If you were in charge...

[ergonomics]

Deport everyone without work permits. Scrap inheritance tax amongst others. Leave the EU. Ban the building of further mosques, churchs, synagogues. Enforce punishments and social services on those who have children under the age of 21. Enforce life sentences as actual life sentences, and build more jails to meet cell demands. Death penalty for rapists, paedophiles, murderers and wanton repeat offenders. Permanent tracking system on anyone who has commited a crime no matter how insignificant (you go against society, you forfeit your rights basically). Make A-levels mandatory. Give far more powers to the police, including on the spot subduement of yobs and anti-social delinquents.

***mfw

 

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

Ban Religion.
Execute terrorists, dont lock em up, just shoot them. Job done.
Severely curb the welfare state.
Introduce mandatory army service.
Stop all this bloody immigration.
Make people on the dole do civil service.
Bring back the death penalty.


.....just the usual really.

 

[Beren]

Is this why most of your policies seem to revolve around thinning out the gene pool?

I was going for improving rather than just thinning... and while tongue in cheek I do think my rules would improve the country!

 

[bigredshark]

just a quick one, if any of you do end up being in charge, could you let me have some warning? I think I'd probably want to run away...

 

[EddScott]

Ban Religion.
Execute terrorists, dont lock em up, just shoot them. Job done.
Severely curb the welfare state.
Introduce mandatory army service.
Stop all this bloody immigration.
Make people on the dole do civil service.
Bring back the death penalty.


.....just the usual really.

Think national service is a good idea. Teach the young a bit of respect and discipline. You'll get the do-gooders saying it will breed more violence but it won't. Granted those that were likely to do bad things and kill would be trained to do it better but you can't have everything.

If the government thinks child behaviour is bad now, wait till all the kids being born under the "If get up the stick I get a free house" banner get to hooligan age.

One thing I would add is quick justice for those that harm and kill children. No ifs no buts, shot to the head job done. Also allow the parents to pull the trigger. (if they haven't already so to speak)

 

[bigredshark]

One thing I would add is quick justice for those that harm and kill children. No ifs no buts, shot to the head job done. Also allow the parents to pull the trigger. (if they haven't already so to speak)

Yes, because justice is all about revenge really...

 

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

just a quick one, if any of you do end up being in charge, could you let me have some warning? I think I'd probably want to run away...

Sure, I'd send a van round at 4am, to take you straight to the airport. It'll have friendly men in it to assist you in your move.

 

[rick827]

Yes, because justice is all about revenge really...

many islamic states have executions performed by those who have suffered

 

[Nullvoid]

Yes, because justice is all about revenge really...

What would be the just way to treat a paedophile then?

 

[alexakasloth]

What makes you think you'd pass?

LMAO - pwned.

 

[KNiVES]

just a quick one, if any of you do end up being in charge, could you let me have some warning? I think I'd probably want to run away...

If you're a lout, watch out.

 

[bigredshark]

What would be the just way to treat a paedophile then?

Lock them up, nice and simple, for their entire lives if necessary.

 

[Glaucus]

I know religion isn't terrible, it has often been appropriated as the simplest vehicle to tack whatever crusade (excuse the choice of words) was the aim at the time onto. However I am still entirely for a separation of religion/church and state - that would mean the excuse "well, god told me to do XXXX" need never raise its ugly head again as a reasoning for any state decision. If that is your best justification for doing something then you need to reconsider, if you can't justify it on objective grounds I'd suggest you need reconsider.

I don't have a problem with separating state and religion, but it's already there. As long as religious freedom is protected, I'm happy. I would keep the national anthem, ok it isn't great but it is our history, Some history should be kept. The queen holds next to no power, but brings in millions of £ to the uk and does a great job of representing the UK around the world, so she would also stay. remember nearly all there wealth is there wealth not ours.

Er, they start out believing they are doing right by their religion.

I know some are started to expand the empire or to get something the country want's like Hitler and Sadam Hussein, but you look at Northern Ireland, Isreal, and most of the conflicts in the middle east, they are all to do with religion.

That's rubbish. You are very naive. You do not have to be short sighted to be religious, mad etc. Those war has nothing to do with religion, these are common samples of land expansion and occupation, not religion. You and others would love to blame religion, it's a very simple solution. Only it's not a solution at all.

 

[EddScott]

Yes, because justice is all about revenge really...

I apologise for the assumption but I assume you do not have children?

I have a 6 year old daughter and the only justice satisfactory to my child being tortured and killed would be the complete and total eradication of the individual from existence and history.

Lock them up, nice and simple, for their entire lives if necessary.

What for? for what purpose. NO.

Sorry for off-topic.

 

[Nix]

Ideologies are what has been wrong with mankind. Religion is an ideology, just as fascism, Marxism, communism, etc. were/are.

 

[Energize]

I would ensure that students in all schools in the country were taught Science, Mathematics, and English as primary subjects (i.e. they would spend more time than currently on them).

Everyone has to do science, maths and english upto gcse level.

Pupils who fail exams, and have not shown sufficient ability in class (and cannot explain this lack of ability [i.e. disability]) would have to resit the year of school.

They just throw them out at my school.

The next step, either after the completion of their A2 exams or after 2 years of apprenticeship, would be 1 year of compulsory service in the armed forces (whether Army, Navy or RAF).

That is definatley not a good idea, it would cause so many problems and would make it even longer before people can get a job.

For those who did go on to university, all Bachelor level degrees would be 4-year long honours degrees, with roughly the following design:

4 years, as if university didn't cost enough, you want to make it cost more?!, again increasing the time before people can start work.

2nd year would be undertaken at a partner university elsewhere in the EU, with general subject knowledge taken to an advanced level and the opportunity to begin specialization occurring in the final term.

Lots of people aren't going to want to go to another country so early in their lives.

9) removal of all laws/taxes etc that don't achieve there aims. Ie gun control.

Considering how many people are killed by gun crime in America due to the lax laws. I don't see how that would help.

 

[Glaucus]

I have a 6 year old daughter and the only justice satisfactory to my child being tortured and killed would be the complete and total eradication of the individual from existence and history.
.

And that's exactly why, victims aren't included in the choice of punishment and never should be.

 

[bigredshark]

I apologise for the assumption but I assume you do not have children?

I have a 6 year old daughter and the only justice satisfactory to my child being tortured and killed would be the complete and total eradication of the individual from existence and history.



What for? for what purpose. NO.

Sorry for off-topic.

That is exactly why the law gives the relatives of victims precisely no say in the matter. The purpose of justice is to safeguard society, it's not about revenge.

What difference does locked up or dead make? They offer no threat to society, studies in the US apprently show that the costs of execution and life imprisonment are comparable overall (I find that surprising but it looks to be true). The only defence of the death penalty is it offers some comfort to the victims family, which is too close to the line called revenge for my liking.

Maybe I'd think differently if I had kids but in my eyes the law should be made dispassionatly, it shouldn't be about how you'd feel if you were the victim.

You could make the usual arguments 'what if you execute an innocent person' but they're getting old and apparently only 2 or 3 people of the hundreds executed in the US in the last 20 or so years have real doubt regarding their conviction (not perfect but not bad a percentage, another suprising stat).

It can be argued to death and i don't expect to convince people but I think the death penalty is wrong.

 

[Glaucus]

What difference does locked up or dead make? They offer no threat to society, studies in the US apprently show that the costs of execution and life imprisonment are comparable overall (I find that surprising but it looks to be true).

comparable , death sentence, is far far far more expensive, due to *** safe guards necessary.

 

[bigredshark]

comparable , death sentence, is far far far more expensive, due to *** safe guards necessary.

depends how blatently guilty the defendant is and their age when they commit the crime among other things. There are lots of variables.

If some guys shoots someone in front of 10 witnesses and admits it at the age of, say, 18, then it would likely be more expensive to imprison him for life than to execute him. But obviously, somebody who gets convicted of poisoning someone by complex DNA evidence at the age of 55 is going to be cheaper just to lock up. On balence it works out even apparently...