed we are going to play a childish tit for tat game, which will achieve nothing.

As a country we have expended political capital and heaps of real dollars to defend 2 drug pushers who were only interested in making a quick buck at the expense of ruining countless Australian lives.

As per usual our do gooder brigade focuses on the perpretators, totally ignoring the victims.

Not that long ago Australia bayed for the blood of the Bali bomber Amrozi, not too many objectors to the death penalty around then.

Good on Indonesia for sticking to their guns.

It is funny people care when these people get caught. Let’s see how much they care about teaching young people the danger of drugs.

mercy.png

Originally Posted by Wongo

It is funny people care when these people get caught. Let’s see how much they care about teaching young people the danger of drugs.

What's funny is how Indonesia tries to save it's own citizens from the same fate in other countries. If that's not a double standard then I'm an expert woodworker.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

What's funny is how Indonesia tries to save it's own citizens from the same fate in other countries. If that's not a double standard then I'm an expert woodworker.

I agree with you. There should be no double standard.

I feel for the families of the two but I am glad it went ahead. It enforces the law there that if you are guilty you will be executed.

It is a shame it was dragged out for so long with the continuous useless appeals and politics, but I guess if it was my son I'd do what ever I could to stop it, but by the same token if my son a drug addict had died I would do every thing I could to ensure they were executed.

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were shot dead at 3.30am this morning (AEST).

Neither I, nor anyone else, condones their actions in 2006. Nor can their actions be regarded as minor.

However, very little if anything will be gained by their lives being ended in such a barbaric way.

For all their faults and criminal actions, they still had a positive contribution to make, even if it was only to help other prisoners be rehabilitated. After all, that's what prison is for.

Perhaps Joe Hockey will get an unexpected $½Bill bonus.

It will be interesting to see how our PM handles this diplomacy. Not well I fear.

When I discuss the issue of capital punishment with friends I point out how strange it is that the very people we can't trust to spend our tax money wisely have somehow earned our trust in the making of life and death decisions. If the government can't keep the roads in good repair how can they possibly be relied upon to decide who lives and who dies?

There will of course be many viewpoints on this topic.

One that I think is worth exploring is as follows:
There is talk that if a $130,000 bribe had been paid then they would have received a life sentence or 20 years. If that had happened and they were just gaoled (and we wouldn't necessarily have known about the bribe), would those who are glad/don't care/couldn't give a rat's that they are dead have demanded that the gaol sentence be overturned and that they be shot?

Or would the criminals just have faded into distant memory with no further recriminations required?

I think the latter would be the case.

I guess the point I'm making is that if they had just been gaoled for life (and I mean life) it would have been widely or universally accepted as appropriate justice and they would have been forgotten about, but because it's been brought to the fore in the light of their lives being ended it's stirred up polarisation that would not have otherwise been present.

As far as it being a deterrent - well obviously not, just as the prospect of 20-30-40 years in hell gaols apparently isn't a deterrent. If they were effective deterrents then these and other heinous crimes wouldn't happen.

The proof of that will be the next time someone (particularly an Australian, where the coverage has been wall to wall) is convicted of drug trafficking in Indonesia. If this particularly high profile case (within Australia, at least) doesn't make people aware and deter them then nothing will.

And if that's the case then it will be a senseless waste of two (apparently) rehabilitated lives who had much to contribute to their gaol society.

Surely it's all about rehabilitating people in gaol, isn't it?