OPINION

Is jailing efficient?

Re: "Death penalty taints the record", (Editorial, Oct 14). The debate on whether the death penalty for certain crimes continues unabated with both sides putting forward their reasons for keeping it or not. The editorial, obviously on the side of abolishing it, states "...life imprisonment, without a commuting term, is a more acceptable and efficient punishment choice for people committing heinous crimes". What it failed to state is to whom is it more acceptable and how is it more efficient.

Bearing in mind the two points above, if your relatives or loved one were murdered is it "more acceptable" that those convicted live out the rest of their lives in relative comfort of a prison? As for being more efficient -- on what basis? In the US and UK, the average cost of keeping a person in prison is said to be between US$31,000 to $66,0000 (about 1 million to 2 million baht) per year. On average, therefore, assuming 40 years of incarceration, the cost is $1.8 million per convict. While cost in Thailand would be lower, how is that "more efficient"?

The only question remains: Is the death penalty a deterrent? Both sides argue on that point.

I had difficulty understanding the logic behind "Timsahb's" Oct 14 letter. According to what he writes, if an Eastern European is found floating dead off Koh Tao, it might be normal. I agree. But if 13 events from drowning to rapes to murders occur in the same place, that is not at all within the normal graph of things. Discovering one person exposed to radiation poisoning near a nuclear facility might be normal, but finding a group of people in the same area exposed to this poisoning would definitely raise questions and merit investigation.

A murder anywhere is treated as such. But if many murders with similarity occur in a given area, then the police mobilises a hunt for a serial killer. Should the events on "Murder Island" be treated differently, other than to protect Thailand's "pristine" tourist reputation?

I enjoyed Paul's Oct 13 letter, "Celebration of change". However I would like to take exception to his statement that JFK was "the greatest president in American history". Perhaps he would have been, should he have been permitted to finish his term and be re-elected for a second. There are other presidents who are considered greater. Who they are is a matter of opinion. I'd cast my vote for FDR.

Can anyone please explain what's going on in this country with its desire for ever more documents. Immigration allowed me in this country and has since taken over my British passport for its own uses. Several years worth of visa extensions are stamped in the pages which were not intended for this purpose, a map of my "home location" and also a small form indicating that this alien has notified his home address is also stapled in place virtually turning my passport into a Thai identity paper.

However, just to renew, not obtain, my driving licence, I'm told I need a guarantee of address document which somehow isn't covered by the thick pile of photocopies I supplied to extend my visa or by my notified address. So to be a proper documented driver in a country where many drivers have never taken a test and have no licence I need a proper home address.

Surely a yellow book (the farang's tabian baan) would be the answer. But a visit to our local town hall tells me they don't believe my passport and I must get the British Embassy in Bangkok to supply me with a certified translation plus several other documents from me and the wife before they can issue a house document.

But if I go back to Immigration and wait long enough, or pay them more for a speedy service, I can get them to issue a guarantee of address paper, issued from the same documents I gave them for my visa extension, including my passport, that they are happy with but Mae Ai amphur isn't. Is it any wonder I am confused?

Contact: Bangkok Post Building 136 Na Ranong Road Klong Toey, Bangkok 10110 fax: +02 6164000 Email: postbag@bangkokpost.co.th

All letter writers must provide full name and address.

All published correspondence is subject to editing at our discretion.