You don't think that decreasing the punishment for smuggling would make it easier for the barons to traffic larger quantities and make more money? I understand you saying the sentences in themselves aren't stopping trafficking, but we would need to implement lax sentences for mules in order to compare the quantity trafficked under those conditions with the current conditions before we could rule that the sentences have no impact on trafficking.

In theory it would but in practice I doubt it. The same amount would flow through to meet the demand in say Europe but even more would be seized by officials to get more money from the barons. To drastically change the supply and demand of the drug, a much larger amount of new users would be needed. Most of these new users would probably be the users of cheaper drugs, that would be attracted to use cocaine as its price would've gone down, due to more of it in the market place. On the flip side of the coin, greater cocaine use would see the usage of other drugs decrease, thus affecting their trade in turn. It then raises the question, is it better to have more cocaine users and less users of other drugs or vice versa, again that's a different debate.

I'd just like to say that every time I see the title of this thread, I think it says "2 British girls one cup" for about half a second.

I'm not following you here. How do you figure?
I don't think there's any shortage on the demand side. If cartels could increase the supply they'd have no trouble finding customers.

In that if more cocaine was being smuggled out and customs officials and police officers were aware of this, they would probably demand an even bigger pay-off.

You think bribes would absorb any possible increase in their profit margin?

I think dying is a good reason not to be a drug mule. It's common for the bags to open and poison the mule.

I recommend that everyone see this movie:

I guess from a business point of view the drug baron would make more of a profit, but then I'm hesitant to suggest that as I don't believe lighter sentences on mules would actually increase the amount of traffickers. If the existing penalty of 25 years is not deterring them, it means that hefty prison sentences are not the solution here and the tinkering with jail time a waste of time. What would make a huge difference though, are the chances of knowing that you'll most likely be caught.

At the end of the day, if they really wanted to (the local authorities) they could actually get most of the cocaine that leaves the continent. Non-corrupt airport officials would snag most of it, leaving only ships to really try and smuggle it. Smuggling controls are actually very effective, when the officials are capable of doing the job properly.

There's no real point in inflicting punitive punishments on mules, when the root cause the barons and production facilities for the drug are right there in the country. Their production is illegal and I can't believe with modern technology that they can't be brought to justice, but we know why they're not brought to justice.

I once knew of a guy in Spain who was a drug user, his girlfriend was Colombian who was aged around 23-25 and from the looks of her she had been extremely pretty. When I saw here she looked pale, drawn and ghastly thin like she was seriously ill. Much later somebody else that knew of them had said that she had been smuggling drugs for a number of years and she was now suffering from stomach cancer. I then thought how unlucky she'd been to get such a serious illness despite the smuggling, until somebody explained to me what body packing was and its risks to the body.

It sounds to me like you favor an amoral system of laws that demands obedience through fear rather than any kind of moral obligation.

I don't know how you can claim such empathy for the victims but then turn around and feel nothing for the accused. It would be one thing if these were hardened, violent criminals, but your contempt for people who are really just idiots shows more callousness than it does respect for justice.

I know that all sounds like personal attacks, but the problem I have with the modern criminal justice system is that it seems more like vengeance than any kind of justice and I think that needs to be pointed out. If all you want is to punish them then put their eyes out and be done with it, but if you want justice then start thinking about rehabilitation rather than throwing non-violent morons into a dungeon for two decades to rot.

Yeah but you seem to be going the other way, like "it's not their fault, let them go, they knew no better". I mean, come on, wtf? This from a man whose tagline says "children should die"? I know it's a joke but you've never come across to me as someone who would advocate going easy on criminals. It's not like they were forced to do it (despite their swiss cheese story)!

Next you'll be saying that hit men shouldn't be jailed as they're just carrying out the orders of a higher-up! The whole "I was only following orders" or "I'm a small cog in a larger wheel" argument doesn't wash with me. US's community service thing might or might not work, but what do you say the solution should be? How would you discourage people from doing this? Would you discourage them, or do you just think it's me getting my knickers in a twist over something small?

(I like the idea of putting out their eyes, though...) ;)

Seriously, I'd like to know: what solution/sentence do or would you propose for this sort of crime? Never mind who's ultimately responsible; those who take the risks and want to share in the spoils should be prepared to share in the punishment, so please don't tell me they're unwitting pawns or something...