How come in America heroin dealers with heroin from Afghanistan are not charged with terrorism?

Question

or aiding and abetting the enemy. In my country we put them to death usually in a week or two after conviction.

people who buy this are supporting terrorism, banks that launder their money support terrorism, yet from the west we see inaction on this issue. tests can be done on the narcotics to determine what region of the world it was grown in, we do it here in Asia , yet in the west inaction why is that.

we don't kill the addict, they get treatment in boot camps, a combination of hard physical labour, with whippings and cannings as needed, seems to get the addiction out of the addict , with a remarkable sucess rate.

Answer 1

Because the people that make the laws in this country are a bunch of hypocritical hicks. I also agree with the laws of your country: people who sell death (especially to young people, kids) should definitely be put to death.

Answer 2

This is a difficult question to answer in a meaningful way. The Justice Systems in the west are built on the bankrupt theory that criminals can be 'rehabilitated'. Other systems of Justice, Sharia Law as an example, take a more pragmatic view of things. The results are clear enough: there is very little out and out 'crime' in Muslim countries and what little there is is punished swiftly and severely. In the west, Justice has been turned into a game that Lawyers play against each other at the Peoples expense: the perpetrators, the victims and society in general.

Answer 3

In the United States, our laws consider drug dealing a felony offense with very severe consequences.

Even though the drug trade often supports terrorist groups financially, the act of selling drugs can't be legally tied to terrorism, I think.

However, as far as I'm aware, terrorism is not a classification of crime in our civil lawbooks. Furthermore, something that is considered a terrorist act must be an act of massive violence/killing. (For example, blowing up a building, a bus, yourself, etc.)

Dealing heroin, in itself, is not violent; and thus, it's not considered terrorism. Even though violence surrounds drug dealing, it still can't be considered terrorist.

The death penalty is reserved for crimes that kill people directly, and is only allowed in certain states. (Shooting someone with a gun, etc.)

Thus, the death penalty is not given to drug dealers for being drug dealers. They could, however, face the death penalty if they killed somebody or were a direct accessory to somebody's murder.


---------------------------------
Additional response:

You know, that is rather confusing, isn't it? In America, you are only directly responsible for the crimes you committ; you can't be accused of another crime based on circumstantial evidence.

If somebody were charged with aiding and abedding terrorists, for example, they would have to be directly culpable for that crime. If they're just a cog in a larger system, however, it's really difficult to prove they committed an act of terror or committed a national offense....

Additionally, it would probably be pretty impossible to prove that somebody actually was aiding a terrorist organization on purpose through their drug dealing... You're innocent until proven guilty, you know.... And dang, would that be hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt....

these are just my guesses... but I'm as confused as you are about this, honestly.

Answer 4

becasue the suppliers of the heroin are the terrorists (or supporting them)... The buyers are criminals yes, but they are'nt picky about where it comes from (and usually don't ask... If you're a criminal, you usually don't care too much about being a patriot)... so long as they get thier proffits... They should be punished, and punished harshly. But it's the suppliers that should be charged under the terrorism act.

Answer 5

This is a very good question and I don't know the answer - but I wish I did.

Answer 6

agree with your countries thinking all drug dealers and drug addicts should face death

Answer 7

Guess you could make the same argument for OIL