FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Should Britain adopt the American system of prison sentences
Should Britain adopt the American system of prison sentences
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
 | |||
"I like the US 3 strikes and you're out idea - e.g. get caught burglarising a house 3 times and - bye bye, you're in prison for 10 years. A d*unk driver in the UK and kill someone you might, if you're unlucky, get 4 years. In the US minimum 20 years. "In one word..........YES  | |||
| |||
| |||
" We should be looking at the cause of crime and looking at preventative measures " this is why it wouldnt work  | |||
" We should be looking at the cause of crime and looking at preventative measures this is why it wouldnt work "Really ? How's that? | |||
| |||
  | |||
"I watch this American show and there was a guy that kept this girl (14 years old) captive and sexually assaulted her....he got 425 years in prison...I don't agree with capital punishment however I do think we need longer sentences..." For certain crimes...I do think for petty crimes we do need to understand the behaviour of why people are committing petty crimes and why are repeat offenders rather then keep locking them up....there are those however that for public safety need to remain behind bars for the rest of their life | |||
"I think the present prison system is way to lenient. My bro was a prison officer in high security and he has told me a few things.... For those guilty of a serious crime, they should be fed and watered and somewhere to sleep. Every day there ,they should be wishing they wasnt. I dont advocate cruelty in anyways, just hard labour and not bloody tv,games machines and a bloody menu where they get a choice on what they eat. More is spent on food for prisoners than they allow for oap homes. They are kept warm, no bills and have a better standard of living than some people do who work. " | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" We should be looking at the cause of crime and looking at preventative measures this is why it wouldnt work
Really ? How's that?"because we as a country have to many people who want to talk things out, mamby pamby the criminals give them all they ask for, tuck them in at nite with no thought of the victims and just try to reform all the time tougher sentences would mean less crime theres no deterant here what so ever | |||
"NO! It is a very bad idea! In fact it is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard on these forums! The US penal system are really quite horrific, and the 3 strikes system is barbaric. The fact is that the US system is effectively legalized slavery. It results in the US having the highest prison population in the western world. Where a person can end up being jailed for life for stealing a bottle of milk. And because all prisons are run for profit with inmates being used as a free labour force it is in the interests of the state(s) and federal authorities to trump up charges from misdemeanor offences to felony charges in order to increase their labour force. That anyone would think that that system is superior to ours shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the US system. " | |||
" We should be looking at the cause of crime and looking at preventative measures this is why it wouldnt work
Really ? How's that? because we as a country have to many people who want to talk things out, mamby pamby the criminals give them all they ask for, tuck them in at nite with no thought of the victims and just try to reform all the time tougher sentences would mean less crime theres no deterant here what so ever"Prisoners certainly don't get everything they are asked for...and why shouldn't they be allowed to talk about issues... | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Whatever the option chosen it's gotta be a better system than the one already running! Britain really needs to look at some of the countries with low crime rate and see what they are doing right! " | |||
"NO! It is a very bad idea! In fact it is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard on these forums! The US penal system are really quite horrific, and the 3 strikes system is barbaric. The fact is that the US system is effectively legalized slavery. It results in the US having the highest prison population in the western world. Where a person can end up being jailed for life for stealing a bottle of milk. And because all prisons are run for profit with inmates being used as a free labour force it is in the interests of the state(s) and federal authorities to trump up charges from misdemeanor offences to felony charges in order to increase their labour force. That anyone would think that that system is superior to ours shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the US system. "
Whether our judicial system is adequate or not, one thing is for certain - seeking inspiration from the American system is a ludicrous proposal. | |||
"ive worked in a few prisons and it didn't seem to hard tbh televisions pool tables and a jolly up with mates seemed ok to me wouldnt want much more apart from freedom" Certain things like that are put into place to distract prisoners can you imagine working in a prison with hundreds of bored prisoners on your hands | |||
"ive worked in a few prisons and it didn't seem to hard tbh televisions pool tables and a jolly up with mates seemed ok to me wouldnt want much more apart from freedom" I think the last 3 words in your post are the most pertinent. | |||
| |||
" We should be looking at the cause of crime and looking at preventative measures this is why it wouldnt work
Really ? How's that? because we as a country have to many people who want to talk things out, mamby pamby the criminals give them all they ask for, tuck them in at nite with no thought of the victims and just try to reform all the time tougher sentences would mean less crime theres no deterant here what so ever
Prisoners certainly don't get everything they are asked for...and why shouldn't they be allowed to talk about issues..."How's this for a stat Looked after children in this country make up less than 1% of all children Yet if we look at the offenders in jail over 50% have been in care ? These our "criminals " tht should be banged up for 25 years These the criminals that we shouldn't "mamby pamby" to ? | |||
"To have your Liberty taken from you is pretty bad s it is I would think, America sneezes and we catch the cold. " | |||
| |||
| |||
"ive worked in a few prisons and it didn't seem to hard tbh televisions pool tables and a jolly up with mates seemed ok to me wouldnt want much more apart from freedom I think the last 3 words in your post are the most pertinent. " to me and you yes, i cant think of anything worse, but some of these people it means nothing to be locked up | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent " Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes? | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes?" Yes and some states don't execute | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes?" Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones | |||
| |||
"I watch this American show and there was a guy that kept this girl (14 years old) captive and sexually assaulted her....he got 425 years in prison...I don't agree with capital punishment however I do think we need longer sentences..." 425 years is quite a long time, how long do you think he should have got? | |||
| |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes? Yes and some states don't execute " So comparing our justice system to the U S of A is a futile exercise then? If we are going to do comparisons shouldn't it be with an individual state?  | |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs " Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent " oh i can quite believe that, but surely now with dna testing forensics etc it must less common or not happening at all i don't claim to know just surmising  | |||
"I watch this American show and there was a guy that kept this girl (14 years old) captive and sexually assaulted her....he got 425 years in prison...I don't agree with capital punishment however I do think we need longer sentences... 425 years is quite a long time, how long do you think he should have got?" I can't answer that question as I can't say....the crime was horrendous and he had committed previous crimes against minors...from the film I did not consider that he would ever become rehabilitated so therefore will always pose a risk to minors so I do believe that he would never be able to be released into society....if that makes any sense | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent oh i can quite believe that, but surely now with dna testing forensics etc it must less common or not happening at all i don't claim to know just surmising "The risk has decreased but not completely gone...such as planting of DNA is still there etc | |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes? Yes and some states don't execute So comparing our justice system to the U S of A is a futile exercise then? If we are going to do comparisons shouldn't it be with an individual state? "Oh so some counties have it etc...I'm not sure that would work some how lol | |||
| |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people." It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks? | |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks?" this sort of thing is clearly just daft, i'm talking about more serious crimes | |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks? this sort of thing is clearly just daft, i'm talking about more serious crimes" That's the 3 strike rule the level of crime is not taken into consideration | |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks? this sort of thing is clearly just daft, i'm talking about more serious crimes That's the 3 strike rule the level of crime is not taken into consideration " i havn't suggested that we be american about it, they are brainless! but a system somewhere between ours and theres, could be an improvement. or look around at other countries ,with a lesser crime rate than ours and adopt new ideas | |||
"I like the US 3 strikes and you're out idea - e.g. get caught burglarising a house 3 times and - bye bye, you're in prison for 10 years. A d*unk driver in the UK and kill someone you might, if you're unlucky, get 4 years. In the US minimum 20 years. "Personally I think our justice system is majorly flawed and the Americans have the best way of doing it. However if you do 3 minor things wrong 20 years apart. Is it right to face 10 years? Maybe not. I do agree though life should mean life and there should be a president in place for each crime saying this crime means this amount of time in prison or this is how much they should get fined, etc. Too many people getting off lightly in my opinion and treated like a God too .
If our prisons are too full to give lengthier sentences for the so called "big" crimes. Then what about shipping them out somewhere, where they may have room? Easier said than done maybe, but something must be done to get the scum off the streets. | |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks? this sort of thing is clearly just daft, i'm talking about more serious crimes That's the 3 strike rule the level of crime is not taken into consideration i havn't suggested that we be american about it, they are brainless! but a system somewhere between ours and theres, could be an improvement. or look around at other countries ,with a lesser crime rate than ours and adopt new ideas" Scandinavia have low crime rates and very liberal prison systems...with certain crimes you are convicted of you can choose when you want to complete the prison sentence... | |||
| |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up.... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks?" What was offence 1 and 2? He knew 3rd time and your inside.... | |||
| |||
"America has the worst prison service in the world, people doing life sentences for stealing a fucking chocolate bar ffs Care to quote a link? But their 3 strikes is good, stops all the mamby pamby around the criminal scum. 1st time you could sympathise, bad crowd etc, 2nd time hmmm ok benifit of the doubt, 3rd time well, just lock them up .... the message will get through to most people. It's not a bar of chocolate but how about Curtis Wilkerson - currently serving a minimum 25 year stretech for shoplifting a pair of socks? this sort of thing is clearly just daft, i'm talking about more serious crimes That's the 3 strike rule the level of crime is not taken into consideration " We have all read stories in the UK of people with ten's of cautions, asbos, fines 30 days etc, but they just keep offending as the messsge is not getting through to them. | |||
"http://m.rollingstone.com/politics/news/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-the-shame-of-three-strikes-laws-20130327" Guess he won't be committing any more crimes. He aready has a criminal past, I only saw the first crime and he got 6 years, can't see the second crime.... there seems to be a slight change to the 3 strikes, but the princaple is good | |||
" Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones" 38 of 50 do. And just to be clear I am in favour of the death penalty. I am a convert, I have spent most of my life believing that it is better that 100/1000/1000000 guilty go free than 1 innocent be executed. However with the rise in violent crime (average prison term for unlawful killing is now 6 years) and the advances in scientific detection methods I have come to the conclusion that we should all have to carry ID cards and be subject to bio-metric (DNA, retina scanning etc) data collection, retention and use to solve crime. | |||
"NO! It is a very bad idea! In fact it is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard on these forums! The US penal system are really quite horrific, and the 3 strikes system is barbaric. The fact is that the US system is effectively legalized slavery. It results in the US having the highest prison population in the western world. Where a person can end up being jailed for life for stealing a bottle of milk. And because all prisons are run for profit with inmates being used as a free labour force it is in the interests of the state(s) and federal authorities to trump up charges from misdemeanor offences to felony charges in order to increase their labour force. That anyone would think that that system is superior to ours shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the US system. " | |||
" Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones 38 of 50 do. And just to be clear I am in favour of the death penalty. I am a convert, I have spent most of my life believing that it is better that 100/1000/1000000 guilty go free than 1 innocent be executed. However with the rise in violent crime (average prison term for unlawful killing is now 6 years) and the advances in scientific detection methods I have come to the conclusion that we should all have to carry ID cards and be subject to bio-metric (DNA, retina scanning etc) data collection, retention and use to solve crime. " Yeh right ! Why don't you go live in North Korea | |||
" Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones 38 of 50 do. And just to be clear I am in favour of the death penalty. I am a convert, I have spent most of my life believing that it is better that 100/1000/1000000 guilty go free than 1 innocent be executed. However with the rise in violent crime (average prison term for unlawful killing is now 6 years) and the advances in scientific detection methods I have come to the conclusion that we should all have to carry ID cards and be subject to bio-metric (DNA, retina scanning etc) data collection, retention and use to solve crime. Yeh right ! Why don't you go live in North Korea " There is always 1. LoL Why does carrying an ID card and having your bio-metric details recorded equate to living in a totalitarian state? Sounds very like the NRA's argument justifying the unhindered right to carry arms even though it has led to the US having shootings running at the same rate as in failed states such as Iraq, Somalia or Afghanistan! Personally I would happily have my DNA recorded and carry an ID card if it increased crime detection and thus reduced crime. Why do you object to that? What have you to be afraid of if you are not a criminal? | |||
| |||
"We should be asking the following questions: Why do criminals commit crime? Is it psychological? Is it social? Why do criminals reoffend? How can we prevent people from committing the first crime? How can we stop prisoners from committing new crimes? I'd rather not be robbed or murdered than trying to decide what their punishment in the aftermath. " I'd rather someone go out and stop someone who is carrying out a crime, stopping things getting out of hand and catching those who have broken the law. Rather than work out the mind of a criminal and teaching strangers right and wrong, etc. Teaching rights and wrongs should be done in schools and by parents/guardians. They should also teach people consequences of doing things that are wrong/against the law. No one else should do that really as it isn't their job really. I believe even though its incredibly small. Things start at a very very young age and its up to whoever is looking after them to admit there's something wrong and then some outside help (maybe a psychiatrist) to help them prevent things from getting worse. | |||
| |||
"Plus America I think has the highest rate of people that have been executed then later found that they were indeed innocent Don't different states give out different lengths of sentences for certain crimes? Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones" im sure micheal moore showed in one of his documentaries that at election time there is a increase in the number of death row prisoners in texas who are executed to prove the elected offical is tough on crime. we used to lead the world with ideas and innovations now we follow. | |||
" Some states don't even have the death sentence only certain ones 38 of 50 do. And just to be clear I am in favour of the death penalty. I am a convert, I have spent most of my life believing that it is better that 100/1000/1000000 guilty go free than 1 innocent be executed. However with the rise in violent crime (average prison term for unlawful killing is now 6 years) and the advances in scientific detection methods I have come to the conclusion that we should all have to carry ID cards and be subject to bio-metric (DNA, retina scanning etc) data collection, retention and use to solve crime. Yeh right ! Why don't you go live in North Korea There is always 1. LoL Why does carrying an ID card and having your bio-metric details recorded equate to living in a totalitarian state? Sounds very like the NRA's argument justifying the unhindered right to carry arms even though it has led to the US having shootings running at the same rate as in failed states such as Iraq, Somalia or Afghanistan! Personally I would happily have my DNA recorded and carry an ID card if it increased crime detection and thus reduced crime. Why do you object to that? What have you to be afraid of if you are not a criminal?" I hope you were one of the ones who booked a one way ticket to mars | |||
"We should be asking the following questions: Why do criminals commit crime? Is it psychological? Is it social? Why do criminals reoffend? How can we prevent people from committing the first crime? How can we stop prisoners from committing new crimes? I'd rather not be robbed or murdered than trying to decide what their punishment in the aftermath. I'd rather someone go out and stop someone who is carrying out a crime, stopping things getting out of hand and catching those who have broken the law. Rather than work out the mind of a criminal and teaching strangers right and wrong, etc. Teaching rights and wrongs should be done in schools and by parents/guardians. They should also teach people consequences of doing things that are wrong/against the law. No one else should do that really as it isn't their job really. I believe even though its incredibly small. Things start at a very very young age and its up to whoever is looking after them to admit there's something wrong and then some outside help (maybe a psychiatrist) to help them prevent things from getting worse. " I agree that stopping crimes and catching criminals deter people from committing crimes. But what other factors are there? The culture, the media, political, or even poverty can affect why people commit crime. It isn't all psychological. What is the most committed crime? Which crime is the worst? | |||
| |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff." I would agree with that although how you deal with them and for how long is at present in the UK has incarceration term cost taken into account. Part of me would look to outsourcing the prison service and maybe seeing if places like Poland, Rumania or Thailand wish to take our prisoners for a lot less than it costs us to jail them here. | |||
"We should be asking the following questions: Why do criminals commit crime? Is it psychological? Is it social? Why do criminals reoffend? How can we prevent people from committing the first crime? How can we stop prisoners from committing new crimes? I'd rather not be robbed or murdered than trying to decide what their punishment in the aftermath. I'd rather someone go out and stop someone who is carrying out a crime, stopping things getting out of hand and catching those who have broken the law. Rather than work out the mind of a criminal and teaching strangers right and wrong, etc. Teaching rights and wrongs should be done in schools and by parents/guardians. They should also teach people consequences of doing things that are wrong/against the law. No one else should do that really as it isn't their job really. I believe even though its incredibly small. Things start at a very very young age and its up to whoever is looking after them to admit there's something wrong and then some outside help (maybe a psychiatrist) to help them prevent things from getting worse. I agree that stopping crimes and catching criminals deter people from committing crimes. But what other factors are there? The culture, the media, political, or even poverty can affect why people commit crime. It isn't all psychological. What is the most committed crime? Which crime is the worst? " Has to be drug or theft related? The most popular ones. We all know what I think the issue is on drugs and each theft case should be looked at individually. | |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff. I would agree with that although how you deal with them and for how long is at present in the UK has incarceration term cost taken into account. Part of me would look to outsourcing the prison service and maybe seeing if places like Poland, Rumania or Thailand wish to take our prisoners for a lot less than it costs us to jail them here. " Or maybe Siberia? | |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff." Actually the numbers over the last 50 years would contradict that. And if you use the same standard as was applied in 1965 (when the death penalty was abolished) then the numbers would be even more stark. | |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff. Actually the numbers over the last 50 years would contradict that. And if you use the same standard as was applied in 1965 (when the death penalty was abolished) then the numbers would be even more stark. " You reckon there are stats which show most murders are premeditated? I'd like to see those. | |||
| |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff. Actually the numbers over the last 50 years would contradict that. And if you use the same standard as was applied in 1965 (when the death penalty was abolished) then the numbers would be even more stark. You reckon there are stats which show most murders are premeditated? I'd like to see those." The definition of murder in 65 was: The deliberate killing of a person under the protection of the queens peace or the killing of a person during the commissioning of a crime. Provided that the person died within 1 year and 1 day of the assault that caused the death. Therefore every death where the defense was "I only meant to give him a kicking" or "I didn't mean to run them over I just wanted to get away from the police" and all the other excuses where people have been killed would not have been entertained. | |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff. Actually the numbers over the last 50 years would contradict that. And if you use the same standard as was applied in 1965 (when the death penalty was abolished) then the numbers would be even more stark. You reckon there are stats which show most murders are premeditated? I'd like to see those. The definition of murder in 65 was: The deliberate killing of a person under the protection of the queens peace or the killing of a person during the commissioning of a crime. Provided that the person died within 1 year and 1 day of the assault that caused the death. Therefore every death where the defense was "I only meant to give him a kicking" or "I didn't mean to run them over I just wanted to get away from the police" and all the other excuses where people have been killed would not have been entertained." I'd still like to see the numbers. It may be that if you include crimes like Lockerbie and the London Bombings as the actual number of victims them there's been more murders than manslaughter but if you treat them as one crime, I reckon there's more unpremeditated murders. I might be wrong. | |||
"None of this is going to make much difference to murder rates because most murders aren't premeditated crimes. Murderers don't think 'I'd better not kill 'cos I'll get a long sentence'. Killing in the execution of a crime is a different matter and should attract a very long tariff. Actually the numbers over the last 50 years would contradict that. And if you use the same standard as was applied in 1965 (when the death penalty was abolished) then the numbers would be even more stark. You reckon there are stats which show most murders are premeditated? I'd like to see those. The definition of murder in 65 was: The deliberate killing of a person under the protection of the queens peace or the killing of a person during the commissioning of a crime. Provided that the person died within 1 year and 1 day of the assault that caused the death. Therefore every death where the defense was "I only meant to give him a kicking" or "I didn't mean to run them over I just wanted to get away from the police" and all the other excuses where people have been killed would not have been entertained. I'd still like to see the numbers. It may be that if you include crimes like Lockerbie and the London Bombings as the actual number of victims them there's been more murders than manslaughter but if you treat them as one crime, I reckon there's more unpremeditated murders. I might be wrong." The raw data is published ever year, it is now divided between England and Wales, Scotland, and N.I. so you have to do a little addition. You also need to look at the unlawful killings numbers rather than the murder numbers but you will find that they are steadily climbing and have been since the abolition of the death penalty. I suggest you go look at the Home Office web site and see for yourself. | |||
| |||
| |||
"I like the US 3 strikes and you're out idea - e.g. get caught burglarising a house 3 times and - bye bye, you're in prison for 10 years. A d*unk driver in the UK and kill someone you might, if you're unlucky, get 4 years. In the US minimum 20 years. ". I have been saying this for year in every case | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" Scandinavia have low crime rates and very liberal prison systems...with certain crimes you are convicted of you can choose when you want to complete the prison sentence..."
Scandinavia has lower crime rates, lower re-offending rates and is clearly a 'success story' when it come to their penal system.
The American system statistically is appalling, it's a failed system compared to the Scandinavians.
Why would anyone choose a failed system over a successful one? | |||
"NO! It is a very bad idea! In fact it is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard on these forums! The US penal system are really quite horrific, and the 3 strikes system is barbaric. The fact is that the US system is effectively legalized slavery. It results in the US having the highest prison population in the western world. Where a person can end up being jailed for life for stealing a bottle of milk. And because all prisons are run for profit with inmates being used as a free labour force it is in the interests of the state(s) and federal authorities to trump up charges from misdemeanor offences to felony charges in order to increase their labour force. That anyone would think that that system is superior to ours shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the US system. " | |||
" Scandinavia have low crime rates and very liberal prison systems...with certain crimes you are convicted of you can choose when you want to complete the prison sentence...
Scandinavia has lower crime rates, lower re-offending rates and is clearly a 'success story' when it come to their penal system.
The American system statistically is appalling, it's a failed system compared to the Scandinavians.
Why would anyone choose a failed system over a successful one? "punishments, fines are dished out compared to the persons wealth too, which is a fantastic idea | |||
"NO! It is a very bad idea! In fact it is one of the worst ideas I have ever heard on these forums! The US penal system are really quite horrific, and the 3 strikes system is barbaric. The fact is that the US system is effectively legalized slavery. It results in the US having the highest prison population in the western world. Where a person can end up being jailed for life for stealing a bottle of milk. And because all prisons are run for profit with inmates being used as a free labour force it is in the interests of the state(s) and federal authorities to trump up charges from misdemeanor offences to felony charges in order to increase their labour force. That anyone would think that that system is superior to ours shows their total lack of knowledge and understanding of the US system. " And it has not had a significant effect in decreasing crime rates. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" Scandinavia have low crime rates and very liberal prison systems...with certain crimes you are convicted of you can choose when you want to complete the prison sentence...
Scandinavia has lower crime rates, lower re-offending rates and is clearly a 'success story' when it come to their penal system.
The American system statistically is appalling, it's a failed system compared to the Scandinavians.
Why would anyone choose a failed system over a successful one? "Because the American system is more in keeping with vengeance than justice and it appeals to the mob mentality that always seems prevalent on these threads. | |||
"The post above makes some very valid points However what's important to remember is the way crimes are recorded vary from county to county and are changing all the time Policies in place to tackle youth crime are changing - and in my opinion not for the good of society or indeed any use for the young people themselves ! Crimes are still being committed by young people - ( known to the youth justice system) -fact . You only have to ask them and they will tell you openly they are still bang at it ... Some I know have been to court weekly , yes weekly yet they receive the same sentence given previously .. I don't neccessarily agree locking kids up is the answer, however yp who are continuing to offend and commit more serious crimes are being let off time and time again This teaches them nothing .. Apart from " I've got away with it again" ask them they will openly tell you they laugh at the system The amount of yp being given custodial sentences had decreased significantly - Yet crimes ( some very serious ones) are being committed with community sentences being given Someone sceptical may believe that it's just another way our government can say hey look we have cut crime .. Aren't we good? Another reason to cut the money services get to deal with youth crime , yots are suffering badly , jobs are being lost and what's frustrating about the whole thing is that crime is still happening .. Yet work around this is decreasing We need to stop burying our heads in the sand and take a look at the reason crime is being commited . Especially by young people ... And to be honest it's not rocket science .. Will the government respond to it ... Will they fuck ... That have no interest in young people and never have ... No jobs for them , university fees tripled,cuts to frontline services , cuts in pay and benefits and alterations to other policies that affect young people -I.e. Cuts to early interventions and family support. Cuts to children's centres Until we have a government that looks after it's citizens properly instead if squandering money all over the world and fighting wars that cost billions and billions why not get our country up and running again Real jobs for young people . Real wages . Chances for them to get on the housing ladder .. Not pipe dreams ! As long as our young people have little to look forward to there will be crime . Poverty breeds crime Once our young people enter the justice system they are in it and usually for life Reoffending rates are over 95 % They will go on to commit crime as an adult So as long as the system we have continues the more it will fail We need to look at the causes and deal with that It's not easy , far from it . And there lyes the problem "
Completely agree. There is no use trying different solutions without knowing the root problems.
| |||
 | |||
| |||
"Why do people still insist on helping criminals??? Our own laws do that without anyone helping. For example, there have been a number or time where someone has broken into a person house then turned around and sued them because the hurt themselfs ffs. Also they anyone breaking into your house can sue you if you try and defend yourself or your family if you hurt them. The other problem with our law is there is not consistancy, it all down the the judge on the day, recently where I live there was two car crashes both male drivers were dui and both killed their passangers, one got 2.5 years the other got 6 years. One that's simply is not long enough and two how can they have diffrent terms. Also a new way to HELP the CRIMINAL in his rehabiltaion is to have meeting with family of the person they killed again WTF, there is only one way I'd ever be in the same room as someone who killed a memeber of my family and that to kick the crap out of them. We need to become tougher on criminals from the start. " It's called restorative justice ... And the majority of these face to face meetings are made by the person who is grieving . And not a you say so the perpetrator can be helped Your idea of beating the fuck out of someone really doesn't help | |||
"Why do people still insist on helping criminals??? Our own laws do that without anyone helping. For example, there have been a number or time where someone has broken into a person house then turned around and sued them because the hurt themselfs ffs. Also they anyone breaking into your house can sue you if you try and defend yourself or your family if you hurt them. The other problem with our law is there is not consistancy, it all down the the judge on the day, recently where I live there was two car crashes both male drivers were dui and both killed their passangers, one got 2.5 years the other got 6 years. One that's simply is not long enough and two how can they have diffrent terms. Also a new way to HELP the CRIMINAL in his rehabiltaion is to have meeting with family of the person they killed again WTF, there is only one way I'd ever be in the same room as someone who killed a memeber of my family and that to kick the crap out of them. We need to become tougher on criminals from the start. It's called restorative justice ... And the majority of these face to face meetings are made by the person who is grieving . And not a you say so the perpetrator can be helped Your idea of beating the fuck out of someone really doesn't help " Really? Again it wouldn't help me to talk to them, I truly believe in and eye for a eye, as someone has already posted criminals get better treatment the oap in home, how can you say that right? As in the example I gave them two guys will be out soon and they can get on with their lives, the familys of the ones who lost a love one will need to live with that for the rest of their, there no justice there or anyway within the current law. Also I said crap and not fuck, two diffrent things | |||
"Why do people still insist on helping criminals??? Our own laws do that without anyone helping. For example, there have been a number or time where someone has broken into a person house then turned around and sued them because the hurt themselfs ffs. Also they anyone breaking into your house can sue you if you try and defend yourself or your family if you hurt them. The other problem with our law is there is not consistancy, it all down the the judge on the day, recently where I live there was two car crashes both male drivers were dui and both killed their passangers, one got 2.5 years the other got 6 years. One that's simply is not long enough and two how can they have diffrent terms. Also a new way to HELP the CRIMINAL in his rehabiltaion is to have meeting with family of the person they killed again WTF, there is only one way I'd ever be in the same room as someone who killed a memeber of my family and that to kick the crap out of them. We need to become tougher on criminals from the start. It's called restorative justice ... And the majority of these face to face meetings are made by the person who is grieving . And not a you say so the perpetrator can be helped Your idea of beating the fuck out of someone really doesn't help Really? Again it wouldn't help me to talk to them, I truly believe in and eye for a eye, as someone has already posted criminals get better treatment the oap in home, how can you say that right? As in the example I gave them two guys will be out soon and they can get on with their lives, the familys of the ones who lost a love one will need to live with that for the rest of their, there no justice there or anyway within the current law. Also I said crap and not fuck, two diffrent things " Ahhh silly me .... But can you just explain the difference ? As shut as you may think the justice system is I would rather have our system than any other country | |||
| |||
| |||
"Nothing good has come out of usa, mc donalds, kfc, all help make us ill. why should the prison sentences be any better, just chop hands of for theft, stone people for adultery, hang people for murder, get back to the good old days,..." Same for homosexuals then ? | |||
"Nothing good has come out of usa, mc donalds, kfc, all help make us ill. why should the prison sentences be any better, just chop hands of for theft, stone people for adultery, hang people for murder, get back to the good old days,..." I like a few American musicians...and The Sopranos...And The Wire! | |||
"Why do people still insist on helping criminals??? Our own laws do that without anyone helping. For example, there have been a number or time where someone has broken into a person house then turned around and sued them because the hurt themselfs ffs. Also they anyone breaking into your house can sue you if you try and defend yourself or your family if you hurt them. The other problem with our law is there is not consistancy, it all down the the judge on the day, recently where I live there was two car crashes both male drivers were dui and both killed their passangers, one got 2.5 years the other got 6 years. One that's simply is not long enough and two how can they have diffrent terms. Also a new way to HELP the CRIMINAL in his rehabiltaion is to have meeting with family of the person they killed again WTF, there is only one way I'd ever be in the same room as someone who killed a memeber of my family and that to kick the crap out of them. We need to become tougher on criminals from the start. It's called restorative justice ... And the majority of these face to face meetings are made by the person who is grieving . And not a you say so the perpetrator can be helped Your idea of beating the fuck out of someone really doesn't help Really? Again it wouldn't help me to talk to them, I truly believe in and eye for a eye, as someone has already posted criminals get better treatment the oap in home, how can you say that right? As in the example I gave them two guys will be out soon and they can get on with their lives, the familys of the ones who lost a love one will need to live with that for the rest of their, there no justice there or anyway within the current law. Also I said crap and not fuck, two diffrent things Ahhh silly me .... But can you just explain the difference ? As shut as you may think the justice system is I would rather have our system than any other country " Ones slighty worst than the other, Are you saying then its not shut? Can you give an example where the law has helped or given accurate justice to the criminals? | |||
"Nothing good has come out of usa, mc donalds, kfc, all help make us ill. why should the prison sentences be any better, just chop hands of for theft, stone people for adultery, hang people for murder, get back to the good old days,... I like a few American musicians...and The Sopranos...And The Wire!" I like America and Americans in general... | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? " The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance | |||
"......... Can you give an example where the law has helped or given accurate justice to the criminals? " Justice, in the form of the sentence, is dispensed by someone who has sat through the entire trial - not someone who's read a bit about it in the Daily Mail, whilst avoiding the big words. | |||
"I like the US 3 strikes and you're out idea - e.g. get caught burglarising a house 3 times and - bye bye, you're in prison for 10 years. A d*unk driver in the UK and kill someone you might, if you're unlucky, get 4 years. In the US minimum 20 years. "over there prison is prison , hell yes bring it on over here. | |||
 ...when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper.
So what are we supposed to think ? Me and my son had nothing left,but that didnt matter to anyone....
My anger and frustration comes from many cases like my own...where the crim comes out on top.
So yes, i do feel like we should bring back the birch, the stocks and have harsher sentencing.... | |||
| |||
"What we dont do is see all of the evidence in an impartial way! We get bias opinions from media sources with agendas! Our legal system is the best in rhe world bar none! Jayxxx "Not for all and many still see it as "those with money have the best" ...even legal aids been slashed | |||
"..............when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper. ........" You don't think crimes of violence are more serious than property crimes, no matter how personally inconvenient that property crime might be? Out of curiosity, what did the culprit get for the police assault? | |||
| |||
"..............when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper. ........ You don't think crimes of violence are more serious than property crimes, no matter how personally inconvenient that property crime might be? Out of curiosity, what did the culprit get for the police assault?" He got 6 years and was out in 3 . and yes i do think crimes of violence are serious. But just for it to be dropped and shoved to one side was like another kick in the teeth. Surely it could have been added to his sentence | |||
| |||
"..............when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper. ........ You don't think crimes of violence are more serious than property crimes, no matter how personally inconvenient that property crime might be? Out of curiosity, what did the culprit get for the police assault? He got 6 years and was out in 3 . and yes i do think crimes of violence are serious. But just for it to be dropped and shoved to one side was like another kick in the teeth. Surely it could have been added to his sentence "It wouldn't have been added. It would have been served concurrently and wouldn't have affected the time spent in jail. It would only have added to the costs involved in getting him there. The victim might have felt better but nothing would have changed. | |||
"..............when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper. ........ You don't think crimes of violence are more serious than property crimes, no matter how personally inconvenient that property crime might be? Out of curiosity, what did the culprit get for the police assault?" He got 6 years and was out in 3 . and yes i do think crimes of violence are serious. But just for it to be dropped and shoved to one side was like another kick in the teeth. Surely it could have been added to his sentence
Incidently, the guy who attacked my son with a crowbar and left him for dead, got away with it because of his wifes alibi....the coppers told me they knew he had done it but couldnt prove it. But THAT bloke knows,if it takes me all my life....i will get justice for my son....one way or another.
and i make no apologies for that to anyone. | |||
"Hell yes we should. As a nation, we're too bloody soft on criminals. Our law and justice system is way too old and needs bringing up to date ASAP! "In my opinion we are too soft on everyone unless you attack someone who has a little bit of authority in some shape or form. | |||
"I think what annoys the hell out of folk is that criminals in this country get away with murder,so to speak. How many times have we read and witnessed horific crimes and the sentence following is laughable. I do see a different attitude re sentencing when its a member of the police that has been killed /maimed etc...Why ? we are all human beings and have families and its no less heartbreaking because of. The general public are fed up with what they see as "mamby pambying" of those who commit crime and seem to get very light sentences. All the bloody do gooders on the side of the crim instead of shouting up for the victim. Human rights bandied about all the time. Well as long as they are fed and watered and kept warm.......thats the human right aspect sorted. They negated anything else when doing the crime . I was burgeled some years ago and the guy doing it was caught. He not only burgled me but obliterated everything i had worked hard for ,because it was fun ...when it all came to court..the judge said he was dropping the charge ,although he was caught in my house my neighbours....because a more serious crime had been commited...he attacked a copper.
So what are we supposed to think ? Me and my son had nothing left,but that didnt matter to anyone....
My anger and frustration comes from many cases like my own...where the crim comes out on top.
So yes, i do feel like we should bring back the birch, the stocks and have harsher sentencing.... " | |||
"......... Can you give an example where the law has helped or given accurate justice to the criminals? Justice, in the form of the sentence, is dispensed by someone who has sat through the entire trial - not someone who's read a bit about it in the Daily Mail, whilst avoiding the big words." So which one do you think I read in the daily mail then? Or was that just a general statement | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance " That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years!" My cousin was a high court judge who gave it up because of her frustration of the whole sentencing fiasco. She had to stick to what was laid down and not what she felt the crime merited. She now works in sweden and loves it | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years!" So what mitigating circumstances could there be for that then? | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years!" Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ?" | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ?" How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers." Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying " And if you don't know that the drugs react with alcohol? | |||
| |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying And if you don't know that the drugs react with alcohol? " Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense | |||
"The doctors normally tell you don't drink on these tablets when I you get them, and in any case both drivers were way over the legal limit, " Again, you're still missing the point! Unless you've seen the records from both cases, you have no idea why the sentencing was so different...I was just throwing hypothetical shit out there, as I haven't seen the records either, so have no more knowledge of the case than you. You repeated what you'd read, I based my knowledge on what you'd repeated, neither of which have any basis in law. | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying And if you don't know that the drugs react with alcohol? Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense " Ignorance is no defence but can be a consideration during sentencing...which reminds me, I owe the University Library about £30 in overdue fines for Law books that were due back before Xmas! | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying And if you don't know that the drugs react with alcohol? Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance is no defence but can be a consideration during sentencing...which reminds me, I owe the University Library about £30 in overdue fines for Law books that were due back before Xmas! "But you can't say you agree with that or think that the system isn't flawed if they can take into the account oopss sorry I forgot? | |||
"And you've read all the court notes from the two DUI's and know that the cases were identical? The two dui were virtally identical, only noteable diffrence was ages of the people involved and one left the passanger in the car. Ironically the one who left the sence got the less sentance That isn't what I asked! Have you read the court and sentencing notes? There could have been major mitigating circumstances that you know nothing about. No two cases are rarely the same, regardless of the charges. As our law tutor tells us time and again, 'the law is the law'. Though the judge not getting laid the previous night can have an effect on sentencing...but not by 4 years! Can I ask what the mitigation circumstances are for killing someone whilst driving d*unk ? How about if prescription drugs had caused a reaction to a small amount of alcohol? I'm not making excuses, just saying things aren't always as cut and dried as they appear when reported in newspapers. Appreciate your not making excuses but if your on prescription drugs that could react to alcohol then you don't drink and drive just saying And if you don't know that the drugs react with alcohol? Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance is no defence but can be a consideration during sentencing...which reminds me, I owe the University Library about £30 in overdue fines for Law books that were due back before Xmas! "I would say in this case it's more a case of softer judge softer sentence. Best you get the books back soon though | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense " Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense." So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding "No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense. However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking. | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking." | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking."Interesting | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking."Interesting | |||
".... So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
...."Not true, take your pick from the BBC news http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/news/?q=ignorance%20of%20the%20law | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking.
Interesting "It would have to be proved that you had been or are suffering from a state of mental illness which would be deemed to be an excuse for not being in controll of your normal mental functions therefore negating normal reasoning at the time of the crime therefore not realising you have done wrong. | |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking.
Interesting
It would have to be proved that you had been or are suffering from a state of mental illness which would be deemed to be an excuse for not being in controll of your normal mental functions therefore negating normal reasoning at the time of the crime therefore not realising you have done wrong."But what if the judge realised both you and he were Masons .... | |||
| |||
"Should think your doctor would tell you and I think you'll find ignorance is no defense Ignorance of the law is not a defense. There are 2 elements to any crime. Actus Reus (lat) a guilty act. And Mens Rea (lat) a guilty mind. Therefore ignorance is a valid defense. So if charged with a crime just say "I didn't know it was illegal" at least it solves prison over crowding
No you know what you are doing, not that it is illegal, that is ignorance of the law, and is no defense.
However if as in the example given above you were found DUI but you did not know you were DUI because a medication had had an unexpected reaction with something else, then you do not know what you are doing and is a defense. The classic example is you cant commit an offense while sleepwalking.
Interesting
It would have to be proved that you had been or are suffering from a state of mental illness which would be deemed to be an excuse for not being in controll of your normal mental functions therefore negating normal reasoning at the time of the crime therefore not realising you have done wrong."An example I heard of this is a guy took some drugs and had a bad trip he was seeing dragons and demons, so he got a sword and started attacking the dragons which were real people, he had a lessen sentance because he didn't know they weren't really at the time of the attack.... Don't know if that's a true example or not tho | |||
"Don't know if that's a true example or not tho " I think that has been true of more than one of your reference points on this thread, still at least you are acknowledging it this time.
The idea that someone could use an adverse reaction to illegal drugs as mitigation is laughable | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
" Scandinavia have low crime rates and very liberal prison systems...with certain crimes you are convicted of you can choose when you want to complete the prison sentence...
Scandinavia has lower crime rates, lower re-offending rates and is clearly a 'success story' when it come to their penal system.
The American system statistically is appalling, it's a failed system compared to the Scandinavians.
Why would anyone choose a failed system over a successful one?
Because the American system is more in keeping with vengeance than justice and it appeals to the mob mentality that always seems prevalent on these threads."
I know, for some vengeance IS justice, you can only hope that reason and progressive voices may convince some to consider another way. | |||
| |||
"Yeah, we should privatise the prison system like in the US - then we can have the super-rich shareholders making a fortune out of the taxpayer, who has zero say in the rising costs - whilst the super-rich shareholders ensure their massive dividends by leaning on politicians to 'not' invest in deprived areas; after all, that's where the money is to be made!!! Maybe they'll code name it; The Anglo-Amarican dream!! "We have some of that already. Prisons run by G4S - the people who made such a fine job of the Olympics recently. | |||
"Yeah, we should privatise the prison system like in the US - then we can have the super-rich shareholders making a fortune out of the taxpayer, who has zero say in the rising costs - whilst the super-rich shareholders ensure their massive dividends by leaning on politicians to 'not' invest in deprived areas; after all, that's where the money is to be made!!! Maybe they'll code name it; The Anglo-Amarican dream!!
We have some of that already. Prisons run by G4S - the people who made such a fine job of the Olympics recently."Agreed!! Yep, OP, - an inspired idea!!! | |||
"There's the case of the guy accused of the T in the Park rape who was found Not Proven 'cos the jury believed his story that 'he’d taken so many drugs he was ‘on planet Pluto’ at the time' More http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/t-in-the-park-sex-attacker-walks-free-on-drug-plea-1-3236207" Scottish Law isn't English Law... | |||
| |||
"There's the case of the guy accused of the T in the Park rape who was found Not Proven 'cos the jury believed his story that 'he’d taken so many drugs he was ‘on planet Pluto’ at the time' More http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/t-in-the-park-sex-attacker-walks-free-on-drug-plea-1-3236207 Scottish Law isn't English Law..." And in any case it was a jury of ordinary Scots that found the case not proven (the Scots have 3 verdicts, guilty, not proven, not guilty) and so has nothing to do with sentencing. | |||
"There's the case of the guy accused of the T in the Park rape who was found Not Proven 'cos the jury believed his story that 'he’d taken so many drugs he was ‘on planet Pluto’ at the time' More http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/t-in-the-park-sex-attacker-walks-free-on-drug-plea-1-3236207 Scottish Law isn't English Law... And in any case it was a jury of ordinary Scots that found the case not proven (the Scots have 3 verdicts, guilty, not proven, not guilty) and so has nothing to do with sentencing. " It was a reply to a post about a plea in mitigation "The idea that someone could use an adverse reaction to illegal drugs as mitigation is laughable" | |||
| |||
| |||
"Whatever the option chosen it's gotta be a better system than the one already running! Britain really needs to look at some of the countries with low crime rate and see what they are doing right! " the USA has a much higher crime rate particularly sexual and violent crime. Don't think we should be looking that direction for reforms. | |||
"There's the case of the guy accused of the T in the Park rape who was found Not Proven 'cos the jury believed his story that 'he’d taken so many drugs he was ‘on planet Pluto’ at the time' More http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/t-in-the-park-sex-attacker-walks-free-on-drug-plea-1-3236207 Scottish Law isn't English Law... And in any case it was a jury of ordinary Scots that found the case not proven (the Scots have 3 verdicts, guilty, not proven, not guilty) and so has nothing to do with sentencing. It was a reply to a post about a plea in mitigation "The idea that someone could use an adverse reaction to illegal drugs as mitigation is laughable"" My God Onny! I credited you with a little more sense and knowledge! A plea of mitigation is entered AFTER an accused has been FOUND GUILTY! It is the defense barrister asking the judge for leniency! There is no mitigation if the defense plea is not guilty! The main difference between the English justice system and the Scots is you have a verdict of "not proven" which is like saying we do not believe your innocent but the Crown has not proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" your guilt, it allows for retrial if further evidence comes to light (we have effectively changed English law to allow for the same result by removing the "double jeopardy" rule). If you are going to argue about the law please have at least a little knowledge about the subject! | |||
 | |||
"That would be Plea IN Mitigation, not Plea OF Mitigation. If you are going to argue about the law please have at least a little knowledge about the subject! "So now instead of acknowledging your total misunderstanding of the law and how courts work you further demean yourself by quibbling over a 2 letter word... Worthy of the most corrupt of shysters. | |||
| |||
"They don't call me Flywheel for nothing." But this is a subject that deserves more than spinning to gain debating points (and yes I know I split hairs quite often, OK a lot...). | |||
"They don't call me Flywheel for nothing. But this is a subject that deserves more than spinning to gain debating points (and yes I know I split hairs quite often, OK a lot...)." Do you honestly believe there's the slightest chance the UK will adopt the US system of prison sentences? | |||
"They don't call me Flywheel for nothing. But this is a subject that deserves more than spinning to gain debating points (and yes I know I split hairs quite often, OK a lot...). Do you honestly believe there's the slightest chance the UK will adopt the US system of prison sentences?" I sincerely hope not! Who would want to adopt the judicial system of any country that has a Guantanemo Bay!? | |||
"They don't call me Flywheel for nothing. But this is a subject that deserves more than spinning to gain debating points (and yes I know I split hairs quite often, OK a lot...). Do you honestly believe there's the slightest chance the UK will adopt the US system of prison sentences?" We already have private companies running prisons for profit and selling the inmates labour to other private companies. So its not so much a case of will we adopt the US system but how much of it will be adopted without the approval of Parliament. I will also point out that call me were all in it together dave did say last week that he wants US type sentences to be handed down by judges. | |||
"They don't call me Flywheel for nothing. But this is a subject that deserves more than spinning to gain debating points (and yes I know I split hairs quite often, OK a lot...). Do you honestly believe there's the slightest chance the UK will adopt the US system of prison sentences? We already have private companies running prisons for profit and selling the inmates labour to other private companies. So its not so much a case of will we adopt the US system but how much of it will be adopted without the approval of Parliament. I will also point out that call me were all in it together dave did say last week that he wants US type sentences to be handed down by judges." You're going to have to stop believing everything (anything?) Dave says. He's a lying toe-rag. There's no doubt there's a brutal element in British society which has so little in their lives that they'd delight in public executions, floggings and the like. They've reached the point where the ritual humiliation imposed on people by Jeremy Kyle just doesn't satisfy their blood-lust any more. Don't stoop to their level. It's not big and it's not clever. | |||
