Hacker News Reader

Comment by can16358p | Hacker News Reader

The person in question is indeed very guilty but death sentence in 21st century? What kind of an archaic system allows it?

View on HN

Civilizations that prioritize the overall safety and wellbeing of society over "individual rights" tend to have more harsh penalities to safeguard society and it does work, and rarely needs to be executed.

More "liberal" countries have real societal problems that cannot be solved because "individual rights" stands in its way.

Are you saying that systems with the death penalty are less corrupt? That's a funny take especially coming in under an article about one of the largest fraud cases worldwide where the perpetrator gets the death penalty.

What societal beacons of moral rectitude were you having in mind?

She's executed only if she does not return at least $27b of the $44b stolen.

I used to think the same until contemplating how many destroyed families the drug trafficking penalties of Singapore have prevented.

I hope you also contemplate how many innocent people (usually undocumented migrant workers) have been scapegoated in drug trials and executed…

I used to support the death penalty, but inevitably it is used by the state against the vulnerable, poor, and politically weak. If there’s even the possibility of one innocent person being killed, it is a perverse justice.

That certainly doesn't seem to be the case here.

Having drug trafficking laws to prevent (potential) destroyed families is one thing (though I think all drugs should be legal and no government should have right to dictate what you can put into your own body, but that's not the point at this thread), but regardless of the extent of the crime, I think death sentence is unacceptable in any civilized justice system.

You really did not give any arguments for why it is unacceptable.

Cause innocent people are sometimes wrongly convicted, and sentenced to death. Life behind bars without the possibility of parole achieves pretty much the same effect for public safety, while still giving the wrongly accused a chance to live. There are also rare cases in which new evidence overturns their conviction decades into their sentence. If they're put to death, they never get that chance.

Context is important here.

Considering Asia's history with drugs (European imperialists growing drugs in their colonies and then selling them to China to destroy their population), it is completely understandable and a societally acceptable trade off.

I think after a few more generations of escalating drug use harming our societal well being, we may resort to similar measures.

U mean like, people why had a few grams on weed on them?

Nobody is getting executed by having a few gr of weed on them, one needs to actively distributing it and in large amount (500 gr). Singapore is very strict but they’re not executing their citizens for consuming drugs.

Where would you cut off be?

They don't cut off in Singapore. It's death by hanging.

How many exactly?

How many families have the Singapore government's authoritarian policies prevented from even existing, given it's got the third lowest fertility rate in the world; hardly evidence of a place where people feel comfortable to raise families.

Hans Rossling's talk, "The best stats you've ever seen" had something to say about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVimVzgtD6w

Urbanization and education are the two most effective ways of getting a population to have fewer children. Singapore is a highly educated and urbanized country.

I am pretty sure cost of living is #1 reason and certainly not education.

I just hope their population will be replaced by the Indians and Indonesians working to sustain their economy. Same goes for Dubai.

If that happens, it will come to resemble an Indian or Indonesian city.

This is a bit of a weird comment about Singapore because a significant part of their population is and always has been ethnically Indian (Tamil)

The authoritarianism isn't why sg has a low fertility rate anymore than it being the reason the birth rate is below replacement in the west which isn't considered authoritarian.

How many people died indirectly based on her actions? She stole 6.6% of the yearly Vietnam GDP.

Maybe some families were saving up money for a cancer treatment? To start a new family by buying a house?

A death sentence is reasonable in a lot of cases. Nothing archaic about it.

I think every civilized society should execute one of its billionaires once in a while, pour encourager les autres.

I'm against the death penalty for anyone. But this is one of the least bad reasons to have it.

Well, many states in the United States for one, but point taken.

Then justice system in those states are just archaic as this one too.

probably more so, they only kill poor people

Reply on news.ycombinator.com