SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
When you meet an assassin who has killed six people, you don't expect to encounter a diminutive, nervous young woman carrying a baby. "My first job was two years ago in this province nearby. I felt really scared and nervous because it was my first time." Maria, not her real name, now carries out contract killings as part of the government-sanctioned war on drugs. She is part of a hit team that includes three women, who are valued because they can get close to their victims without arousing the same suspicion a man would.
Since President Duterte was elected, and urged citizens and police to kill drug dealers who resisted arrest, Maria has killed five more people, shooting them all in the head. I asked her who gave the orders for these assassinations: "Our boss, the police officer," she said.
[Continues...]
[...] Maria and her husband come from an impoverished neighbourhood of Manila and had no regular income before agreeing to become contract killers. They earn up to 20,000 Philippines pesos ($430; £327) per hit, which is shared between three or four of them. That is a fortune for low-income Filipinos, but now it looks as if Maria has no way out.
Contract killing is nothing new in the Philippines. But the hit squads have never been as busy as they are now. President Duterte has sent out an unambiguous message. Ahead of his election, he promised to kill 100,000 criminals in his first six months in office. And he has warned drug dealers in particular: "Do not destroy my country, because I will kill you." Last weekend he reiterated that blunt view, as he defended the extrajudicial killings of suspected criminals. "Do the lives of 10 of these criminals really matter? If I am the one facing all this grief, would 100 lives of these idiots mean anything to me?"
What has provoked the rough-tongued president to unleash this merciless campaign is the proliferation of the drug crystal meth or "shabu" as it is known in the Philippines. Cheap, easily made, and intensely addictive, it offers an instant high, an escape from the filth and drudgery of life in the slums, a hit to get labourers in gruelling jobs like truck-driving through their day.
Mr Duterte describes it as a pandemic, afflicting millions of his fellow citizens. It is also very profitable. He has listed 150 senior officials, officers and judges linked to the trade. Five police generals, he says, are kingpins of the business. But it is those at the lowest levels of the trade who are targeted by the death squads. According to the police more than 1,900 people have been killed in drug-related incidents since he took office on 30 June. Of those, they say, 756 were killed by the police, all, they say, while resisting arrest. The remaining deaths are, officially, under investigation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @07:05AM
"I'm a cowboy, on a steel horse I ride
"I'm wanted dead or alive"
There's not much else to this story. The Philippines is one of the very few jurisdictions where bounty hunters still operate legally in modern times.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by quintessence on Sunday August 28 2016, @07:32AM
And I'm absolutely positive all these contract killings are for suspected drug dealers and not political rivals.
an escape from the filth and drudgery of life in the slums, a hit to get labourers in gruelling jobs like truck-driving through their day.
And certainly more productive than improving economic conditions there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:06AM
You think political rivals didn't have paper on them in the Old West? The practice of bounty hunting has been abolished almost everywhere because of the potential for abuse, and bounty hunters are considered vigilantes. We like to read about outlaws and the bounty hunters who catch them in fiction, colorful characters all. In the real world, law enforcement has more than enough resources to make arrests and recover fugitives, without resorting to putting out paper.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quintessence on Sunday August 28 2016, @10:26AM
This gets to a larger question of under what conditions should the state be able to kill, if at all; and the ramifications of when this authority is delegated without sufficient oversight.
In a real sense the practice of bounty hunting has just been abstracted to such a degree the populace doesn't really put a face to the practice.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @03:21PM
That's easy - never.
(Score: 2) by quintessence on Sunday August 28 2016, @03:54PM
And while that is a nice, easy, pat answer; even the most superficial unpacking of it leaves more questions than answers (what about police firing on a suspect to prevent immediate loss of life, what about the state's authority to wage war, what about authorizing clinical trials in medical testing, etc.).
The corollary to to that line of thinking is the state doing everything in its power to prevent loss of life, which gets into the three laws conundrums and the potential for an even more oppressive government (arguably the Philippines is promoting this to save lives).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 29 2016, @03:29AM
The answer as to whether summary executions are acceptable should be pretty obvious.
It was implicit that the question was "When should the state be allowed to kill [its own citizens]?", asking about another state's citizens is another issue entirely.
People who die due to unknown and unforseen side effects or circumstances is not the same thing as murder, which as I understood it was what we were discussing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 29 2016, @03:31AM
Correction/clarification, killing of civilians is always unacceptable no matter which state they belong to, what I meant was "another state's military personnel".
(Score: 2) by quintessence on Monday August 29 2016, @03:57AM
And you really haven't answered much of anything.
Inherent to waging war is sending off a portion of the populace to die, if not through conscription then through enlistment with dire penalties for forfeiture, including execution.
Similarly medical tests (if they weren't unforseen or unknown, they wouldn't be tests now would they?) could be simply forbidden outright and avoid any killing whatsoever, since it is the government that sets the parameters.
And to the contrary, what is considered a summary execution is less than obvious from the onset, and becomes more cloudy.
As I was saying easy, pat answers leave more questions than they answer, especially with an absolutist stance that has little reason or justification to support it.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Sunday August 28 2016, @07:19PM
Not in self defence?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 29 2016, @03:24AM
What exactly would qualify as "self defense" for the state? We're talking about the government here, not individuals.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday August 30 2016, @04:33PM
If you define the "state" as being an instrument of the state -- e.g. a police officer. Would it be acceptable for a police officer to kill someone who had already killed 5 hostages and was about to kill more?
And from there it goes on, what if the person you kill hadn't already proven he'd kill and was just threatening it?
Howabout if he wasn't threatening it, but was instead just reaching for the trigger?
What if another part of the state had told you he was armed and dangerous?
What if you had been told that bag with wires out was a bomb? Despite the bag saying "radioshack" on the side?
What if there was no bag, and just a bulky jacket? Or a light jacket? Or just a t-shirt? What if it was a 3 year old kid with a real gun (only in america!)? What about a toy gun? What about a toy hosepipe?
What about someone planning to kill people, who had killed them already, but wasn't in a position to kill anyone at that immediate time?
At some point between the extremes the state makes a decision, through it's implementers, to take a life. One the one extreme it's justified as self defence, on the other it isn't.
What if the state kills someone by allowing a coal fired power station and thus kills people from the radiation and pollution? What if they don't allow the power station and instead kill people through lack of power to keep houses warm (or cold)? What if they build a road that allows an ambulance to get to hospital and save someone's life? What if that road also leads to an increase in traffic that killed people?
What do you refer to as "state", and what do you refer to as "killing"?
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @09:45AM
There's not much else to this story. The Philippines is one of the very few jurisdictions where bounty hunters still operate legally in modern times.
Don't forget that the other major jurisdiction is that wonderful bastion of civilization, The United States [youtube.com].
From the Bounty Hunter Wikipedia Page [wikipedia.org]:
Perhaps our next president will, in the course of making "America Great Again," take this bit from President Duterte and make it part of his playbook. I sure hope so, because those drug dealers are destroying our country, one wetback drug mule at a time [washingtonpost.com]. It would certainly save us the trouble of jailing and deporting all eleven million of those criminal scumbags. Hell, we could have the Mexicans build the wall out of their dead countrymen. Now that's what I call 'recycling'!
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday August 29 2016, @03:55AM
Wow, this actually seems plausible. Other than the Trump getting elected part.
Just imagine it. All the illegal immigrants get a base bounty. The bounty scales up based on how long it can be proven they've overstayed. Maybe subtract some per U.S. kid they have (the family compassion bonus). And then, if they've committed a crime, double/triple/quadruple it based on any crimes committed (illegals that have committed crimes - that's the big talking point now that the Trump immigration flip-flop is underway).
It's no mistake the U.S. allows bounty hunters. It must be part of the secret to American exceptionalism.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 29 2016, @08:44AM
Thanks, Takyon. I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read this [youtube.com]:
Wow, this actually seems plausible. Other than the Trump getting elected part.
(Score: 2) by dltaylor on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:09AM
With any good luck, her next target, or a friend/relative of an older one, will get her first.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:20AM
Government terrorist, no those are the American Troops, and all of them are motherfucking cocksuckers. There's some shit in the submission queue about a veteran who shot himself in a VA hospital parking lot. Good riddance to the fucking trash.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by HiThere on Sunday August 28 2016, @06:52PM
Armies are *also* government terrorists, but they aren't the only ones. She *is* a government terrorist. This doesn't deny that a soldier going out to kill people is also a terrorist.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 29 2016, @03:34AM
I hadn't thought of it that way before, but you're technically right - soldiers are terrorists, people using violence in pursuit of political aims. Bravo.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:35AM
Drug traffic is a world government business (drugs are control, they are made illegal to maximize the amount of control), and the underworld is a feudal society so the dealer is part of the system, with the police controlling the baddies and the drug money controlling the police, in a nice two pronged approach that is typical of Evil. So, basically, if you hate government you have no horse in this race.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:41AM
It's not going to be pretty...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:46AM
Just another nigger on a hit list!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @12:40PM
Correction: It has not been pretty
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:55AM
This goes against the 5th commandment, thou shall not kill, yet the people knew what the were getting and enthusiastically elected Duterte. Maybe life ain't so sacred, at least not sacred after birth but still sacred before birth. A lot of people turn to crime because of lack of work, exacerbated by high population growth and birth control is still a divisive topic https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsible_Parenthood_and_Reproductive_Health_Act_of_2012 [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Entropy on Sunday August 28 2016, @09:22AM
Kill them all, let god sort it out? Catholics can be pretty brutal.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @09:23AM
Tell us more about how you advocate for impregnating young girls as soon as they reach puberty. Even before their first period, if you can. Menstruation is such a waste of perfectly fertile eggs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @01:36PM
Woah, there. Your sarcasm detector needs calibration.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @02:06PM
> 80% Catholic
And 92.5% christian. [wikipedia.org]
I knew a filipino woman who was raped at 17 by a literal choir boy who offered her a ride home from church on his moped. As a result she was forced to marry him. She wasn't from a poor family either, she ended up graduating with a degree in business from the top university in the country, Ateneo de Manila. After a decade of an abusive marriage he eventually beat her unconscious and left her for dead in the street with a cracked skull. It was only then she was permitted to get an annulment (from the very same priest who married her). In the Philippines you can't legally remarry if you get a divorce. Even then he was able to take all of her property, including her house and leave her solely responsible for raising their children.
Anyone who tells you christianity is an inherently superior religion is just an ignorant scottsman.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @06:23PM
My wife is from Philippines and I know it is only slightly better than India in terms of everything. So it's like the 6th circle of Hell if India is the 7th. Everything there sucks, and all the problems if not directly caused can be shown to be exacerbated by lack of contraception.
(Score: 2) by esperto123 on Sunday August 28 2016, @07:48PM
Never underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance.
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Sunday August 28 2016, @06:54PM
Things you can say about Christians but not about Muslims.
Neither are religions of peace
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @10:46PM
Nor are they religions of violence.
The jesuits have a saying - "When you read the bible, the bible reads you."
Shakespeare said it differently: "The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."
If your heart is dark you'll find some way to justify it in scripture, although it usually takes significant mental gymnastics to get there. I say this as someone who was born and always will be an atheist. Just one who isn't hung up on literalism.
Also, I dunno what country you live in, but the most successful news network in the US has "Islam is a religion of violence" as one of its pillars of faith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 06 2016, @11:26AM
The devil indeed cites the scriptures: "If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence: For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee: And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone." (Luke 4:9-13) citing Psalms 91:12.
Also the devil tends not to outright lie, but to misrepresent the truth. Knowledge of good and evil, indeed makes similar to god (says the devil) but makes also responsible for own actions which means the ability of committing sin (says god).
Which, if you can't bring yourself to believe in the evil one, should be interesting nonetheless because it outlines how evil people operate.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday August 29 2016, @03:22AM
Why do you assume this is related to religion? I see nothing in the summary to suggest that.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 30 2016, @12:45AM
If that happened in a 92% islamic country runaway and his fellow travellers would be declaring how its proof that islam is a religion of barbarians. They're wrong, and the OP is wrong too. But the islamofoe narrative is practically gospel around here so I can't too worked about the gander getting what he gives the goose.
(Score: 0, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @08:36PM
You let in Mexicans and suddenly you get women killing and raping people all over the place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 28 2016, @09:37PM
Can I get a handy before I get shot in the forehead?