Wrong. Remember the context that the AOA was implemented in.
Back then organised crime was still rampant, and tt was not
uncommon to hear of armed robberies and kidnap attempts on
businessmen like CK Tang. The implementation of the death penalty
for possession and sale of arms in 1973 was not for the purpose of
deterrence, but to physically reduce the frequency of armed crime
by literally killing off offenders while working to curb the import
of arms from Indonesia and Malaysia. At this point in time, the
death penalty was no deterrent to crime- since criminals had as
much chance to die in a shootout as to swing from a noose, many
died in gun battles with the police during the course of their
crimes. Also discovered were that most of the crimelords involved
were repeat offenders- everytime the police foiled a robbery they
would retreat to a offshore kelong and recoup their losses for
another attempt.
The death penalty as a deterrent to armed crime remained
ineffective until gun trafficking was stopped in the 80s, due to it
being made impossible and unprofitable to bring weapons into the
country.
What term would you use then? You insist that drug related
deaths are not premeditated and therefore can't be classified as
murder. Fine. But you are tacitly ignoring the reality that most
drug traffickers are aware of the fact that their wares can and do
take lives. According to Singapore law, you have committed culpable
homicide if you cause death by doing an act with the intention of
causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury
as is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that you
are likely by such act to cause death.
What ticks the majority of Singaporeans is the attempts to let
the Aussie go scott free because he is an Aussie.
