Pregnant prisoner returns to UK

[Sergio sledge]

What's everyone's thoughts on this story? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8188868.stm) :grr:


Foreign Office Minister Chris Bryant said: "We do not condone any crimes involving illegal drugs. We work around the world to combat the use of illegal drugs."

However he added the transfer was "excellent news", saying: "[It] means that Samantha will give birth in the UK, close to her relatives and under UK medical care.

"This is clearly the best outcome for all - not least her unborn child."

He also said the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was continuing to work for the early transfer of John Watson, from Bradford, West Yorkshire, who is also imprisoned in Laos for drug smuggling.

Watson, 47, was identified as the father of Orobator's baby in a statement read out on her behalf by the local prosecutor.

Her statement said she had artificially inseminated herself while in prison using Watson's semen. Her baby is due next month.

Whilst happy to see that she has avoided the death penalty, I cannot believe that she would do something like artificially inseminating herself in prison to facilitate her return to the UK from Laos.

In Laos, if you are caught with over 0.5kg of Heroin, and found guilty, it is automatically the death penalty. However the law over there says that pregnant women cannot be killed. I wonder who the lawyer was who advised her to get pregnant, and I wonder if they feel good about encouraging someone to bring a child into this world purely for their own gains.

This story sickens me, as it appears to be a cynical ploy to avoid the death penalty in Laos, and get brought back to Britain, where sentences are less harsh, and the chance of parole is much higher. :grr:

I also cannot believe that they are working for the release of the "father" of this baby. He should certainly serve his sentence there for the crime he committed, even though he agreed to donate his sperm to the woman.

[Chuckie]

Interesting to hear that she has changed her story... :cool2:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1179945/Say-werent-raped-jail-let-live-pregnant-British-woman-told-Laos-prison.html

[ArabHibee]

Interesting to hear that she has changed her story... :cool2:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1179945/Say-werent-raped-jail-let-live-pregnant-British-woman-told-Laos-prison.html


Quote: Asked who fathered the baby, Nuanthasing said: ‘It is a mystery – maybe it is a baby from the sky.’

Says it all really - muppet. I have no time for people who smuggle drugs. They deserve all they get. She, unfortunately, has managed to find a loophole.

[BravestHibs]

What's everyone's thoughts on this story? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8188868.stm) :grr:



Whilst happy to see that she has avoided the death penalty, I cannot believe that she would do something like artificially inseminating herself in prison to facilitate her return to the UK from Laos.

In Laos, if you are caught with over 0.5kg of Heroin, and found guilty, it is automatically the death penalty. However the law over there says that pregnant women cannot be killed. I wonder who the lawyer was who advised her to get pregnant, and I wonder if they feel good about encouraging someone to bring a child into this world purely for their own gains.

This story sickens me, as it appears to be a cynical ploy to avoid the death penalty in Laos, and get brought back to Britain, where sentences are less harsh, and the chance of parole is much higher. :grr:

I also cannot believe that they are working for the release of the "father" of this baby. He should certainly serve his sentence there for the crime he committed, even though he agreed to donate his sperm to the woman.

I don't really see what your point is here? Are you saying that she shouldn't have gotten pregnant and taken the death penalty instead? Would you not do anything at your disposal to avoid being killed, or would you just give up and put your family through the trauma of collecting your corpse in Laos after you've been hung or executed by firing squad because of your respect for their judicial system?

[Jack]

Without knowing the judicial systems around the world I think its pretty safe to say none of them condone drug trafficking and you'd have to be very young (too young to travel alone) or thick to have missed the point that some countries actually kill you for it!

So if you do it and get caught, you deserve what you get. This one should have been made to rot in jail along with all the others.

[BravestHibs]

Without knowing the judicial systems around the world I think its pretty safe to say none of them condone drug trafficking and you'd have to be very young (too young to travel alone) or thick to have missed the point that some countries actually kill you for it!

So if you do it and get caught, you deserve what you get. This one should have been made to rot in jail along with all the others.

Right fair enough, you don't like drug smugglers. However, IF you had been in her position, would you not have taken any out available to you? Or, like Sergio is implying she should have done, would you have actively discouraged the oppurtunity to reduce your sentence, not be killed and return to your home country?

I honestly can't see how anyone could begrudge this 20 year old for doing whatever it took to survive/shorten her sentence/return home???? Why this vindictiveness?

[BravestHibs]

Just out of interest Jack, do you subscribe to the Daily Mail? The reason I ask is below an extract from your post.

"So if you do it and get caught, you deserve what you get. This one should have been made to rot in jail along with all the others." Jack - Edinburgh

The extracts below are copy and pasted from the comments section underneath the daily mail article.

cannot find it in my heart to feel sorry for this woman She chose to smuggle drugs knowing the penalty if caught and should be left to rot.Anyone who has had a relative whose life has been ruined because of drgs will feel no sympathy.She accepted the job and must accept the pay
- Christina Crosbie, LESMAHAGOW SCOTLAND, 10/5/2009 09:19



So if she is sent back to UK and does not serve a term for her crime, what message does this give to other would be drug smugglers!!
If you comit the crime , you do the time.
justice must not be tampered with.
- Molly, Oxford, 10/5/2009 09:01



if she is found guilty of drug smuggling she should serve her sentabce in Laos why should she be transfered to one of our holiday camps to serve probabaly a 3rd of her sentance If our prisons were as harsh as these maybe few criminals would be willing to re-offend
- keith, Spain, 10/5/2009 08:45


A distinct similarity in tone I'm sure you'll agree. 'Let her rot' seems to be, despite being spectacularly hackneyed, a strong favourite of the Daily Mail faithful.

[Sergio sledge]

Right fair enough, you don't like drug smugglers. However, IF you had been in her position, would you not have taken any out available to you? Or, like Sergio is implying she should have done, would you have actively discouraged the oppurtunity to reduce your sentence, not be killed and return to your home country?

I honestly can't see how anyone could begrudge this 20 year old for doing whatever it took to survive/shorten her sentence/return home???? Why this vindictiveness?

Ok, so you are not bothered by this story at all then? Fair enough, nothing to see here, just a poor young girl trying to save her life....

Think of the child who will grow up without a mother or father, and then find out that both its parents are convicted drug smugglers who only wanted the child so that they could both get out of doing the time for the crime they committed. I wonder how the child will feel knowing how they were conceived?


Interesting to hear that she has changed her story...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...os-prison.html

Aye, I did hear that, but she made a statement on her return to the UK, so would seem strange to keep up the story. :confused:

[Darth Hibbie]

Just out of interest Jack, do you subscribe to the Daily Mail? The reason I ask is below an extract from your post.

"So if you do it and get caught, you deserve what you get. This one should have been made to rot in jail along with all the others." Jack - Edinburgh

The extracts below are copy and pasted from the comments section underneath the daily mail article.

cannot find it in my heart to feel sorry for this woman She chose to smuggle drugs knowing the penalty if caught and should be left to rot.Anyone who has had a relative whose life has been ruined because of drgs will feel no sympathy.She accepted the job and must accept the pay
- Christina Crosbie, LESMAHAGOW SCOTLAND, 10/5/2009 09:19



So if she is sent back to UK and does not serve a term for her crime, what message does this give to other would be drug smugglers!!
If you comit the crime , you do the time.
justice must not be tampered with.
- Molly, Oxford, 10/5/2009 09:01



if she is found guilty of drug smuggling she should serve her sentabce in Laos why should she be transfered to one of our holiday camps to serve probabaly a 3rd of her sentance If our prisons were as harsh as these maybe few criminals would be willing to re-offend
- keith, Spain, 10/5/2009 08:45


A distinct similarity in tone I'm sure you'll agree. 'Let her rot' seems to be, despite being spectacularly hackneyed, a strong favourite of the Daily Mail faithful.

On the other hand we could just let all the drug smugglers go free. :bitchy:

[Chuckie]

Ok, so you are not bothered by this story at all then? Fair enough, nothing to see here, just a poor young girl trying to save her life....

Think of the child who will grow up without a mother or father, and then find out that both its parents are convicted drug smugglers who only wanted the child so that they could both get out of doing the time for the crime they committed. I wonder how the child will feel knowing how they were conceived?



Aye, I did hear that, but she made a statement on her return to the UK, so would seem strange to keep up the story. :confused:

As strange as getting artificially inseminated by her partner while they were both supposed to be incarcerated ?

I suppose they were allowed to vist each other and he blew his load through the bars ?

[BravestHibs]

Ok, so you are not bothered by this story at all then? Fair enough, nothing to see here, just a poor young girl trying to save her life....

Think of the child who will grow up without a mother or father, and then find out that both its parents are convicted drug smugglers who only wanted the child so that they could both get out of doing the time for the crime they committed. I wonder how the child will feel knowing how they were conceived?



Aye, I did hear that, but she made a statement on her return to the UK, so would seem strange to keep up the story. :confused:

How else do you propose she fights to save her life from within a Laotian jail?

Personally, I'd think it was cool as ****. Probably about 10 times better than if my parents had met in Standard life, got pregnant via drunken intercourse and then got married in a hastily arranged ceremony because they were so petrified about what their christian, right wing leaning parents and family were going to say.

[Jack]

Right fair enough, you don't like drug smugglers. However, IF you had been in her position, would you not have taken any out available to you? Or, like Sergio is implying she should have done, would you have actively discouraged the oppurtunity to reduce your sentence, not be killed and return to your home country?

I honestly can't see how anyone could begrudge this 20 year old for doing whatever it took to survive/shorten her sentence/return home???? Why this vindictiveness?

Sorry BravestHibs I wasn’t even talking about her particularly, and how she has avoided justice, but about all drugs traffickers.

My point was that everyone knows the penalties are either grim or grimmer. She knew the penalty was death and she still did it – I blame the authorities for not carrying out the sentence sooner. These people are helping pedal death and misery and I have absolutely no sympathy for her or her like, none at all. Other people think differently and that’s up to them.

I feel its embarrassing when the families of these criminals demand that the UK government grovels to have them freed – which is not really part of this story but how I feel about it.


As you might have gathered its not something that would ever happen to me so I don’t have to think about what I might or might not do in her situation.

[BravestHibs]

On the other hand we could just let all the drug smugglers go free. :bitchy:

What are you on about?

[Darth Hibbie]

What are you on about?


If they (in this case she) should not "rot in jail" what should happen to them?

[BravestHibs]

If they (in this case she) should not "rot in jail" what should happen to them?


I don't think that the people who are caught are the people that are the ones most deserving of punishment. In my opinion it is the people who gave her the drugs in Laos and who are collecting the drugs in the UK who are the real danger. The fact that she got caught and convicted in her capacity as a 'drugs mule' doesn't automatically make her a danger to everyones children which is what the borderline fascist, illiteratti who subscribe to the hateful, bitter ramblings of the daily mail seem to think. By convicting this 20 year old 'woman' they are effectively making her a scapegoat for the drug lords who no doubt have the local police in their pockets. It wouldn't surprise me if one of these drug gangs hadn't tipped the authorities off in order to ensure safe passage for another, much larger consignment soon afterwards. That is of course all conjecture.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Quote: Asked who fathered the baby, Nuanthasing said: ‘It is a mystery – maybe it is a baby from the sky.’

Says it all really - muppet. I have no time for people who smuggle drugs. They deserve all they get. She, unfortunately, has managed to find a loophole.

Sounds like the sort of thing people make up in an attempt to make out they are mentally ill. (Not the pregnancy obviously, but how it happened).

[ArabHibee]

How else do you propose she fights to save her life from within a Laotian jail?

Personally, I'd think it was cool as ****. Probably about 10 times better than if my parents met in Standard life, got pregnant via drunken intercourse and then got married in a hastily arranged ceremony because they were so petrified about what their christian, right wing leaning parents and family were going to say.

It all makes sense now. :cool2:

[Pete]

How else do you propose she fights to save her life from within a Laotian jail?

Personally, I'd think it was cool as ****.
Probably about 10 times better than if my parents had met in Standard life, got pregnant via drunken intercourse and then got married in a hastily arranged ceremony because they were so petrified about what their christian, right wing leaning parents and family were going to say.

10 times better?

what ****ing planet do you live on?

Your "anti-mail" rantings are sounding just a scary as those of who you accuse of being "right-wing".

[BravestHibs]

10 times better?

what ****ing planet do you live on?

Your "anti-mail" rantings are sounding just a scary as those of who you accuse of being "right-wing".

I'm happy to say it appears to be a different one than you.

Are you saying this because you subscribe to this ****rag?

[Jack]

I don't think that the people who are caught are the people that are the ones most deserving of punishment. In my opinion it is the people who gave her the drugs in Laos and who are collecting the drugs in the UK who are the real danger.

I don’t agree, the mules are at least as deserving of the punishment as those who sent her. They're all peas from the same pod.


The fact that she got caught and convicted in her capacity as a 'drugs mule' doesn't automatically make her a danger to everyones children which is what the borderline fascist, illiteratti who subscribe to the hateful, bitter ramblings of the daily mail seem to think.

She would however be a danger to someone’s child who at the end of the line take those drugs (see also next bit). In all probability that would not have been her only time either in the past or the future that she would be a mule. She would be no danger whatsoever if she was dead. BTW I don’t read the Daily Mail.


By convicting this 20 year old 'woman' they are effectively making her a scapegoat for the drug lords who no doubt have the local police in their pockets.

By convicting this 20 year old woman they are sending out a very clear signal that anyone caught will be severely punished.


It wouldn't surprise me if one of these drug gangs hadn't tipped the authorities off in order to ensure safe passage for another, much larger consignment soon afterwards. That is of course all conjecture.

It wouldn’t surprise me either considering the low value they put on life, except of course their own. The fewer people who are willing to potentially put their lives on the line working for these peoples personal profits the better it will be, IMO.

[RyeSloan]

Firstly I disagree with the death penalty and therefore cannot condone a 20yo being shot for smuggling drugs.

Secondly as a previous poster pointed out, the mules are small small fry...shooting these people will do ZERO to reduce the drugs trafficking.

Lastly I despair at some peoples lack of compassion towards others despite their alleged crimes. Quite clearly there was no 'artificial insemination' and I really wonder if a DNA check would prove the partner to be the father. Sounds quite obvious that she has been seriously abused in a prison where money and influence will allow anything to happen. The idea that there would be some sort of justice carried out by 'letting her rot' in such a prison is pretty wide of the mark IMHO.

[BravestHibs]

I don’t agree, the mules are at least as deserving of the punishment as those who sent her. They're all peas from the same pod.

Are you implying that resources in this ludicrous, unwinnable 'war on drugs' are as well spent on convicting this woman as chasing down and convicting the big players who run the show?

She would however be a danger to someone’s child who at the end of the line take those drugs (see also next bit). In all probability that would not have been her only time either in the past or the future that she would be a mule. She would be no danger whatsoever if she was dead.

My point is that she wouldn't have been the one disseminating them at this end. She would have been handing them over to the people I would consider to be the real danger. You think that she should pay with her life for a foolish error in judgement at the age of 20? That seems extremely unreasonable in my opinion.

By convicting this 20 year old woman they are sending out a very clear signal that anyone caught will be severely punished.

By convicting this 20 year old woman they are sending out a very clear signal that they'll go for the easy option every time. By convicting this 20 year old woman and no one else, they are sending out a clear signal that the drug barons can carry on doing exactly what they want with impunity.

The fewer people who are willing to potentially put their lives on the line working for these peoples personal profits the better it will be, IMO.

The only way you're going to stop this from happening is either erradicating poverty altogether or world leaders taking the brave decision to legalise drugs and take control of this industry out of the hands of these animals. I can't see either of these things happening anytime soon. Can you?

[Jack]

I don’t agree, the mules are at least as deserving of the punishment as those who sent her. They're all peas from the same pod.

Are you implying that resources in this ludicrous, unwinnable 'war on drugs' are as well spent on convicting this woman as chasing down and convicting the big players who run the show?

The amount of resource required to train a dog and a few other wee bits and techie pieces is well cheap in comparison with what is required to hunt down those running the show. I don’t think they should stop trying to hunt them down though.

***********************************

She would however be a danger to someone’s child who at the end of the line take those drugs (see also next bit). In all probability that would not have been her only time either in the past or the future that she would be a mule. She would be no danger whatsoever if she was dead.

My point is that she wouldn't have been the one disseminating them at this end. She would have been handing them over to the people I would consider to be the real danger. You think that she should pay with her life for a foolish error in judgement at the age of 20? That seems extremely unreasonable in my opinion.

If there was nobody willing to carry them they wouldn’t get there for any one to disseminate.

To me they're all as dangerous as each other and all deserve the same fate. However we know that in the UK they’ll get a dozen or so years in prison, too lenient IMO, or in other countries where they are executed, too harsh in your opinion, it doesn’t really matter, at the end of it all they know the law is harsh as far as the drugs trade is concerned and they know the punishment if caught, they still do it.

20 is well beyond the age of reasoning. She knew what she was doing and she knew the risks, unreasonable or otherwise.

What's to sympathise with?

***********************************

By convicting this 20 year old woman they are sending out a very clear signal that anyone caught will be severely punished.

By convicting this 20 year old woman they are sending out a very clear signal that they'll go for the easy option every time. By convicting this 20 year old woman and no one else, they are sending out a clear signal that the drug barons can carry on doing exactly what they want with impunity.

Its only easy because it’s the only time the drugs ‘officially’ go near the authorities and as I said its just too easy to detect them with all their dogs and gadgets.

Governments around the world invest considerable sums in ships, aircraft and even the armed forces being used to tackle drug crime. Running gun battles in Latin and South America with the drug barons.

Another wee thought here is that governments aren’t charities so the billions they are spending on this sort of stuff must in some way offset the amount being spent on addicts, that’s a lot of suffering addicts and those that suffer as a direct, or indirect, result of their actions (all of us).

***********************************

The fewer people who are willing to potentially put their lives on the line working for these peoples personal profits the better it will be, IMO.

The only way you're going to stop this from happening is either erradicating poverty altogether or world leaders taking the brave decision to legalise drugs and take control of this industry out of the hands of these animals. I can't see either of these things happening anytime soon. Can you?

While we both know there may be a bit of tinkering with the legality of some drugs we both know that neither option you have given above will ever come about.

I think we can agree what I said earlier that governments aren’t charities or doing this just to p!ss off those who fancy a wee puff now and again. Addicts are costing this country billions in, to name but a few, the Border Agencies, the NHS and social services, good money that could be better spent elsewhere, IMO.

[BravestHibs]

If there was nobody willing to carry them they wouldn’t get there for any one to disseminate.

This is lazy logic.

20 is well beyond the age of reasoning. She knew what she was doing and she knew the risks, unreasonable or otherwise.

So you've never made a rash/foolish decision after you turned 20? I find that extremely hard to believe.

Another wee thought here is that governments aren’t charities so the billions they are spending on this sort of stuff must in some way offset the amount being spent on addicts, that’s a lot of suffering addicts and those that suffer as a direct, or indirect, result of their actions (all of us).

The government isn't a charity you're right, but their currency isn't cash, it's power. The reason they invest in this war isn't for a tangeable monetary return but in order to curry favour in terms of public opinion. People who don't fully comprehend the facts would be up in arms about what would be percieved to be a limp wristed government policy if drugs were legalised. It is this that is stopping governments from doing the sensible thing and legalising the drugs trade in order to take the power away from the kingpins in one fell swoop.

I don't quite understand how spending billions in armoury can in any way offset the cost of treating addicts or victims of crime, particularly when the amount of drugs finding their way into the country doesn't seem to be lowering, but would be interested to hear your theories on how that could possibly be the case.

[Jack]

If there was nobody willing to carry them they wouldn’t get there for any one to disseminate.

This is lazy logic.

20 is well beyond the age of reasoning. She knew what she was doing and she knew the risks, unreasonable or otherwise.

So you've never made a rash/foolish decision after you turned 20? I find that extremely hard to believe.

Another wee thought here is that governments aren’t charities so the billions they are spending on this sort of stuff must in some way offset the amount being spent on addicts, that’s a lot of suffering addicts and those that suffer as a direct, or indirect, result of their actions (all of us).

The government isn't a charity you're right, but their currency isn't cash, it's power. The reason they invest in this war isn't for a tangeable monetary return but in order to curry favour in terms of public opinion. People who don't fully comprehend the facts would be up in arms about what would be percieved to be a limp wristed government policy if drugs were legalised. It is this that is stopping governments from doing the sensible thing and legalising the drugs trade in order to take the power away from the kingpins in one fell swoop.

I don't quite understand how spending billions in armoury can in any way offset the cost of treating addicts or victims of crime, particularly when the amount of drugs finding their way into the country doesn't seem to be lowering, but would be interested to hear your theories on how that could possibly be the case.

Lazy logic perhaps, but logical all the same :greengrin

Oh dear!!!!! :cool2: many, many rash/foolish decisions/actions and I could probably write a book, well a large pamphlet anyway. However in all my years I can quite honestly say none incurred the possibility of the death sentence, in any country. Unless you include Trade Unionism or speaking/writing against what the state, which although OK here isn't in other places and I wouldn’t do it in these places.

If the worlds governments (and I cant think of any where drug trafficking is legal so that must tell you something about it and come to think about it I cant think of anything else at all, ever, that all the worlds governments have agreed on), allowed currently illegal drugs to be freely available they would be in even deeper doo doo than they are just now with the currently permitted intoxicating / addictive substances.

Knowing government as I do I can only think the reason they spend so much effort stopping the stuff coming in is because it would cost more than that to deal with the consequences – a cost I don’t really think we, the people (socially), / they, the governments (financially), can cope with [at the moment].

[BravestHibs]

Oh dear!!!!! :cool2: many, many rash/foolish decisions/actions and I could probably write a book, well a large pamphlet anyway.

OK so you're a loveable rogue, I get it.

Knowing government as I do I can only think the reason they spend so much effort stopping the stuff coming in is because it would cost more than that to deal with the consequences – a cost I don’t really think we, the people (socially), / they, the governments (financially), can cope with [at the moment].

This simply isn't true. Drugs are so easily available now that the fact that you would have to go to a government run facility to procure them would probably make them harder to get!

If drugs were made legal, it wouldn't be costing the government it would be making them money through taxes. Taxes which could go towards the NHS in the same way cigarette taxes do. I could only assume that there would still be a small black market economy off the back of this as knowing governments as I do they would be sure to get it wrong at first. But eventually, organised crime which relies heavily on the drug trade for finance would peter out, not completely but noticeably so, heroine/crack/cocaine addicts wouldn't have to steal to feed their addiction which would see petty crime drop imeasurably, and I actually believe that there wouldn't be any kind of noticeable increase in drug taking which is what people always tout as being a reason for the continued criminalisation. Why, all of a sudden would previously right minded people suddenly start taking drugs??? Just because they're legal?? I seriously doubt it.

[Jack]

I’ll concede to a point. If drugs were made legal they wouldn’t be illegal anymore, demand for them might fall, many addicts wouldn’t be needing to break the law to feed their habit and all in all it would be a very different world. How different is impossible to tell. :dizzy:

However at this time they are illegal and very likely to remain so.

Also there are people who will continue to break laws, all laws, some of which carry the death sentence abroad. They have chosen to break the law knowing the punishments that may be incurred if/when they are caught, certainly the big ones and the warnings are there to see in all languages.

As a generally law abiding citizen I have no sympathy for those who break the law then whinge when they are caught. I’m not that fussy on people who break the law and don’t get caught either :bitchy:

Particularly Brits abroad who in some cases don’t think any laws apply to them abroad then whinge to the Foreign Office to get them freed. Or to foreigners here who whinge that they didn’t know our law.

Good idea if you are somewhere and your not sure about something, don’t do it or find out before you do it, then you'll know the risk.

If I was to get a speeding ticket then that’s my fault, my fault and I pay the fine. Tough luck!

[Darth Hibbie]

This simply isn't true. Drugs are so easily available now that the fact that you would have to go to a government run facility to procure them would probably make them harder to get!

If drugs were made legal, it wouldn't be costing the government it would be making them money through taxes. Taxes which could go towards the NHS in the same way cigarette taxes do. I could only assume that there would still be a small black market economy off the back of this as knowing governments as I do they would be sure to get it wrong at first. But eventually, organised crime which relies heavily on the drug trade for finance would peter out, not completely but noticeably so, [B]heroine/crack/cocaine addicts wouldn't have to steal to feed their addiction which would see petty crime drop imeasurably, and I actually believe that there wouldn't be any kind of noticeable increase in drug taking which is what people always tout as being a reason for the continued criminalisation. Why, all of a sudden would previously right minded people suddenly start taking drugs??? Just because they're legal?? I seriously doubt it.

I get your point about legalizing drugs to reduce the problem but I do not really think that that is true. The part I have highlighted is where I have the largest problem the unemployed horrible junkies that do not have the money to buy illegal are not suddenly going to have the money to buy legal drugs. The only real reduction crime rates would be for drug supply and possession.

[RyeSloan]

I’ll concede to a point. If drugs were made legal they wouldn’t be illegal anymore, demand for them might fall, many addicts wouldn’t be needing to break the law to feed their habit and all in all it would be a very different world. How different is impossible to tell. :dizzy:

However at this time they are illegal and very likely to remain so.

Also there are people who will continue to break laws, all laws, some of which carry the death sentence abroad. They have chosen to break the law knowing the punishments that may be incurred if/when they are caught, certainly the big ones and the warnings are there to see in all languages.

As a generally law abiding citizen I have no sympathy for those who break the law then whinge when they are caught. I’m not that fussy on people who break the law and don’t get caught either :bitchy:

Particularly Brits abroad who in some cases don’t think any laws apply to them abroad then whinge to the Foreign Office to get them freed. Or to foreigners here who whinge that they didn’t know our law.

Good idea if you are somewhere and your not sure about something, don’t do it or find out before you do it, then you'll know the risk.

If I was to get a speeding ticket then that’s my fault, my fault and I pay the fine. Tough luck!

For someone that is 52 you have a very loose grasp of how illegal drug trafficking works.

Or indeed how certain people may find themselves in circumstances well beyond their making or want.

Anybody who has any influence, power or money in the drugs trade wouldn't be near a mule in a thousand years...these people are but pawns in a much bigger game and lining them up in front of a firing squad would simply be a futile and barbaric act, sadly one you seem to support quite readily by equating it to a speeding ticket :bitchy:

[Darth Hibbie]

For someone that is 52 you have a very loose grasp of how illegal drug trafficking works.

Or indeed how certain people may find themselves in circumstances well beyond their making or want.

Anybody who has any influence, power or money in the drugs trade wouldn't be near a mule in a thousand years...these people are but pawns in a much bigger game and lining them up in front of a firing squad would simply be a futile and barbaric act, sadly one you seem to support quite readily by equating it to a speeding ticket :bitchy:


Not suggesting for a second that they should be shot however there has to be some sort of punishment for the mules otherwise it would become like open season and increase the amount of drugs entering the country.

[Corstorphine Hibby]

What's everyone's thoughts on this story? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8188868.stm) :grr:



Whilst happy to see that she has avoided the death penalty, I cannot believe that she would do something like artificially inseminating herself in prison to facilitate her return to the UK from Laos.

In Laos, if you are caught with over 0.5kg of Heroin, and found guilty, it is automatically the death penalty. However the law over there says that pregnant women cannot be killed. I wonder who the lawyer was who advised her to get pregnant, and I wonder if they feel good about encouraging someone to bring a child into this world purely for their own gains.

This story sickens me, as it appears to be a cynical ploy to avoid the death penalty in Laos, and get brought back to Britain, where sentences are less harsh, and the chance of parole is much higher. :grr:

I also cannot believe that they are working for the release of the "father" of this baby. He should certainly serve his sentence there for the crime he committed, even though he agreed to donate his sperm to the woman.


Why don't they let her have the baby then shoot her?
Technically speaking, after having the baby she is no longer pregnant therefore she is eligible for eradication.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Why don't they let her have the baby then shoot her?
Technically speaking, after having the baby she is no longer pregnant therefore she is eligible for eradication.

Awck, your a compassionate chap...

Oh aye, and **** Boris Johnson.

[BravestHibs]

I get your point about legalizing drugs to reduce the problem but I do not really think that that is true. The part I have highlighted is where I have the largest problem the unemployed horrible junkies that do not have the money to buy illegal are not suddenly going to have the money to buy legal drugs. The only real reduction crime rates would be for drug supply and possession.

No, but by treating it as a health issue and not a criminal one which helps no one, the possibility would be that heroine and drugs that cannot be regarded as recreational would be available on the NHS by prescription. This is how I would propose to work the system.

Like any major transition period it would be difficult, but it would eventually in my opinion curb so much crime as well as opening doors to heroine addicts by making them come into contact with the NHS every time they want to score and thus making them come into contact with the help they need on a daily basis, not to mention the fact that the reduction in crime would pay for the system alone, that I really can't see the justification for not legalising drugs. It's estimated that £15bn is spent every year in policing, the court sytem, prison sentences for junkies. My proposal would assimilate alot of this back into the system and could be used to help rather than avenge.

Would those who argue against legalisation say that the current status quo is working??? I'm genuinely interested to know how you can think that it is.

[Darth Hibbie]

No, but by treating it as a health issue and not a criminal one which helps no one, the possibility would be that heroine and drugs that cannot be regarded as recreational would be available on the NHS by prescription. This is how I would propose to work the system.

Like any major transition period it would be difficult, but it would eventually in my opinion curb so much crime as well as opening doors to heroine addicts by making them come into contact with the NHS every time they want to score and thus making them come into contact with the help they need on a daily basis, not to mention the fact that the reduction in crime would pay for the system alone, that I really can't see the justification for not legalising drugs. It's estimated that £15bn is spent every year in policing, the court sytem, prison sentences for junkies. My proposal would assimilate alot of this back into the system and could be used to help rather than avenge.

Would those who argue against legalisation say that the current status quo is working??? I'm genuinely interested to know how you can think that it is.

I would agree that the current system does not work and a lot more has to be done to re-educate the drug users.

Can I take it the along with the legalization you are talking about there would also be an illegal trade running side by side with it?

Heroin users in particular do not pat taxes and would get there drugs for free on the NHS. The NHS would not give them enough because no matter how much they get they always want more.

[Corstorphine Hibby]

Awck, your a compassionate chap...

Oh aye, and **** Boris Johnson.


Is that a claim to fame you have? Do tell if you were the giver or receiver.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Is that a claim to fame you have? Do tell if you were the giver or receiver.

Gay jokes, and ones that don't even really make sense. Excellent.