kamui Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Since some time I read quite alarming comments from fellow board members how Thais should deal with suspected criminals, either Thai or Farang. Today I read the worst comment which actually not only postulates extrajudicial killing of the culprit (proven or not), but of the parent too and in addition advocates forced sterilization of the poor. As far those rioting "students" are concerned, only one death is too low. The lot of them should have blown each other's brains out. I saw one cop on TV who was REALLY PISSED OFF, waving his gun at the punks because he they weren't getting their shirts off quickly enough. He should've just shot the fucks. A bullet to the head and the problem is solved. And don't give me any guff about their poor mothers; do away with Mama, too, if that's all the decency they can put in their child. [...]. No, these punks are Exhibit A in any argument for froced sterilization of the poor. I am concerned that except FlyW now body reacted to this in my eyes completely inhuman demands. A search on the board would bring up more comments like this, maybe not so harsh, but with the same intention, like someone is robbed and it is hoped that police or other people the will deal with it the appropriate way which usually means the culprit should to be beaten up or worse without any trial (and without a correct prove that the right person will be punished) I have learned that the laws in Thai are weak, or better said there might be strong laws but they are not enforced properly. But to demand killings of violent schoolboys or thiefs e.g. for me is completely unacceptable. First, it is not always clear who is the culprit and second I think it is universal that every person has the right for trial and deserves appropiate punishment. OK, I am not a lawer and I don't want to lecture about moral, but for me it seems that fellow Farangs leave the idea of civil, human laws behind when they talk about Thailand. Maybe because Thailand itself has a problem with law and justice, but sometimes I have the feeling that they even outstrip Thai "customs" with their demands. (But I am sure that all who promote extra juridical pushiment claim the opposite for themself, their family and friends in their home countries.) Is my perception wrong? I hope so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Well the tread was locked you know. And for good reasons I would say. That quote was out of line. Sounded like someone with fascist tendencies. Shouldv't been deleted if you ask me. Free speech for everyone, but some self censorship is an asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickfarang Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 I didn't read the original post, but from the quote, it looks like the writer is expressing him emotions rather than calling for action. Same with prior posts that say things like "he should be hung by her heels..." etc. Just some hot-headed retoric. Keep it in perspective and don't encourage her/him too much. RickF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torrenova Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Says kamui: Since some time I read quite alarming comments from fellow board members how Thais should deal with suspected criminals, either Thai or Farang. I think the main comment made was inappropriate and perhaps inflamatory but I don't deem it worthy of further comment. As for your quote above, I believe that the "ability" of Thailand to issue punishment which many find just and proper (albeit without having gone through the due process of law admittedly) reflects the inability of their own birth / domicile country to deal adequately with the same issues. Too many in the first world are inadequately punished because of society's "do-gooders" whilst too many in the third world escape justice because of corrupt political and judicial systems where money and connections are the defense, not the facts of the case. Whether we like or dislike, approve or disapprove of a persons views, it is certain that overt censorship has the opposite effect to that which was desired. Free speech is widely abused but even more highly valued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 problem though is that during the last six months exactly that sort of thing has happened here - 3000 to 4000 people have been massakered that way. their crime - mostly small scale drugdealers, and others who were set up as such afterwards. so, for me, those sort of facist rants hit a bit too close home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jitagawn Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 I agree with your perceptions of this post. I did not reply simply because I frequently seem to note outrageous,biased, unbalanced and often ego based posts that are so far off base that I simply shake my head and move on. Silence or lack of response does not necessarily imply any form of agreement IMHO- The member posting base is from a wide segement of the populous and a variety of cultures and well... we have some true knuckleheads aboard. :: :: Your point taken sir- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Hi, "That quote was out of line. Sounded like someone with fascist tendencies. Shouldv't been deleted if you ask me." It was, it did and it was. Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khwaimaisabai Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 Hi kamui, I think you are being over sensitive. While people write such things - and I agree that it was over the top - if it came down to expressing a considered opinion, most people would broadly agree with you. The legal system in any country is not perfect, but without it, and respect for it, we would have a state of anarchy which would not be good for any of us. I am sure the person who made that comment would think again if it was suggested to him that the "punk" could have been his son and "Mama" his wife. Khwai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattaya127 Posted September 3, 2003 Report Share Posted September 3, 2003 What i find puzzling about it, besides its violent rhetoric is that i wonder why BK felt so personal about it, as if he was talking about his own country. Unless one's life in LOs is so miserable and so victimized, i do not understand over-reacting like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 4, 2003 Report Share Posted September 4, 2003 >>>The legal system in any country is not perfect, but without it, and respect for it, we would have a state of anarchy which would not be good for any of us.<<< well, what he suggested had nothing to do with a legal systhem we know. it was a request for torture and extrajudical executions. as you should know, our systhems are separated into legislatice, judicative and executive, all with their clear cut boudaries. so, those sort of judge dread rants might sound manly in some old man cowboy bars, and should stay there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.