Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Death sentence for traffickers of wildlife

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

>In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of pangolins, I

>had actually came up with a recommendation for a death sentence for

>traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

 

 

Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya, and

Zimbabwe.

 

The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national hero, of

enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend and

hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered as

an arch-villain.

 

Among all the evil people who held authority in various

places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands their

citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible reasons,

the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as the

record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not personally

support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to the

war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most notorious of

the tax resistors.

 

Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to hang

Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to Robin

Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

wardens, tax collectors, et al.

 

In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the head.

Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was encouraging

the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who might be

killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into Chinese

versions of Robin Hood.

 

Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

through a combination of public education, increased surveillance of

vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

secure greater public cooperation.

 

In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by the

then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded their

bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn. Mugabe's

army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe African

People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

protect elephants and rhinos.

 

Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the arrival of

relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-restrained

for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

 

Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but the

shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that might

look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a ranger or

landowner.

 

Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and leopards

if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

 

Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

 

The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web site in

English, French, and Spanish.

 

The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and 1999

indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order, in

some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which easily

disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting poachers

may have been to reduce the competition.

 

Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the public

trust.

 

 

--

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

P.O. Box 960

Clinton, WA 98236

 

Telephone: 360-579-2505

Fax: 360-579-2575

E-mail: anmlpepl

Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

 

[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

for free sample, send address.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Sorry to say this but as a campaigner for the abolishment of the death

penalty I cannot stand by and agree to such a thing. What ever happened to

the compassion we believe in? Is there no room for forgiveness and

rehabilitation?

 

I understand these people are committing crimes against innocent animals,

but they do so for money. Usually it is the poorest people committing these

acts. And why are they poor? Well lets not go into global economic politics

shall we?

 

We usually sentence the person being paid to do the job for the fat cats who

run industry. What does the boss do next? Get someone else. Same goes for

the drug trade.

 

If meat is murder then the death penalty is very much murder as well.

 

For more info please visit

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng

 

Love,

Seelan.

 

 

 

 

On 7/22/06, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>

> >In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of pangolins,

> I

> >had actually came up with a recommendation for a death sentence for

> >traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

>

> Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

> trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

> notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya, and

> Zimbabwe.

>

> The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

> poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national hero, of

> enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend and

> hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered as

> an arch-villain.

>

> Among all the evil people who held authority in various

> places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands their

> citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible reasons,

> the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

> interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as the

> record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

> collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not personally

> support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to the

> war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most notorious of

> the tax resistors.

>

> Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

> and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to hang

> Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to Robin

> Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

> wardens, tax collectors, et al.

>

> In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

> 1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the head.

> Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was encouraging

> the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

> addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who might be

> killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into Chinese

> versions of Robin Hood.

>

> Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

> through a combination of public education, increased surveillance of

> vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

> secure greater public cooperation.

>

> In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

> on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

> Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by the

> then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded their

> bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn. Mugabe's

> army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe African

> People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

> proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

> protect elephants and rhinos.

>

> Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

> years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the arrival of

> relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-restrained

> for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

> after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

>

> Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

> Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

> 1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but the

> shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that might

> look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a ranger or

> landowner.

>

> Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

> lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and leopards

> if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

>

> Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

> back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

> aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

> rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

> poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

>

> The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

> escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

> anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

> government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

> PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

> militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

> management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web site in

> English, French, and Spanish.

>

> The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

> funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and 1999

> indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order, in

> some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

> destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which easily

> disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

> instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting poachers

> may have been to reduce the competition.

>

> Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

> of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

> especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the public

> trust.

>

> --

> Merritt Clifton

> Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> P.O. Box 960

> Clinton, WA 98236

>

> Telephone: 360-579-2505

> Fax: 360-579-2575

> E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

> Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

>

> [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

> We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

> for free sample, send address.]

>

>

>

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I fully agree with what Seelan says. The death sentence should be abolished

if we are to call ourselves truly civilised.

 

S. Chinny Krishna

 

 

Seelan FW [fallenworld]

Saturday, July 22, 2006 8:32 PM

Merritt Clifton; aapn ; Lucy Davis; Weng Choy Lee

Re: Death sentence for traffickers of wildlife

 

 

Sorry to say this but as a campaigner for the abolishment of the death

penalty I cannot stand by and agree to such a thing. What ever happened to

the compassion we believe in? Is there no room for forgiveness and

rehabilitation?

 

I understand these people are committing crimes against innocent animals,

but they do so for money. Usually it is the poorest people committing these

acts. And why are they poor? Well lets not go into global economic politics

shall we?

 

We usually sentence the person being paid to do the job for the fat cats who

run industry. What does the boss do next? Get someone else. Same goes for

the drug trade.

 

If meat is murder then the death penalty is very much murder as well.

 

For more info please visit

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng

 

Love,

Seelan.

 

 

 

 

On 7/22/06, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>

> >In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of pangolins,

> I

> >had actually came up with a recommendation for a death sentence for

> >traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

>

> Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

> trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

> notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya, and

> Zimbabwe.

>

> The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

> poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national hero, of

> enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend and

> hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered as

> an arch-villain.

>

> Among all the evil people who held authority in various

> places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands their

> citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible reasons,

> the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

> interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as the

> record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

> collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not personally

> support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to the

> war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most notorious of

> the tax resistors.

>

> Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

> and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to hang

> Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to Robin

> Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

> wardens, tax collectors, et al.

>

> In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

> 1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the head.

> Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was encouraging

> the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

> addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who might be

> killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into Chinese

> versions of Robin Hood.

>

> Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

> through a combination of public education, increased surveillance of

> vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

> secure greater public cooperation.

>

> In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

> on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

> Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by the

> then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded their

> bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn. Mugabe's

> army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe African

> People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

> proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

> protect elephants and rhinos.

>

> Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

> years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the arrival of

> relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-restrained

> for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

> after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

>

> Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

> Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

> 1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but the

> shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that might

> look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a ranger or

> landowner.

>

> Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

> lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and leopards

> if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

>

> Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

> back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

> aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

> rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

> poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

>

> The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

> escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

> anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

> government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

> PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

> militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

> management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web site in

> English, French, and Spanish.

>

> The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

> funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and 1999

> indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order, in

> some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

> destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which easily

> disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

> instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting poachers

> may have been to reduce the competition.

>

> Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

> of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

> especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the public

> trust.

>

> --

> Merritt Clifton

> Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> P.O. Box 960

> Clinton, WA 98236

>

> Telephone: 360-579-2505

> Fax: 360-579-2575

> E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

> Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

>

> [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

> We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

> for free sample, send address.]

>

>

>

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

 I fully agree that Death Sentence is brutal and old fashioned as is hunting of

wildlife,when there were no civil society. Now,more and more countries are

coming up with Animal Welfare Laws & SPCAs and animal welfare agencies speak for

the Voiceless.

It is most important that awareness needs to be created so that law enforcing

agencies implement the laws, which are usually stringent but not implemented

properly.

I do not agree with Seelan's view that crimes against animals are done for money

only and the offenders are poor.e.g Indian Former cricket captain MAK Pataudi is

not a poor man, similarly A star Salman Khan involved in blackbuck Hunting Case

is not poor.

Some times poor people do it for Smugglers and big traders of Animal skins,

bones etc., etc.

The punishment should be exemplary, so that no one indulge into crimes against

Animals.

Dr.Sandeep K.Jain

 

 

On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 Dr.Chinny Krishna wrote :

>I fully agree with what Seelan says. The death sentence should be abolished

>if we are to call ourselves truly civilised.

>

>S. Chinny Krishna

>

>

> Seelan FW [fallenworld]

>Saturday, July 22, 2006 8:32 PM

>Merritt Clifton; aapn ; Lucy Davis; Weng Choy Lee

>Re: Death sentence for traffickers of wildlife

>

>

>Sorry to say this but as a campaigner for the abolishment of the death

>penalty I cannot stand by and agree to such a thing. What ever happened to

>the compassion we believe in? Is there no room for forgiveness and

>rehabilitation?

>

>I understand these people are committing crimes against innocent animals,

>but they do so for money. Usually it is the poorest people committing these

>acts. And why are they poor? Well lets not go into global economic politics

>shall we?

>

>We usually sentence the person being paid to do the job for the fat cats who

>run industry. What does the boss do next? Get someone else. Same goes for

>the drug trade.

>

>If meat is murder then the death penalty is very much murder as well.

>

>For more info please visit

>http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng

>

>Love,

>Seelan.

>

>

>

>

>On 7/22/06, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

> >

> > >In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of pangolins,

> > I

> > >had actually came up with a recommendation for a death sentence for

> > >traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

> >

> > Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

> > trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

> > notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya, and

> > Zimbabwe.

> >

> > The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

> > poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national hero, of

> > enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend and

> > hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered as

> > an arch-villain.

> >

> > Among all the evil people who held authority in various

> > places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands their

> > citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible reasons,

> > the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

> > interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as the

> > record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

> > collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not personally

> > support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to the

> > war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most notorious of

> > the tax resistors.

> >

> > Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

> > and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to hang

> > Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to Robin

> > Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

> > wardens, tax collectors, et al.

> >

> > In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

> > 1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the head.

> > Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was encouraging

> > the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

> > addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who might be

> > killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into Chinese

> > versions of Robin Hood.

> >

> > Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

> > through a combination of public education, increased surveillance of

> > vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

> > secure greater public cooperation.

> >

> > In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

> > on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

> > Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by the

> > then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded their

> > bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn. Mugabe's

> > army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe African

> > People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

> > proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

> > protect elephants and rhinos.

> >

> > Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

> > years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the arrival of

> > relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-restrained

> > for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

> > after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

> >

> > Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

> > Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

> > 1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but the

> > shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that might

> > look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a ranger or

> > landowner.

> >

> > Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

> > lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and leopards

> > if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

> >

> > Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

> > back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

> > aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

> > rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

> > poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

> >

> > The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

> > escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

> > anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

> > government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

> > PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

> > militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

> > management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web site in

> > English, French, and Spanish.

> >

> > The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

> > funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and 1999

> > indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order, in

> > some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

> > destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which easily

> > disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

> > instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting poachers

> > may have been to reduce the competition.

> >

> > Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

> > of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

> > especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the public

> > trust.

> >

> > --

> > Merritt Clifton

> > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> > P.O. Box 960

> > Clinton, WA 98236

> >

> > Telephone: 360-579-2505

> > Fax: 360-579-2575

> > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

> > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

> >

> > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection organizations.

> > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity. $24/year;

> > for free sample, send address.]

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

We Indians should relax as far as capital punishment for wildlife

crimes are concerned.

 

The wildlife criminals here are already enjoying full freedom, and

have a track record of coming out 'NOT GUILTY'. And this they know

very well.

 

I am sure we would not like the world to know of our shameful ratio

of Wildlife Crimes to Convictions. And this despite having the best

set of animalprotection laws in the world.

 

With a near 2% conviction rate for wildlife and environment crimes in

India, atleast the offenders are very well aware that if you are RICH

or can afford a flamboyant LAWYER to defend his / her case, you can

get away with serious wildlife crimes here.

 

I am afraid wildlife and animal welfare laws have been given the

lowest priority in this country. So forget about the capital

punishment happening here in near future, let us first see a Salman

Khan or a Pataudi go for five years behind bars.

 

Does anyone have the statistics of how many people in India are

serving the maximum penalty of atleast five years in jail for

wildlife crimes in Indian prisons ???

 

The only punishment for a Salman Khan or a Pataudi is when they have

to go through the pain of appearing and re-appearing in the courts,

face the media pressure, cancel/ reschedule their appointments/

shoots and the mental trauma. And one fine dy believe me they will

get a clean chit or maybe with paltry fine of a few hundred rupees.

 

So why are we debating Capital Punishment for Wildlife Crimes ?

 

Atleast a Capital Punishment threat will be good enough to keep the

offenders at a distance.

These wildlife criminals fear NO ONE. I am sure anybody who has been

physically involved with the Wildlife Mafia, Timber Mafia, Land

Encroachment Mafia will agree as to how dangerous these criminals

are. Celebrities certainly shoot animals for fun or sport, but more

serious are people like Sansar Chand.

Please let us not show any sympathy towards these criminals. So what

if they are humans ?

Now I do not think any living tiger in the Indian sub continent would

compromise when it comes to Sansar Chand being given death penalty.

 

Why should there be a soft approach towards animal / wildlife crimes

and criminals???

 

If Capital Punishment exists in a country for crimes such as MURDER/

RAPE etc.....it should also then be extended to serious wildlife

crimes. Debate on abolishing Capital Punishment as a whole from a

country....not just specifically for wildlife crimes. Wildlife crimes

need more and more stringent laws and penalties.

 

This is my personal opinion. I have lived in the northeastern region

of India for 32 years. I know how terrible the situation is. I have

not been able to fight with the wildlife criminals here. They simply

rule high. And I see very very less hope for conservation here.

 

Azam Siddiqui

 

 

 

aapn , " Sandeep kumar jain " <jeevdaya

wrote:

>

>  I fully agree that Death Sentence is brutal and old fashioned as

is hunting of wildlife,when there were no civil society. Now,more and

more countries are coming up with Animal Welfare Laws & SPCAs and

animal welfare agencies speak for the Voiceless.

> It is most important that awareness needs to be created so that law

enforcing agencies implement the laws, which are usually stringent

but not implemented properly.

> I do not agree with Seelan's view that crimes against animals are

done for money only and the offenders are poor.e.g Indian Former

cricket captain MAK Pataudi is not a poor man, similarly A star

Salman Khan involved in blackbuck Hunting Case is not poor.

> Some times poor people do it for Smugglers and big traders of

Animal skins, bones etc., etc.

> The punishment should be exemplary, so that no one indulge into

crimes against Animals.

> Dr.Sandeep K.Jain

>

>

> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 Dr.Chinny Krishna wrote :

> >I fully agree with what Seelan says. The death sentence should be

abolished

> >if we are to call ourselves truly civilised.

> >

> >S. Chinny Krishna

> >

> >

> > Seelan FW [fallenworld]

> >Saturday, July 22, 2006 8:32 PM

> >Merritt Clifton; aapn ; Lucy Davis; Weng Choy

Lee

> >Re: Death sentence for traffickers of wildlife

> >

> >

> >Sorry to say this but as a campaigner for the abolishment of the

death

> >penalty I cannot stand by and agree to such a thing. What ever

happened to

> >the compassion we believe in? Is there no room for forgiveness and

> >rehabilitation?

> >

> >I understand these people are committing crimes against innocent

animals,

> >but they do so for money. Usually it is the poorest people

committing these

> >acts. And why are they poor? Well lets not go into global economic

politics

> >shall we?

> >

> >We usually sentence the person being paid to do the job for the

fat cats who

> >run industry. What does the boss do next? Get someone else. Same

goes for

> >the drug trade.

> >

> >If meat is murder then the death penalty is very much murder as

well.

> >

> >For more info please visit

> >http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng

> >

> >Love,

> >Seelan.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >On 7/22/06, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

> > >

> > > >In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of

pangolins,

> > > I

> > > >had actually came up with a recommendation for a death

sentence for

> > > >traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

> > >

> > > Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

> > > trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

> > > notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya,

and

> > > Zimbabwe.

> > >

> > > The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

> > > poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national

hero, of

> > > enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend

and

> > > hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered

as

> > > an arch-villain.

> > >

> > > Among all the evil people who held authority in various

> > > places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands

their

> > > citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible

reasons,

> > > the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

> > > interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as

the

> > > record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

> > > collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not

personally

> > > support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to

the

> > > war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most

notorious of

> > > the tax resistors.

> > >

> > > Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

> > > and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to

hang

> > > Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to

Robin

> > > Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

> > > wardens, tax collectors, et al.

> > >

> > > In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

> > > 1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the

head.

> > > Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was

encouraging

> > > the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

> > > addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who

might be

> > > killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into

Chinese

> > > versions of Robin Hood.

> > >

> > > Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

> > > through a combination of public education, increased

surveillance of

> > > vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

> > > secure greater public cooperation.

> > >

> > > In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

> > > on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

> > > Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by

the

> > > then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded

their

> > > bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn.

Mugabe's

> > > army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe

African

> > > People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

> > > proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

> > > protect elephants and rhinos.

> > >

> > > Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

> > > years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the

arrival of

> > > relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-

restrained

> > > for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

> > > after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

> > >

> > > Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

> > > Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

> > > 1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but

the

> > > shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that

might

> > > look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a

ranger or

> > > landowner.

> > >

> > > Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

> > > lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and

leopards

> > > if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

> > >

> > > Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

> > > back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

> > > aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

> > > rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

> > > poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

> > >

> > > The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

> > > escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

> > > anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

> > > government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

> > > PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

> > > militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

> > > management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web

site in

> > > English, French, and Spanish.

> > >

> > > The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

> > > funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and

1999

> > > indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order,

in

> > > some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

> > > destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which

easily

> > > disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

> > > instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting

poachers

> > > may have been to reduce the competition.

> > >

> > > Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

> > > of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

> > > especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the

public

> > > trust.

> > >

> > > --

> > > Merritt Clifton

> > > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

> > > P.O. Box 960

> > > Clinton, WA 98236

> > >

> > > Telephone: 360-579-2505

> > > Fax: 360-579-2575

> > > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

> > > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

> > >

> > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

> > > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

> > > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

> > > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection

organizations.

> > > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity.

$24/year;

> > > for free sample, send address.]

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Capital punishment for any crime should be abolished. Stringent jail sentences

should be awarded. Mr. Siddiqui is absolutely right when he says the only

punishment for criminals like M A K Pataudi and Salman Khan is the

inconvenience of frequent court appearances. The final punishment for the

influential is just a slap on the wrist if not acquital.

 

However, with greater awareness, the amazing range of availabe laws strictly

enforced can be most effective for wildlife crimes.

 

Re punishment for rape, I am strongly in favour of castration for rapists and

stiff jail sentences for murder. Nothing can justify the death penalty by a

truly civilised society. There is very little justice in most parts of the

world. For those who feel that there are two standards of justice - one

for the

poor and one for the rich, I can confidently state that there is only one

standard of justice - that for the rich.

 

 

 

S. Chinny Krishna

 

Quoting azam24x7 <azamsiddiqui:

 

> We Indians should relax as far as capital punishment for wildlife

> crimes are concerned.

>

> The wildlife criminals here are already enjoying full freedom, and

> have a track record of coming out 'NOT GUILTY'. And this they know

> very well.

>

> I am sure we would not like the world to know of our shameful ratio

> of Wildlife Crimes to Convictions. And this despite having the best

> set of animalprotection laws in the world.

>

> With a near 2% conviction rate for wildlife and environment crimes in

> India, atleast the offenders are very well aware that if you are RICH

> or can afford a flamboyant LAWYER to defend his / her case, you can

> get away with serious wildlife crimes here.

>

> I am afraid wildlife and animal welfare laws have been given the

> lowest priority in this country. So forget about the capital

> punishment happening here in near future, let us first see a Salman

> Khan or a Pataudi go for five years behind bars.

>

> Does anyone have the statistics of how many people in India are

> serving the maximum penalty of atleast five years in jail for

> wildlife crimes in Indian prisons ???

>

> The only punishment for a Salman Khan or a Pataudi is when they have

> to go through the pain of appearing and re-appearing in the courts,

> face the media pressure, cancel/ reschedule their appointments/

> shoots and the mental trauma. And one fine dy believe me they will

> get a clean chit or maybe with paltry fine of a few hundred rupees.

>

> So why are we debating Capital Punishment for Wildlife Crimes ?

>

> Atleast a Capital Punishment threat will be good enough to keep the

> offenders at a distance.

> These wildlife criminals fear NO ONE. I am sure anybody who has been

> physically involved with the Wildlife Mafia, Timber Mafia, Land

> Encroachment Mafia will agree as to how dangerous these criminals

> are. Celebrities certainly shoot animals for fun or sport, but more

> serious are people like Sansar Chand.

> Please let us not show any sympathy towards these criminals. So what

> if they are humans ?

> Now I do not think any living tiger in the Indian sub continent would

> compromise when it comes to Sansar Chand being given death penalty.

>

> Why should there be a soft approach towards animal / wildlife crimes

> and criminals???

>

> If Capital Punishment exists in a country for crimes such as MURDER/

> RAPE etc.....it should also then be extended to serious wildlife

> crimes. Debate on abolishing Capital Punishment as a whole from a

> country....not just specifically for wildlife crimes. Wildlife crimes

> need more and more stringent laws and penalties.

>

> This is my personal opinion. I have lived in the northeastern region

> of India for 32 years. I know how terrible the situation is. I have

> not been able to fight with the wildlife criminals here. They simply

> rule high. And I see very very less hope for conservation here.

>

> Azam Siddiqui

>

>

>

> aapn , " Sandeep kumar jain " <jeevdaya

> wrote:

>>

>>  I fully agree that Death Sentence is brutal and old fashioned as

> is hunting of wildlife,when there were no civil society. Now,more and

> more countries are coming up with Animal Welfare Laws & SPCAs and

> animal welfare agencies speak for the Voiceless.

>> It is most important that awareness needs to be created so that law

> enforcing agencies implement the laws, which are usually stringent

> but not implemented properly.

>> I do not agree with Seelan's view that crimes against animals are

> done for money only and the offenders are poor.e.g Indian Former

> cricket captain MAK Pataudi is not a poor man, similarly A star

> Salman Khan involved in blackbuck Hunting Case is not poor.

>> Some times poor people do it for Smugglers and big traders of

> Animal skins, bones etc., etc.

>> The punishment should be exemplary, so that no one indulge into

> crimes against Animals.

>> Dr.Sandeep K.Jain

>>

>>

>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 Dr.Chinny Krishna wrote :

>> >I fully agree with what Seelan says. The death sentence should be

> abolished

>> >if we are to call ourselves truly civilised.

>> >

>> >S. Chinny Krishna

>> >

>> >

>> > Seelan FW [fallenworld]

>> >Saturday, July 22, 2006 8:32 PM

>> >Merritt Clifton; aapn ; Lucy Davis; Weng Choy

> Lee

>> >Re: Death sentence for traffickers of wildlife

>> >

>> >

>> >Sorry to say this but as a campaigner for the abolishment of the

> death

>> >penalty I cannot stand by and agree to such a thing. What ever

> happened to

>> >the compassion we believe in? Is there no room for forgiveness and

>> >rehabilitation?

>> >

>> >I understand these people are committing crimes against innocent

> animals,

>> >but they do so for money. Usually it is the poorest people

> committing these

>> >acts. And why are they poor? Well lets not go into global economic

> politics

>> >shall we?

>> >

>> >We usually sentence the person being paid to do the job for the

> fat cats who

>> >run industry. What does the boss do next? Get someone else. Same

> goes for

>> >the drug trade.

>> >

>> >If meat is murder then the death penalty is very much murder as

> well.

>> >

>> >For more info please visit

>> >http://web.amnesty.org/pages/deathpenalty-index-eng

>> >

>> >Love,

>> >Seelan.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >On 7/22/06, Merritt Clifton <anmlpepl wrote:

>> > >

>> > > >In one of our letters to editor relating to the smuggling of

> pangolins,

>> > > I

>> > > >had actually came up with a recommendation for a death

> sentence for

>> > > >traffickers of wildlife in Malaysia.

>> > >

>> > > Imposing the death penalty for poaching and wildlife

>> > > trafficking has been attempted many times in many places, most

>> > > notoriously in medieval England and contemporary China, Kenya,

> and

>> > > Zimbabwe.

>> > >

>> > > The outcome during the regime of King John was to make the

>> > > poacher and wildlife trafficker Robin Hood into a national

> hero, of

>> > > enduring repute, while the game warden who tried to apprehend

> and

>> > > hang him, the Sheriff of Nottingham is historically remembered

> as

>> > > an arch-villain.

>> > >

>> > > Among all the evil people who held authority in various

>> > > places during the Middle Ages, torturing hundreds of thousands

> their

>> > > citizens to death for often trivial and incomprehensible

> reasons,

>> > > the Sheriff of Nottingham would seem to be--at the very worst

>> > > interpretation of his conduct--the least of the lot. So far as

> the

>> > > record shows, his major alleged offenses were simply trying to

>> > > collect taxes to pay for the Crusades, which he did not

> personally

>> > > support, keeping his men home instead of contributing troops to

> the

>> > > war effort, and trying to prevent poaching by the most

> notorious of

>> > > the tax resistors.

>> > >

>> > > Ask anyone what they know about the Sheriff of Nottingham,

>> > > and what will be remembered, inevitably, is that he tried to

> hang

>> > > Robin Hood for killing the king's deer, without reference to

> Robin

>> > > Hood also having killed quite a few of the king's lesser game

>> > > wardens, tax collectors, et al.

>> > >

>> > > In more recent times, specifically the 1980s and early

>> > > 1990s, China executed quite a few poachers with a shot to the

> head.

>> > > Eventually China learned that all this accomplished was

> encouraging

>> > > the poachers to kill game wardens rather than risk capture. In

>> > > addition, witnesses were reluctant to turn in poachers who

> might be

>> > > killed. Basically, the death penalty turned criminals into

> Chinese

>> > > versions of Robin Hood.

>> > >

>> > > Poaching was eventually significantly reduced in China

>> > > through a combination of public education, increased

> surveillance of

>> > > vulnerable wildlife populations, and lessening the penalties, to

>> > > secure greater public cooperation.

>> > >

>> > > In Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe took power while still fighting

>> > > on several fronts. Years of warfare continued against the rival

>> > > Zimbabwe African People's Union and a force covertly armed by

> the

>> > > then still apartheid government of South Africa. Both funded

> their

>> > > bush militias by poaching elephant ivory and rhino horn.

> Mugabe's

>> > > army in 1983 killed about 1,500 supporters of the Zimbabwe

> African

>> > > People's Union, but the trouble continued until Mugabe in 1984

>> > > proclaimed a shoot-to-kill anti-poaching policy, ostensibly to

>> > > protect elephants and rhinos.

>> > >

>> > > Killing at least 160 alleged poachers during the next several

>> > > years cut off the rebels' funding, and coincided with the

> arrival of

>> > > relative peace--for humans. Poaching in Zimbabwe was semi-

> restrained

>> > > for about 15 years, then soared well beyond the previous levels

>> > > after the " land invasions " began in 2000.

>> > >

>> > > Shoot-to-kill anti-poaching edicts prevailed in Kenya, South

>> > > Africa, Botswana, Namibia, and Zambia from 1984 into the early

>> > > 1990s. At least 130 alleged poachers were killed in Kenya, but

> the

>> > > shoot-to-kill policies also gave anyone carrying anything that

> might

>> > > look like a weapon cause to flee from anyone resembling a

> ranger or

>> > > landowner.

>> > >

>> > > Among the " poachers " at constant risk were truck drivers

>> > > lightly armed for self-defense against bandits--or lions and

> leopards

>> > > if obliged to sleep outdoors after a breakdown.

>> > >

>> > > Serious poachers meanwhile improved their armament and shot

>> > > back at the rangers. During this time several Somali militias

>> > > aligned with al Qaida and Hamas took control of the elephant and

>> > > rhino poaching industries in Kenya, and continue to dominate

>> > > poaching and wildlife trafficking in the eastern half of Kenya.

>> > >

>> > > The response of many wildlife protection organizations to the

>> > > escalation of violence after the introduction of shoot-to-kill

>> > > anti-poaching and trafficking policies was to either arm the

>> > > government forces or set up their own private militias. ANIMAL

>> > > PEOPLE extensively examined the history of private anti-poaching

>> > > militias in an April 1999 cover feature entitled " Can mercenary

>> > > management stop poaching in Africa? " , accessible at our web

> site in

>> > > English, French, and Spanish.

>> > >

>> > > The weight of experience involving at least seven militias

>> > > funded by private conservationists between the mid-1980s and

> 1999

>> > > indicates that they did not increase respect for law and order,

> in

>> > > some cases may have provided cover for covert operations to

>> > > destabilize governments, imported weapons and equipment which

> easily

>> > > disappeared without a trace (including helicopters), and in some

>> > > instances hired individuals whose chief interest in fighting

> poachers

>> > > may have been to reduce the competition.

>> > >

>> > > Over time, ANIMAL PEOPLE found, the short-term achievements

>> > > of anti-poaching militias were offset by catastrophic failures,

>> > > especially at the political level after mercenaries abused the

> public

>> > > trust.

>> > >

>> > > --

>> > > Merritt Clifton

>> > > Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

>> > > P.O. Box 960

>> > > Clinton, WA 98236

>> > >

>> > > Telephone: 360-579-2505

>> > > Fax: 360-579-2575

>> > > E-mail: anmlpepl <anmlpepl%40whidbey.com>

>> > > Web: www.animalpeoplenews.org

>> > >

>> > > [ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing

>> > > original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide,

>> > > founded in 1992. Our readership of 30,000-plus includes the

>> > > decision-makers at more than 10,000 animal protection

> organizations.

>> > > We have no alignment or affiliation with any other entity.

> $24/year;

>> > > for free sample, send address.]

>> > >

>> > >

>> > >

>> >

>> >

>> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...