-
Posts
-
If we are going to go for the sentence fitting the crime angle……. then what exactly do we mean?
I meant appropriate length sentences for serious crimes. And murder and torture of little ones would mean maximum sentencing, no matter what background or excuses the defendant can come up with.
We need to make the thugs and paedophiles who commit serious aggressive crimes think twice before they lash out. Make them pause and wonder if it is worth it. Prevention would be my first priority. How can we make sentencing tough enough to make people think twice about actually committing these crimes in the first place?
It seem s plain to me that some, not all of these criminals must suffer a mental disability. That being said, are we to dispel any compassion here? Yes, some crimes are beyond all humanity and dignity, this strenghtens my thoughts that some of these people must have no sense of direction at all. To put to death anyone is a sad situation. Often vengence can distort humane justice, thats not to say the victims should be forgotten. I would agree that the prison system offers very little in the way of true punishment. Lets also not forget that all of these criminals have a mother and father and possibly sibblings, should we not take into account their feelings.
What do you mean by taking into account the feelings of mother, father and siblings? Are we supposed to adjust our sentencing laws on the basis of not upsetting relatives?
lets ignore the feelings of the family and friends of the people offended against eh
It seem s plain to me that some, not all of these criminals must suffer a mental disability.
And be predjudicial to the disabled….tut-tut
A mother, father, sibblings…..oh, and children.
If they have a mental disability it is taken into account when passing judgment. But many many people commit atrocities because they want to, because they can, and because they don’t fear the consequences.
Very few serial killers are found insane in fact they lead perfectly normal lives inbetween in the main
@minim wrote:
………. How can we make sentencing tough enough to make people think twice about actually committing these crimes in the first place?
I was chewing this point over for a while – in terms of a punishment being a deterrent and it occurred to me that the severity of a punishment is not always in itself the deterrent. It is the fear of getting caught that acts as a deterrent to crime.
Problem is that ‘criminals’ don’t get caught often enough and when they finally are convicted of committing a crime, all the namby pamby ‘liberals’ come out of the woodwork with a variety of pathetic excuses as to why they ought not to be punished too severely …….. conveniently forgetting that this may have been one of many crimes they committed, but for which they wern’t caught & convicted.
My own preference is for punishments to be severe and based solely on retribution and NOT on rehabilitation. If they can’t behave, then simply lock ’em away and leave ’em to rot.
You put up taxes to pay for better policing (though spending the budget on catching criminals rather than admin might help)
You put up taxes to pay for better policing (though spending the budget on catching criminals rather than admin might help)
How about nil VAT then PB……. :lol:
Can there be a deterent to the disturbed mind :?:
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!