Re: Another criminal cyclist

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 19:57:19 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 2/7/2025 6:33 PM, John B. wrote:

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 10:46:37 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
 

with action video
>
https://nypost.com/2025/02/07/us-news/terrifying-moment-san-francisco-store-owner-is-shot-seven-times-at-point-blank-range-in-random-attack/

 
 
Will we next be entertained by a motion made by the "do goodies" to
charge the police with cruel and unusual punishment of the shooter?

>
We know what works, as you often note here. Enforce our
laws. Or repeal them.
>
But ignoring law for some but not others makes a real mess.
>
In the freshly independent Singapore, under the wise
leadership of Lee Kwan Kew, the economy grew rapidly unlike
her neighbors. This inspired a wave of illegal immigrants to
some 10,000 or so.
>
As recounted by Vic Pelson who was setting up an ATT Factory
in Singapore at the time:
>
In the 1980s, the population of illegal immigrants in
Singapore grew to more than 10,000.
>
For the iron-fisted Lee, this flouting of the law was
unacceptable.
>
The prime minister’s advisers approached Lee and asked how
he wanted to handle the illegal immigrants.
>
“Cane them,” Lee said.
>
The aides were stunned. The process of caning a single
prisoner required a team of medical officers, prison
officials and martial artists (apparently to assure that the
last lashes were as ferocious as the first). Prisoners could
require hospitalization between lashes to make sure they
were healthy enough to continue. Those who have endured the
punishment describe the pain as excruciating and unbearable.
>
“Mr. Prime Minister,” they pleaded. “You can’t possibly
intend to cane more than 10,000 people.”
>
“Of course not,” Lee replied. “We will probably need to cane
two or three.”
>
He was right. In the two weeks after the new policy was
announced, more than 10,000 illegal immigrants fled the
country.

But that was then and this is now.

In the way back days Singapore was very set against narcotics and
possession of even tiny amounts was justification for the death
penalty. If a death sentence was imposed an automatic appeal was
submitted to the President who could ignore it, order a retrial or
rule the trial non and void. If the appeal was ignored the execution
was carried within a week.

At the time Singapore bragged that their narcotics problem was less
then 1%.

Today after the "love and kindness" group have gotten the rules
changed where very large quantities of Dope are required for the death
sentence the dope problem is now in the 5% range.

When "LKY" as he was known, was President... the legislature was made
up of his group, the "Peoples Action Party" and one dissident :-)

By the way, Canning was the penalty for a number if crimes. I remember
some foreign kids stole a car and scratched it all up and the court
sentence then to a caining. The U.S. community was up in arms about it
- "Beat my kid... You can't do that!" The government  didn't formally
respond although the word was "put around", "You live in Singapore,
you obey Singapore laws!" And the kid(s) got canned.

--
Cheers,

John B.