I am somewhat puzzled by the highly enthusiastic response of The Lone Voice to this story from the Telegraph, about a young woman who appears likely to be shot in Laos for heroin smuggling.
Most people of a libertarian persuasion seem to be of the view that the main problem with ‘illegal drugs’ is not their druggishness but their illegality. The legalisation of all drugs is part of most Libertarian manifestos, with a view to restoring individual responsibility, restoring the status quo ante Margaret Thatcher in re medical support for addicts, and eliminating both the undesirable organised-crime element in drug supply and the undesirable totalitarian element in the police force so clearly symbiotic therewith.
Does The Lone Voice feel that this commitment is an improper one, and that in fact ‘drugs’ (meaning, of course, only those which are not profited from by multinationals nor taxed by governments) should remain illegal? If so, why?
Libertarian opinion differs somewhat on the subject of judicial capital punishment; I am against it, myself, for a number of reasons, though I would allow the individual the use of lethal force in self-defence.
Does The Lone Voice believe (as it would seem) that capital punishment is appropriate in this case? If so, why? Would this view also apply to any cases under British jurisdiction? If so, which?
Libertarian opinion hardly differs at all about Communism, regarding it more or less uniformly as a bad thing. The government of Laos is an unregenerate Communist tyranny, of the usual South-East Asian kind, run by sinister little generals in hats too large for them.
Does The Lone Voice see the government of Laos as being in such a position as to be deserving of support? If so, why?
I hold no brief for the unfortunate (if extremely foolish) young woman involved in this regrettable case, considering that anyone who ever travels to a country like Laos has only themselves to blame for the consequences.
However, I am, as I said before, puzzled at what seems to be The Lone Voice’s joy and rapture at the prospect of this silly girl being killed by Communists for doing something (if, indeed, she did) which many people of our general outlook believe shouldn’t be illegal at all.
Does The Lone Voice’s enthusiasm for the executions of young women also extend to this one? If not, why not?
