cont'd ...

Sorry I made a typo in the link. It should be:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/12/australia-offers-to-pay-jail-costs-for-bali-nine-pair-if-their-lives-are-spared

No one asked to have these men released from prison.
Simply not to be put to death - over ten years after their crime.

There is little doubt these two had appeared to be reformed and rehabilitated, however, there is also no doubt that the threat of being executed was a very strong motivator.

So, in the event this situation presents itself again, and the guilty ones show the signs of having been rehabilitated, why not release them on the grounds of indefinite parole with the condition being that if for the rest of their life they are convicted of any illegal drug offense, they be returned to Indonesia for immediate execution, no if's, no buts, no trial, either by the courts or the media.

At least then should someone claim to, or show similar signs of rehabilitation they would have a chance to prove it.

All we have done in this case is throw million of BORROWED dollars at these two, money that I'm sure could have been better spent because after all, they risk their own lives in a country where they knew the consequences should they be caught.

They other point I would make is to say to anyone out there who uses illegal drugs, you have blood on your hands because without your demands for illegal drugs, there would have been no trade for these two.

Hi BUTCH...

Your thought are valid, though have had currency for decades and decades. A person is released from gaol on parole, before the expiration of his head sentence, and should he breach the conditions of that parole he's returned to gaol to finish that sentence. Furthermore he's required to serve the additional time for the crime that originally caused him to breach his parole in the first instance.

Regrettably, the theory and the practice are generally not one of the same thing. Your suggestion of serving a type of 'life parole', would by necessity, need to be served in country ? Otherwise I'd hardly see a politically weak Australia, return either of them to Indonesia for execution, could you ? Nevertheless your concept is meritorious.

Talking about "blood on their hands,"
and illegal drugs - why not broaden this discussion
a bit further and let us take a look at those
making billions selling us - alcohol, nicotine,
valium, and anti-depressants? Why does Australian law
protect them and legalise their harful products?

I wonder how many people overdose or die from these
"legal" drugs?

Alcoholism, lung cancers, overdoses
from anti-depressants - are all damaging.

Why are only
illegal drug dealers considered to be morally responsible
for all resulting ill-effects on user/society
and therefore can face jail (or if on foreign soil -
the death penalty) while these other guys get away with
the ill effects of what they're selling to users and
society?

Just a few thoughts.

Foxy,

Revenue.

Foxy: Talking about "blood on their hands," and illegal drugs - why not broaden this discussion a bit further and let us take a look at those making billions selling us - alcohol, nicotine, valium, and anti-depressants? Why does Australian law protect them and legalise their harmful products?

The difference like being hit with a stick or a .50 cal. The stick can do a fair bit of damage, but the .50 is lethal.

I guess alcohol has been around for about 6000 years & Tobacco since the 1500 after Sir Walter Raleigh introduced it to English Society. A bit hard to get rid of, yes, but it is happening. Valium & anti-depressants are restricted to prescription & as so are the responsibility of the Doctor prescribing them. Like over the counter pain tablets some people will always abuse & use them for recreational purposes. They are a God send when taken properly.

I do favour looking into the medical use for Marijuana, if it's done properly & prescribed by a medical professional. After all Morphine, Cocaine & Heroin are prescribed by the medical profession in all sorts of derivatives.