Michael Fay Punishment

1166 Words3 Pages

A person from the United States goes on a vacation and commits a crime in another country. In America, they would be fined or sent to jail; in another country, they might be caned or shot. Which country should decide their fate? There have been many instances in the past and present where an individual commits a crime in another country and the argument arises as to whether that person should be brought to justice in that country or his/her home country because of the different punishments and ideals. Specific cases include a young man named Michael Fay who committed a crime in another country and was sentenced to a very harsh punishment. Did he deserve the punishment? Which country gets to make that call? Well those are all reasonable questions. …show more content…

Michael Fay committed an act of vandalism which is illegal in the United States, so why would it be okay to commit it anywhere else? The Singaporean government points out that the harsh punishments have helped keep order in the country. It also points out that fourteen other young men had been in the same situation as Michael and they all had to take responsibility for their actions. “The statement noted that in the past five years, fourteen young men aged 18 to 21, twelve of whom were Singaporean, had been sentenced to caning for vandalism.” (Reyes 143). This shows that Michael Fay wasn’t the only individual who committed the crime and needed to take the punishment. People are responsible for their actions whether or not they are knowingly committing crimes. All actions have consequences and the fact that America is trying to impose their ideals on Singapore and help Michael Fay to remain unpunished in …show more content…

The individual broke the law and there is no excuse for that, whether they were unaware or think they should be exempt because there are different laws elsewhere. They need to be brought to justice and the fact is, not everyone believes in the same things, resulting in different procedures and punishments. The Singaporean government points out that while their punishment may be harsh, it is a benefit to the greater part of society in the end. “Unlike some other societies which may tolerate acts of vandalism, Singapore has its own standards of social order as reflected in our laws. It is because of our tough laws against anti-social crimes that we are able to keep Singapore orderly and relatively crime-free.” (Reyes 143). This shows that America and Singapore operate from different perspectives. America pays a lot of attention to the rights of the individual while Singapore wants a safe and orderly country, which means different ways of disciplining. The fact is that Singapore has lower crime rates than America due to their harsh punishments. Caning may not be the most humane way of approaching something like vandalism, but it teaches the person a lesson and assures that they will think twice before they commit another

Open Document