No, I'm totally against it. It's proved worldwide that it doesn't work, it's barbaric and it's extremely expensive and let's not forget how many death row prisoners are found to be innocent (if one person put to death is later proved to be innocent, that's one too many in my book) I don't care what crime you've committed, no one has the right to end your life.

Edit: WTF?

Disagree with the penalties: one person can slip a packet into your baggage.. and it's Good Night Vienna.. How about Sniffer dogs: Why would anyone smuggle?

Your issue is with media compassion then?

If so I tend to agree. There seems to be some conflict there.

I feel less sympathy for drug smugglers than someone convicted of a single murder even - though both are heinous crimes.

The damage caused by such large-scale drug smugglers, who will ultimately kill dozens or hundreds of people and probably impact the lives of thousands more, would make the crime of a single murderer almost pale in significance.

So are you the person who would welcome the death penalty against someone who killed a single person on the spot... but would not feel the same way towards someone who killed loads of people slowly and/or indirectly?

You yourself mentioned terrorists. In your way of reasoning, the death penalty should apply to those who instantly kill others, but if someone set off a 'dirty bomb', doesn't kill a single soul but hundreds end up dying in later years due to radiation exposure, then these people don't deserve the death sentence and will get the same sympathy you're extending to the Bali 9 ringleaders?

Seriously, those who cause mass harm to others, and do so in countries in which the death sentence applies, cannot possibly expect any sympathy. Let this be a message to others: DO NOT DEAL DRUGS. Do not kill. Indirectly or directly. Those who cannot follow such simple rules do not even belong in society and are the last people who deserve any sympathy for when the law kicks in and "cleans up the trash" that would gladly bring immeasurable misery to a myriad of families just to turn a profit.

Seriously? You do that for people who are worth it, like other SAS members or hostages. Not for convicted drug dealers that are rock bottom of the worthlessness scale.

Plus you do cannot do this in countries with which you have active diplomatic ties. Do you honestly expect a team to be able to get in and out of a high security holding facility without being noticed? Or do you expect our lads to basically whack Indonesian military personnel and prison guards in their way to rescue the valuable lives of two dope dealers? Please...

Yes correct. I think motive has to come into it somewhere. There is evil and there is greedy. Sure a greedy drug smuggler can indirectly kill more than a terrorist, a terrorist has evil motives. A terrorist intends to kill. A smuggler does not.

A 9 Kg packet though? not even Paul Daniels could plant that on anyone. What's this behind your ear?

Easy if its done by a baggage handler.

massive ears though. This is why we padlock our cases, even wrap em up in that clingwrap stuff.

Nice big padlock holding two thin, flimsy zip handles together! At least it enables you to see on arrival if the padlock has been twisted off.

Let's all blame the baggage handlers then and mourn Harold and Kumar, how wrong was I

Happened to my wife when we flew from Phuket to Singapore once. Lock was removed and a zip opened. A little bit nervous going through customs. No gear on board but a pair of hair straightners gone.

In Singapore I'd be inclined to approach customs and say that your bag has been tampered with and would they open it. If there's anything in it they could hardly argue that you asked to be searched knowing that drugs would be found.

I would hesitate to do that in Indonesia, though!

Did you not notice the baggage handler with lovely straight hair??

It was considered, though I had never been stopped on my hundreds of visits to Sing in the past so I thought best not to make a scene.