Originally posted by robertteh:
If there is a good reason for state to want to
kill someone in a civilised world today, it is
probably war or terrorism where the terrorist blows himself
up.
If state cannot pursuade terrorists not to die, and will go all out
for education through the Madrasah to get the extremists to
change, why then State cannot be just as considerate of
life in the case of drug. In terrorism, state cannot really
do anything to seek out the terrorists to kill them by preemption
but in drug control laws, state is going all out to seek
lives to kill usually the economic desparados instead got killed by
state by some kind of presumptuous act of trafficking.
Drug traffickers are criminals and deserve punishments of the most
severe kind but they are not the worse criminals like the drug
lords or the terrorists. Terrorists cannot be sought out to
be hanged in fact they are being tackled by educations and
will soon be released after three years.
Talks about stopping terrorism or stopping drug traffickings at
source are unrealistic and only lesser criminals got caught and
hanged. What you cannot stop you don't go all out to
preempt just to kill their underlings or desparado. This
may be a case of cutting the face to spite the nose.
Criminals were not "killed", they were "executed".
Madrasah is for the training of muslim teachers, not run by the
state and certainly not for educating extremists. In fact, the
state is watching closely so that Madrasah do not produce
extremists.
States with anti terrorists laws, tight control of check points,
arrest of JI suspects under ISA....are all actions that seek out
terrorists.
Suspected terrorists arrested would be hanged if they were found
with weapons or explosives.
"Just because you cannot stop osama so you don't go all out to
preempt and shoot terrorists" IS THE MOST STUPID PROPOSITION EVER
MADE.
