8 years ago
4
Duterte tells people to 'go ahead and kill' drug addicts
Newly inaugurated Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has urged communist rebels to start killing drug traffickers and people to kill addicts, adding another layer to a controversial war on crime in which he has warned thousands will die. The communists' armed wing, the 4,000-strong New People's Army, is known for assassinating civilians deemed to have committed so-called crimes against the people — however its courts and summary executions are illegal.
Continue Reading
http://www.abc.net.au
Join the Discussion
Addiction is a medical issue, not a crime.
Anybody who is a 'leader', but is that out of touch should be killed. I fully support killing Duterte because he supports killing innocent people. Come here you little bitch, I'll choke your ass out personally.
When a drug addict intentionally spreads their addiction to others, is that a medical issue? When a drug addict makes, cuts and sells their drugs-of-choice, must society treat that as a matter of compassionate care? By the by, for what crime will you assassinate this particular sitting head of state? Or is that just for kicks?
I'm sorry, but I think I missed your point. Duterte is saying that addicts should be killed. If you want to talk about drug dealers, we can have that conversation, but that's not the current conversation. Try to keep up, I'll provide cliff notes if you need me to help you out.
The crime for which I would assassinate that particular head of state? Oh, how about inciting people to kill innocent drug addicts? Is that good enough for you? If you support the killing of people who have mental health issues, that's on you, but don't try to project your skewed view of the world onto me.
There exists a head of state that calls for innocent people to be killed. He hasn't killed anyone, and is therefore innocent himself. You call for his killing for the crime of calling for innocent people to be killed. Either you also ought be killed, or the head of state's grandstanding's no worse than yours.
Perhaps my skewed view of the world is down to recognizing that drug addiction isn't some immutable trait people are necessarily born with. There is a mote of free will, a whit of personal choice, that accompanies the fact of addiction. Even if we abandon the notion of personal responsibility entirely, and accept it as a transmissible disease somehow, and that we cannot judge those that succumb to it for whatever reason, the moment one decides to addict someone else, that excuse is gone.
There're limits to the head of state's guilt and the drug addicts' innocence. In any case, maybe the judgment they'll face isn't for us to decide. Maybe they'll get their due in time.