They are innocent men who have been used by the bad guys.

are they aware of what they are doing? if they are, they are not innocent.

What do you think of their punishments against drug traffickers [generally death or something like 99 years in prison]?

first time, home incarseration (the ancle bracelet)
second time, and maybe therd depending on the scercanstances give them time with hard labor (perferably one with usable job skills)
after that death, you are not goiong to change there ways.

How would you handle them if you were the leader of Thailand?

as above for the mules, for those running the operations, after they aer convicted in a court of law, death. these people will not get"rehibilated" in jail, they are like wild, and dangros anamals, you put them down for the saftey of scioty.

Drug trafficking is a victimless crime, so a death penalty for it is absurd.

You must be on what these people are trafficking if you think that drug trafficking isn't a victimless crime, because it isn't even CLOSE to a victemless crime. Whaton earth makes you think this???? Not that I agree with emclean (I don't know if I have ever agreed with emclean) but c'mon.

To emclean:

are they aware of what they are doing? if they are, they are not innocent.

I don't think all of them were aware of the type of drug that they were carrying. So they may not be "innocent" as such, but they are being used like pawns by the criminal gangs. They are/were desperate for money to support their families, which is, in itself should be mitigating circumstances to lower the punishment.

first time, home incarseration (the ancle bracelet)
second time, and maybe therd depending on the scercanstances give them time with hard labor (perferably one with usable job skills)
after that death, you are not goiong to change there ways.

If you wish to keep them in their homes, how do they get enough money to put food on the table? Try and keep in mind that these are typically desperate people. The second one is a problem as many of these people have no job skills. They showed one person on the story who had been searching and searching for a job but was unable to get one. Many may not have developed job skills because employers may have been unwilling to employ them. What about rehabilitation? Teach them the neccessary skills in order to gain and hold a job. I am sure that the results would surprise many people.

Put to death after three times? Three strikes you're out eh? In order to change their ways, you will have to tackle the root cause of their problem - financial hardship. Hence the rehabilitating them with the neccessary skills for employment. After they are taught this and have their life back on track, I don't believe that they will committ again. People need to be given chances to redem themselves. Some traffickers are put to death after one time! There is no justice in this. What happened to the belief that the punishment should be proportional to the crime?

as above for the mules, for those running the operations, after they aer convicted in a court of law, death. these people will not get"rehibilated" in jail, they are like wild, and dangros anamals, you put them down for the saftey of scioty.

That is why the government should be taking them out of jail and put them on special programs designed to handle drug traffickers. They are desperate for money, not wild nor dangerous to any member of the community. People of the community should start to take responsibility for their own actions. No one is forcing the Thai people to buy the drugs, they chose to do it themselves. Similarly, the traffickers should also be ready to accept punishment that is proportional to the crime. In my book, drug trafficking is not a really big major kind of crime that deserves the death penalty. Rehabilitation has a high chance for first time offenders and a medium chance for second time offenders to get their lives back on track, while jail time after that should be considered.

If you wish to keep them in their homes, how do they get enough money to put food on the table?

sorry i was not clear. the point of home incarasion IMO is so the people can work, in the morning htey can leve a serton amount of time before they start work, and have so much time to get back home.

The second one is a problem as many of these people have no job skills.

so, you put them to work in apprentist type jobs, they get the crapwork, but also they get skills.

Put to death after three times?

you asked what I would do.

Originally Posted by Master_Shake

You must be on what these people are trafficking if you think that drug trafficking isn't a victimless crime, because it isn't even CLOSE to a victemless crime. Whaton earth makes you think this???? Not that I agree with emclean (I don't know if I have ever agreed with emclean) but c'mon.

So who's the victim?

Originally Posted by Dzeron

So who's the victim?

Those who eventually receive the drugs. If you have to have that explained to you than I don't know what business you have talking on this thread.

Originally Posted by Master_Shake

Those who eventually receive the drugs. If you have to have that explained to you than I don't know what business you have talking on this thread.

Am I correct in saying this?:

They are not forced to take the drugs. They take them as a personal choice on the basis of their view on what is best for themselves.

I may not agree with their opinion on what is best for themselves, but I will defend their right to do it.