Why I sometimes hate Britain

mxfun said:
How's the Britain part irrelevant ? Did it not happen in Britain ?
Click to expand...

It did. But it would be like saying you hate Britain because it has taxes, or because there are murders, or road accidents or people dying of cancer. All of these things happen all over the world and are not exclusive to Britain, just like the incident in the original post.
 
mxfun said:
How's the Britain part irrelevant ? Did it not happen in Britain ?
Click to expand...

Ignore him Sean, it's just Joe trolling for yet another argument by the looks of it.

An old lady loses her life trying to defend all that she holds dear to her, and all Joe can contribute is that the thread title (of someone else's thread) is wrong.

Gets a bit boring after a while :shake:
 
Simmotino said:
Ignore him Sean, it's just Joe trolling for yet another argument by the looks of it.

An old lady loses her life trying to defend all that she holds dear to her, and all Joe can contribute is that the thread title (of someone else's thread) is wrong.

Gets a bit boring after a while :shake:
Click to expand...

+1^
 
Simmotino said:
Ignore him Sean, it's just Joe trolling for yet another argument by the looks of it.

An old lady loses her life trying to defend all that she holds dear to her, and all Joe can contribute is that the thread title (of someone else's thread) is wrong.

Gets a bit boring after a while :shake:
Click to expand...

It's a massive shame that she lost her life, and I feel bad for her family. It's disgusting behaviour.

I just fail to see how this what this has to do with Britain, it's a disgusting part of human nature, not just Britain. Robberies like this happen all over the world.
 
joescrivens said:
It's a massive shame that she lost her life, and I feel bad for her family. It's disgusting behaviour.

I just fail to see how this what this has to do with Britain, it's a disgusting part of human nature, not just Britain. Robberies like this happen all over the world.
Click to expand...


Because this country allows it to happen by not being 'tough' on crimes such as this. Many other countries actually punish crime and the offender suffers.
 
Splog said:
Because this country allows it to happen by not being 'tough' on crimes such as this. Many other countries actually punish crime and the offender suffers.
Click to expand...

That's a fair enough point, what is britains crime rate like compared to other countries then?
 
joescrivens said:
That's a fair enough point, what is britains crime rate like compared to other countries then?
Click to expand...

No idea :shrug: but what is important (to me) is that if someone maims or kills then they should also be made to suffer to such an extent that they are unable or unlikely to to repeat their crimes.
 
Splog said:
No idea :shrug: but what is important (to me) is that if someone maims or kills then they should also be made to suffer to such an extent that they are unable or unlikely to to repeat their crimes.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't disagree with the concept, but in practice it's not really feasible. Think about the ramifications of someone being found guilty when they were innocent and then being punished for the crime in the same way.

An innocent person gets wrongly beheaded for example. That would be unimaginable
 
joescrivens said:
Well, I can't disagree with the concept, but in practice it's not really feasible. Think about the ramifications of someone being found guilty when they were innocent and then being punished for the crime in the same way.

An innocent person gets wrongly beheaded for example. That would be unimaginable
Click to expand...

Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Nothing wrong with breaking a few eggs to make an omelette.

Or more seriously........ No need to bring beheading into this, or are you simply trying to ridicule the concept of people being accountable and made to pay for their actions. The point you seem to have missed is that every single person ever who is a victim of crime is innocent!
 
Splog said:
Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Nothing wrong with breaking a few eggs to make an omelette.

Or more seriously........ No need to bring beheading into this, or are you simply trying to ridicule the concept of people being accountable and made to pay for their actions. The point you seem to have missed is that every single person ever who is a victim of crime is innocent!
Click to expand...

When it comes to life and death of people I think it does matter and I appreciate the irony - by killing an innocent person proved guilty incorrectly it may then deter many other criminals who may kill innocent people. But I just don't think the authorities could have that kind of blood on their hands. It's nothing more than Neanderthal.

Don't take my beheading comment so literally, it was a figure of speech. If the criminal commits a heinous crime then by your measure the punishment should be equal.
 
joescrivens said:
When it comes to life and death of people I think it does matter and I appreciate the irony - by killing an innocent person proved guilty incorrectly it may then deter many other criminals who may kill innocent people. But I just don't think the authorities could have that kind of blood on their hands. It's nothing more than Neanderthal.

Don't take my beheading comment so literally, it was a figure of speech. If the criminal commits a heinous crime then by your measure the punishment should be equal.
Click to expand...


Not sure how you arrived at most of that Joe? I didn't say that killing an innocent would deter other criminals. I said that stopping criminals from being able to commit more crimes would stop them and that is really quite a simple concept.
If a dog is worrying sheep you shoot the dog and it will no longer worry the sheep, of course there is nothing to stop another dog doing the same is there? but if you kill all dogs that are worrying sheep then eventually the sheep will be left alone or perhaps the owners would learn to keep their dogs away from sheep!

As I said previously.... Some people are just bad :shrug:
 
Splog said:
Not sure how you arrived at most of that Joe?
Click to expand...

It was this part

Splog said:
but what is important (to me) is that if someone maims or kills then they should also be made to suffer to such an extent that they are unable or unlikely to to repeat their crimes.
Click to expand...

What other form of suffering would enable someone who had maimed or killed to be unable to repeat their crime other than if they themselves were maimed or killed?
 
joescrivens said:
It was this part



What other form of suffering would enable someone who had maimed or killed to be unable to repeat their crime other than if they themselves were maimed or killed?
Click to expand...

:lol: You didn't highlight the 'or unlikely' bit ;) If someone was locked up for life then they would no longer be able to re-offend! but I think you know that anyway :shrug:

Actually, I really don't have a problem with 'an eye for an eye' mode of punishment.

What's your answer to the problem then Joe? ....
 
Splog said:
:lol: You didn't highlight the 'or unlikely' bit ;) If someone was locked up for life then they would no longer be able to re-offend! but I think you know that anyway :shrug:

Actually, I really don't have a problem with 'an eye for an eye' mode of punishment.

What's your answer to the problem then Joe? ....
Click to expand...

I don't know. I don't have an answer. I agree with the eye for an eye like you in theory. I just don't think it could work practically.
 
joescrivens said:
I don't know. I don't have an answer. I agree with the eye for an eye like you in theory. I just don't think it could work practically.
Click to expand...

Perhaps not? but something needs to change.
 
joescrivens said:
when was the last time you worked in the system?

A friend of mine is a forensic psychologist in a prison and the prisoners can rent a ps3 or Xbox each week? It must depend on the prison type.
Click to expand...

it was nearly 6 years ago now at hmp woodhill in milton keynes. they didnt have ps3s or 360s back then but the xbox 1 was not allowed for the hard drive & internet issue so i can only assume that rule still stands. I admit things may have changed recently however i seriously doubt you get an xbox per cell and you wont get 6 people in a room enjoying a console because apart from the one hour socialization and the hour to walk around the yard each day everyone had to stay in their own cells even at breakfast lunch and dinner and they usually had 1 or 2 people per cell. only the one with the benefits got to use the console
 
Last edited:
Whats wrong with bringing back national service? First youth unemployment would be cut instantly, Second it would teach respect for others, Third they would learn a trade and last but not least crime of all types by people of National Service age would drastically fall.

realspeed
 
Last edited:
Why on earth should prisoners be having tvs in their room? TV should be in a shared room where they can watch it for a few hours a day only. Sounds more like a hotel to me.

They should also make sure all prisoners can read and write properly before being allowed out. There is a high level of illiteracy amongst the prison population. There are also a lot then should be in mental institutions. This care in the community crap has gone on too long. Those that are mental need to be locked out of decent people's way.

I don't agree with state murder. It's hypocritical. Killing can't be so wrong that you kill another. Lock them up til they die.

The irony is the Victorians were often going on about liberalism and how standards had dropped etc so it is normal. There were scroats then and there are scroats now.

Locking them up so they can't terrorise other people is the only answer. You don't give them a wage. They should be made to work to pay their costs. If they don't work they don't get fed. Prisons should be self financing running costs wise and should aim to pay back the capital cost as soon as possible. Decent people shouldn't be having their taxes used for all the scroats. Scroats can pay for their own upkeep. Might also solve the problem of exports being low as scroats being wage free can produce goods much cheaper.

If you can't be a decent member of society then you don't get to be amongst us. You can go elsewhere and live with your own kind behind bars. Then they can make each others' lives a misery instead.
 
srichards said:
I don't agree with state murder. It's hypocritical. Killing can't be so wrong that you kill another. Lock them up til they die.

If you can't be a decent member of society then you don't get to be amongst us. You can go elsewhere and live with your own kind behind bars. Then they can make each others' lives a misery instead.
Click to expand...

where is the room for reform and improvement in your model?
 
joescrivens said:
where is the room for reform and improvement in your model?
Click to expand...

some people cannot be reformed, I am all for giving someone a chance by making good but there are some members of society that do not want to reform or be made good untill its too late.

spike
 
SpikeK6 said:
some people cannot be reformed, I am all for giving someone a chance by making good but there are some members of society that do not want to reform or be made good untill its too late.

spike
Click to expand...

the key point is SOME

in srichards model there is no reform. None whatsoever. Locking everyone up forever on strike 1 would cost this country even more than it does right now.
 
I think the last sentence of his post could explain that, if you cannot behave then you do not get out, so technically you can still try to reform them but if they donot tow the line you stay put.

spike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top