stevewestern
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,472
- Edit My Images
- Yes
and help to keep the site free for all
I don't understand...
- Thread starter stevewestern
- Start date
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't understand either but then 'we've' just deported a 19 year-old girl away from her family in the UK to Mauritius, when a few years ago the killer of teacher Philip Lawrence couldn't be deported because it breached his human rights to be removed from his family in the UK.
Cloud-cuckoo land anyone?
Cloud-cuckoo land anyone?
- Messages
- 12,939
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 12,939
- Edit My Images
- No
Fair enough, but can you shoot twice?
Dave
Can empty the whole magazine.
Keith W
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,408
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Technical point:
.22 is a rifle not a shotgun
Technical point:
.22 refers to the calibre of ammunition
The .22 calibre ammunition can used in a number of weapons and not just a rifle
- Messages
- 11,633
- Name
- Doug
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Lots of cock-eyed things in this country.
- Messages
- 9,277
- Edit My Images
- No
Unfair as it might seem, you have to consider the two things separately. Last night I was told about someone who was arrested for verbal abuse towards a gay couple in a pub. It was a busy night and the police put him in a cell and forgot about him. After twelve hours without food or drink, they released him and he went on to sue and was given £7,500 compensation - much to the usual disgust of Daily Mail reading types.
But the law has to be the same for everyone and regardless of previous history no matter how unfair that sounds. Although in the Levi Bellfield case, I think the shotgun method would have been preferable!
Steve.
But the law has to be the same for everyone and regardless of previous history no matter how unfair that sounds. Although in the Levi Bellfield case, I think the shotgun method would have been preferable!
Steve.
onomatopoeia
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,430
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Lots of people don't understand this.
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
I think that once you have been convicted of a crime you lose all human rights especially when it involves criminals like this guy.
Shooting is too easy......long slow repetitive torture is a far better way to make him suffer
Shooting is too easy......long slow repetitive torture is a far better way to make him suffer
- Messages
- 10,606
- Name
- Lynton (yes really!)
- Edit My Images
- No
Really? Welcome to the middle ages (or suffolk!)
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep! Really....... I don't believe that a prison should be the equivalent to a holiday camp.....no TV, no gym, no nothing......basic food, small cell and
and no time off for good behaviour.
When you commit a crime it is done knowingly, if you argue that it was a mental condition that made you do it then off to an asylum if not then off to a normal prison with basic conditions and no benefits....
One of the reasons for our high crime rate is that prison is no longer seen a deterrent......
And a for torture is would still be too good a punishment for pedophiles, rapists and the like......
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That'll work well!!
"Going to prison for my [relatively] minor offence is so horrible, I might as well stack the odds against conviction and kill all the witnesses!"
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
If you knowingly do a minor crime and do 3 months in a basic cell with basic food you may then think twice about doing it again ......but if you go out and rape someone (and kill the witnesses) the DNA can still convict you and you would deserve the torture that that should be administered on a daily basis....
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
You go to prison AS punishment... not FOR punishment.
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
Today's prisons are not punishment....... we have a local guy who embezzled thousands from vulnerable people he got 6 months......... got out in 3 for good behaviour but the victims will never get their money back.....and he is walking around the village as unconcerned and as bold as brass........ no doubt . for more victims as no deterrent has been applied........
The problem is, that many criminals do not regard prison AS punishment, and certainly the relatives of victims do not regard prison AS punishment.
I wonder how much compensation the parents of Milly Dowler received?
As others have quite correctly pointed out, prison should be a very basic affair, which bears no relation whatsoever to "normal life".
For violent crimes, I would suggest that prison is very like solitary confinement, for the entire prison term - no visitors, one hour exercise a day, one phone call per week, no television or other distractions.
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
When we start escalating the physical punishment to fit the crime, as people are saying, it's a slippery slope to barbarism. He's banged up, and out of harms way: Job done. Who cares what he does, or doesn't do inside, so long as he's doing it inside.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
As said above. Prison is no longer a punishment. TV, gyms, computers, the chance to gain a degree.
Six by six cell...bucket to go in and an hour out of the cell daily. Far fewer would choose to return I suspect.
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
But you miss my point. The punishment is the fact that you lose your freedom. No matter whether there's a gym, TV.. who cares. He's banged up and out of harm's way. He's not free... he's locked up.
Prisons used to be as you described... but we've always had habitual criminals in society. Clearly... poor prison conditions isn't a deterrent.
We seem to be craving revenge, rather than punishment, and that's shaky moral ground IMO.
- Messages
- 9,277
- Edit My Images
- No
Exactly. The compensation for being injured whilst in prison applies to everyone. Like it or not, the prison has a duty of care towards all prisoners and that applies if they are mass murderers or tax evaders.
It has to be handled separately from whatever crime they are in prison for. Otherwise where do you draw the line?
A judge has already decided what the sentence is for each and every crime. No matter how much violence we would like to see some of these people suffer, it is not part of our system of justice and certainly should not be.
Quite possibly, but it's a completely different argument.
My view is that prison should be used to ensure that when the prisoner is released, he does not commit the crime again.
Steve.
Last edited:
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
As one of those paying to keep him there, I care ... I care that he can claim his rights and play the system when he gave no thought to the rights of Milly Dowler or the others he murdered or their relatives and friends ... as far as I am concerned he gave up his rights when he took those rights away from the others.
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
fair enough there is always the risk of barbarism......but if it is some child rapist I don't really care.....for lesser crimes such as embezzlement the penalty should be 23 hours solitary with an hour to wash and exercise (no gym)......no phone calls or visits and basic food......I might sound callous but I am a law abiding citizen and strongly feel that the law is an ass........ and justice is rarely served.....
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
Pookey I'm not missing the point at all....im simply disagreeing with it.
For all the freedom lost in prison you might as well send them to a hotel room and simply lock the door.
Loss of access to the outside is no deterrant. Withrdawal of niceties might be.
For all the freedom lost in prison you might as well send them to a hotel room and simply lock the door.
Loss of access to the outside is no deterrant. Withrdawal of niceties might be.
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
He did give up his rights, yes. His rights to freedom and liberty that we enjoy. What do you suggest we do with him Gramps? Waterboard him? Torture him? What? He's banged up and won't see freedom... that's what we do with criminals, no matter the severity of the crime, because we're a civilised society, not a barbaric, biblical, reactionary one.
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
You're being ridiculous.
Simply lock them in a cell...not just within a prison where they are still pretty mich free to socialise at will.
archangel
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,024
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
Civilised!? A civilised society should be on the side of the civilised population not rewarding criminals on all levels with a break at an all inclusive prison........ crimes should be punished accordingly and if you take another humans life in malice you should be sentenced to death........ a rapist should be given to the family of his/her victim as a play thing........ the only people who pay the price are the victims and the normal law abiding citizen.........
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm being ridiculous because I suggest we're not a barbaric society that deliberately and continually punishes people with cruel circumstances as a prison sentence? If the very laws that enshrine our constitution and judicial system supports actual physical punishment for crimes, then it legitimises violence. It's for this reason we got rid of capital and corporal punishment.
Making decisions on another's life should never be based on an emotional response, and that's what you're doing now. Thankfully, the people who actually make the decisions aren't as reactionary and emotionally driven as you are, and fortunately those people don't think I'm being ridiculous... and that's all that matters. Giving him a hard time will not bring Milly Dowler back, or ease the family;s grief and loss. It may provide a sense of revenge, but that's not really something we want to be promoting in a civilised society.
He's locked up where he can't hurt anyone else... and in all likelihood, is NOT having such a nice time in prison as others in here are suggesting he's having.
Or not so civilised if they're baying for blood perhaps, huh? You call yourself civilised, yet advocate murder and rape as punishments for murder and rape? How does that make you any better than the people you are punishing?
Fortunately, you'll never be in a position to make such decisions happen... for which I am grateful.
The problem with that [capital punishment] is that it never worked when we had it, and in US states where they still have it, doesn't work either. It's clearly not a deterrent, so what's the point?
You lock them up, and they die inside where they can't harm anyone else, job done. That's how it should be. How does officially sanctioned torture or murder help anyone? It makes us as bad as North Korea or China, or militantly Muslim countries. Why would you want to live in a society where murder is seen as fine so long as it is as a result of a judge's sentence? It legitimises violence, and ultimately makes us more violent as a society.
Far too much whiff of the Daily Mail in this thread, and it demonstrates the very worst of our society. The scary thing thing is the passionate belief that it's OK to to meter out brutal and violent punishments.
The priority is removing dangerous people from civilised society so we can be safe, not create a society that bays for blood. You all remind me of the paying crowds that used to gather to see the executions of the French aristocracy during the revolution.
You think you have the moral high ground? What separates YOU from the crowds in THIS video?
mod edit: video removed, there are kids on here
Just think about it. We're a civilised society. Violence has no place in it... anywhere.
There are lessons to be learned from history... it's a pity most are too stupid to learn any history or pay attention to it.
Last edited by a moderator:
BBR
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,546
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not revenge, just a real deterrent.
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Pookeyhead
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 11,746
- Name
- David
- Edit My Images
- No
Why.. and how does it help us as a society?
viv1969
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 29,452
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
Simply by sending a message to criminals that prison will not be the easy life It is now.
I'm not talking about corporal or capital punishments, but severe loss of liberty and loss of social reward.
gramps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 44,805
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
Are we a civilised society David?
Torture, of course not, but is it barbaric to take the life of a multi-murderer? Because that is what I see as suitable punishment for this sort of crime.
Biblical? Yes the bible condemns murder and condones the taking of the life of a murderer.
You don't have to stalk and murder young women David, but if you do you should, IMO, expect the most severest of punishment.
BBR
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,546
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Like the inmates on death row were clearly deterred from committing their crimes? Right... gotchaGreat plan you have there.
In 1965, the year of the abolition of the death penalty for homicide, the murder rate was approximately 6.8 per million population, by 2001/02 this figure had doubled to 16.6 per million. What does that tell you?
- Messages
- 9,836
- Edit My Images
- No
It tells me to read the rest of the document I cut and paste from.
The next paragraph states:
It is very difficult to say how much the abolition of capital punishment has been responsible for this increase. In 1952 the murder rate was higher than in the years immediately following the abolition of the death penalty.