Life for a life ?

[Ken L]

2; excessive leniency in sentencing

3; parole being given far too early

4; prisons turned from prisons to holiday camps

5; criminals being rewarded rather than punished

6; not enough prisons

7; an almost total lack of security in prisons

8; open prisons

9; victims being treated as enemies of the state

10; witnesses being treated as enemies of the state

11; police failing to do their duty

12; misguided or gullible social workers

13; the public treated as simpletons and morons by persons of authority

14; the removal of many basic rights of the individual by the Government

15; to much power given to our failing and failed police forces

16; misuse of the legal aid system

17; matrimonial visits to prisoners

18; community service

19; media treating famous and powerful criminals as if they are heroes

20; most judges being too removed from average British society

 

2,3,4,5,6,7,8 & 17 all appear to be variants on the same theme, namely tougher prisons.

Strangely enough, I broadly agree. Prison should be enough of a punishment to be an effective deterrent but it also needs to serve two other purposes; It needs to remove people from society so they are simply not able to commit more crime for the period of their incarceration and it needs to educate/rehabilitate criminals so they have options other than a return to crime when they get out.

Oddly enough, I strongly believe that sentences handed out in British courts are far to long - but what the courts say should be a minimum tariff, not a maximum.

 

9 & 10. No idea what this is about unless it refers to the recent Dowler case. Sorry but if your evidence is going to take away a mans freedom, you should expect to be cross examined. There have been to many near convictions for rape etc that have been based on vindictive lies to assume that a person providing evidence is always doing so out of some sort of public service.

 

11 & 12. Bland statements again.

 

13. Often they are ! Whilst it is frustrating to receive information couched in overly simplistic language, it's important to remember that people (including jury's) come in a range of intellectual abilities and it's important to get points across in as straightforward a way as possible.

 

14. Example ?

 

15. This is an odd statement as it implies that the police are being given more and more power when they are failing to use the powers that they have and when we all know that their budgets are being cut. How are they failing ? Why are they failing? Who's fault is it ? What exessive powers do they have ?

 

16. Again, not sure where you are going with this. I would agree that legal aid needs massive reform though as it appears to be used exclusively by the very poor and the very rich and those on moderate incomes are effectively excluded from legal recourse under the existing system.

 

18. That's at statement rather than a problem or a solution. Erm what about "Community service" ?

 

19. They always have - Dick Turpin, Butch Cassidy, Ned Kelly, Al Capone, The Krays, Nick Leason etc, etc, etc.

 

20. They are but what would your alternative be ? Cherryl from down on the local estate ?

 

 

Odd that you make no real mention of corporal punishment.

[Roland]

I know everyone has an opinion etc etc etc. But these sort of topics with people getting on their soapboxes, really puts me off this place.

 

Maybe it's because I come on here for fishing discussion

[DavyR]

I know everyone has an opinion etc etc etc. But these sort of topics with people getting on their soapboxes, really puts me off this place.

 

Maybe it's because I come on here for fishing discussion

 

You're in the wrong place then Roland - this is NON-fishing chat.

 

Seriously, if you think this is bad, don't bother visiting another forum with the initials M.D. The same thread is going on over there, started by the same poster. I'm just waiting to see if our old friend KB will put his two penn'orth in (yes, he's still churning out the same old stuff on there - plus ca change, etc.).

[gozzer]

You're in the wrong place then Roland - this is NON-fishing chat.

 

Seriously, if you think this is bad, don't bother visiting another forum with the initials M.D. The same thread is going on over there, started by the same poster. I'm just waiting to see if our old friend KB will put his two penn'orth in (yes, he's still churning out the same old stuff on there - plus ca change, etc.).

 

Rod's posted it on FM as well, I wonder if he's going to collate all the answers, and then let us all know the results of the poll.

What about it Rod?

 

Davy's right Ben, we have to have this section. It can be more interesting than the fishing forum at times .

Just imagine the number of times the same questions are asked by different people, over a few years, (sometimes within days of each other). Although most do their best to answer, it would soon get boring if it was the same thing all the time. It's also a good way to get to 'know' fellow members. As long as it doesn't get too out of control, (and AN is better than any other forum I know), then it makes a nice break from the mundane side of angling.

 

John.

[corydoras]

My own comments - religion is totally irrelevant to the large majority of people in this country and should have no input to our law or government.

Amen.

[Now there's a right un.]

You have all been deceived.

 

 

Governments constantly speak of reducing the crime rates and being hard on convicted criminals.

 

THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO DO THIS.

 

If the UK completely became crime free this country would go bust. Crime is an amazing industry for the UK and every up and coming criminal makes money for our economy.

 

They want criminals freed early so that they can re-offend and contribute to the economy in their actions.

 

Solicitors, Judges, Barristers, Queens Commisioners, Police, Wardens, Probation Officers, manufacturers of Handcuffs..so on and so on would be out of work or bust within 15 weeks if the crime rate dropped to 0%.

 

Criminals mostly commit crime out of mere greed. If government paid a criminal £20,000 per year to NOT COMMIT CRIME it would cost the country significantly less but reduce revenue for industry and cause major problems in employment.

 

CRIME IS AN INDUSTRY WHICH THE COUNTRY NEEDS.

GOVERNMENTS WILL ALWAYS TREAT THE CRIMINAL LIKE THE VICTIM.

WHY DO YOU THINK THEY GIVE THEM THE FACILITIES IN PRISON THAT THEY DO...they want the prisoner out stronger and better educated.

The victim has no financial value to the economy in comparison to the criminal.

 

 

Criminals in themselves are stupid for in their actions they could break this country within 18 weeks by saying that they will all collectively agree to commit no crime for that timeframe.

 

 

Bullshit said so many times eventually is believed as truth.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Now there's a right un.

[Sportsman]

Ah well, that explains everything.

[DavyR]

This reads like a typical viral email rant, but it seems as though it's "all your own work".

 

So exactly who ensures that the criminal paid £20k p.a. not to commit crime complies with the terms of the deal? Are you suggesting that criminals are trustworthy enough to be able to resist the temptation to take the £20k and then "top up" with the odd bank job?

[corydoras]

Bullshit said so many times eventually is believed as truth.

You must have been reciting that one to yourself for some time now then. Edited June 27, 2011 by corydoras

[Now there's a right un.]

You must have been reciting that one to yourself for some time now then.

 

 

 

Sorry I will detail more and add pop up pictures if possible...

 

Government always declare they want zero crime...that is the Bullshit.

 

 

Insults...are given by those who find it awkward to face a fact...especially since they are too dumb to figure it for themselves.

 

Stand back and actually see how crime benefits the UK economy..

 

A few examples:

 

Taxation from wages of those involved in enforcement.

Benefits for the Manufacturers of Cuffs, Truncheons, notebooks, helmets, vehicles, Boots, Shirts, Radios.. etc etc.....

 

Can you honestly see a High Court Judge stacking shelves atMorrisons.

 

Come on surely you are not so blinkered?

 

Tell me that I am wrong and then tell me where you will employ all those who lose their jobs if crime was reduced to 0%.

 

Does no one ever look beyond the picture anymore?

 

 

The criminal being paid £20,000 per year was an illiustration of the fact that most crime is commited through the effect of poverty and £20,000 is enough to lift you from it...IT WAS ONLY AN ILLUSTRATION.

 

 

Personally if I were in charge I would have he following:

 

Blocks of 50 inmates all dependent on each other. One man does not toe the line they all suffer.

They all work to eat. No work = No food.

No TV or Gym unless they achieve merit scores.

Full term sentence.

Confiscation of goods to pay towards their incarceration.

A loss of Human Rights.

Chain gangs that operate 365 days per year.

1 visit every month.

No chances for partner/wife nookie visits.

A loss of voting rights for 3 years post release.

 

2nd offence means, dependent on offence, a minimum of 10 times original sentence of first offence.

 

So I would not be lenient.

Edited June 27, 2011 by Now there's a right un.