Today, the Daily Telegraph newspaper in Sydney had a feature on the ghastly social consequences resulting from the Methamphetamine plague. It seems that our leaders are at their wits end trying to figure out a way to combat it. Suggestions include mandatory frug counselling and mandatory drug rehabilitation, with the good old Aussie taxpayer footing the bill.

The Indonesians are a lot smarter than we are. With 45 to 50 young Indonesians dying every day from drug overdoses, they Indonesians are going to shoot every damned drug pusher they catch until the drug runners get the message. We should do exactly the same thing here. Instead of wringing our hands and wondering how the taxpayer should fix everything, every meth lab cooker caught in the act should be executed in the British fashion. Once convicted, they get no more than 3 Sunday's before they drop with a rope around their necks.

The execution of Barlow and Chambers in Singapore 25 years ago saw an immediate drop in the importation of drugs from Asia into Australia. I predict the Indonesian President's actions to have drug kingpins like Chan and Sukhamaron shot will do the same thing.

Jonathon, perhaps I was hasty, so please accept my apologies for casting aspersions on your professional expertise.

Allow me to explain why game theory and behavioural economics are applicable.

The ostensible reason for the Indonesian application of the death penalty is to reduce the incidence of drug trafficking over time. This is a situation perfectly modellable using game theory, given the assumption that drug traffickers are able to assess the potential risk of being caught, the potential penalty and the potential reward if one is not caught, then decide on the optimal course rationally.

It is further assumed that the game will iterate in such a way that each new drug-trafficking decision-making process will be weighted increasingly by knowledge of the consequence, so that consequence is broadly and luridly publicised. This is behavioural economics 101.

The problem is that deciding to traffic drugs is unlikely to be a rational decision and the assumptions in regard to the motivations, behavioural drivers and rationality of those who are likely to be candidates for drug trafficking are purest wishful thinking.

There are other groups than the drug traffickers whose reactions are much more predictable. Who was this article aimed at?

Jonathan

Some US States have the death penalty on their books for serious crime including large-scale drug trafficking leading to death or serious harm. It is the death or serious harm part that may justify the death penalty, not the drug trafficking. It’s quite different to the case in Indonesia, where drug trafficking by itself can get you shot.

In the UK, “piracy with violence” was a technically a capital offence until 1998, but no one thought that pirates would hang in the 1980s. Likewise, “arson of naval dockyards”, ceased to be a capital crime in New South Wales in 1996.

No-one has ever been executed in the USA for trafficking, and so far as I know no-one in the modern era has been sentenced to death for trafficking.

Harm Reduction International classifies the USA’s death penalty for drug offences as ‘symbolic’, meaning there is little or no chance of death sentences being carried out.

http://www.ihra.net/files/2014/08/06/IHRA_DeathPenaltyReport_Sept2011_Web.pdf

LEGO

You say the Indonesians “are going to shoot every damned drug pusher they catch until the drug runners get the message”. That’s not what they do. Until 2015 executions for drug trafficking were rare. Overwhelmingly it is foreigners who have been executed for drug offences. Unless Indonesians don’t do drug trafficking, this suggests a certain level of discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Indonesia#Execution_Statistics

OJNAB...

Your comments apropos Ms CORBY was very interesting indeed ? Another commercial success I would suggest, for her at least ? Despite the provisions of the 'Proceeds of Crimes' legislation, she'll need to circumvent, and circumvent she will, because of all the 'Jelly' Judges we have presiding within our erudite judiciary ! In fact she'll make 'squillions' from her importation of drugs, together with her time in prison, and what's wrong with that, it's the Australian way, and why not ?

OJNAB

yes Ojnab its nice for once to be able to be in agreement with most of what you have said. I think she probably has paid for her crime but unfortunately much of the idiotic media that tried to paint her as a victim just continues with no accountability. Sad that her family also seem to have profited from this crime. No wonder the Indonesians treat us as hypocrites.

They're not "enjoying Indonesian hospitality", they're locked up in a maximum security Indonesian prison! As indeed they should be. But while Indonesia does have the right to execute them, there are some very good reasons not to:
Firstly the sentences are excessive. They'd previously been given twenty year sentences, and they were only given death sentences after a prosecution appeal.

Secondly, better enforcement is a much more effective deterrent than harsher sentences. And the reason they were caught is that they'd been dobbed in by the father of another of the nine. The risk of death sentences makes future cooperation of this type less likely.

Australia should stress to Indonesia the superiority of the better enforcement option, and offer assistance to Indonesia to implement it instead of relying on needlessly harsh sentences.