Justice done?

Moredhel said:
It shouldn't be a question of punishment, it should be about stopping it from happening again, and converting people who are of no benefit to society into productive and beneficial members.

Prison sentencing should have but 2 priorities in my eyes;

a) Protection of the public from the perpetrator for as long as necessary.
b) Rehabilitation.

Anything else, in my eyes, is revenge, not justice.

If these sentences fulfil both of these purposes, then I fully support them. As to whether they will or not, I don't really have the experience with rehabilitation to say, so I'm going to have to trust the judges judgement on this.
Click to expand...

So how do you define Justice?

There should be an element of punishment in a sentence, punishment which fits the severity of the crime. Is it Justice to lock someone up for 2 years for killing someone? If your pregnant wife was happy slapped and it killed her and your child would you feel that Justice had been served if the person who did it got 2 years in jail?
 
kgi said:
Why not revenge be included in the sentencing/penalty? I don't see why not. In fact, I do believe that whenever we have targetted crime (i.e. murder as opposed to embezlement) retribution and satisfaction for the victim should take precedence over protection and rehabilitation.
Click to expand...

Why? What possible benefit to the world at large can that have?
 
Well they have plenty of time to rehabilitate playing 'find the soap' in the mens showers now.
 
britboy4321 said:
Yea I reckon so.

Remember 'driving over the speed limit' falls into that category .. if you were doing 48 in a 40 zone, and hit someone killing them - do you think 4 years banged up is not enough?

Whats the difference. Both the 'speeder' and the 'slapper' expects no long term damage to anyone ..
Click to expand...

No, actually I dont think 4 years is enough to account for taking someones life. Frankly they shouldnt be going 48 in a 40 and they shouldnt be going around randomly hitting people in the streets either. I really dont know why some people have so much trouble following VERY simple rules of acceptable behaviour. I guess its all to be "cool"...yeah....very cool I must say. *****.
 
britboy4321 said:
Yea I reckon so.

Remember 'driving over the speed limit' falls into that category .. if you were doing 48 in a 40 zone, and hit someone killing them - do you think 4 years banged up is not enough?
Click to expand...

Horses for courses. Driving over the speed limit and attacking a pensioner are two different things in terms of magnitude regarding the probability of GBH or even death. In the latter there is clear and focused intent to harm a person, in the former it is more of a chance. That's why these types of cases carry different custodial sentences (sometimes speeding crimes don't get any jail time).

You can drive over the speed limit and claim - naturally - that you have no intention of hurting anyone. You cannot attack someone and claim the same thing.
 
Moredhel said:
Why? What possible benefit to the world at large can that have?
Click to expand...

Well it works like this:
-retribution/revenge factor: justice for the victim
-punishment (a.k.a custodial sentence) through deprivation of freedom: benefit for the public by removing them from the streets
-rehabilitation: benefit for the perpetrator.

It doesn't have to be only one-sided and only for the public.
 
Moredhel said:
Why? What possible benefit to the world at large can that have?
Click to expand...

Get rid of morons who think hitting people for fun on the street is hilarious?

Get rid of murderers, rapists, tormenters, paedophiles. I just don't see why people such as this should be allowed a chance after ruining an innocents parties life. - especially re-offending. :eek:
 
I read about this in The tTelegraph today.

This "gang" had attacked people 20 seconds or so earlier before attacking the pensioner. They also recorded all of videos on mobile phones as trophies and were distributing them under a film production brand 'Lane Gang Productions' and police found evidence of various other attacks on the elderly, one where they attacked a couple in their own home for example.

They were young teens and had calculated these attacks. Whether they meant to kill the pensioner or not nobody will ever know but they did attack him with serious harm in mind. According to the telegraph article - One of the lads came in behind him while the other from the front and both struck the man's head and he fell down hitting the floor causing serious head injuries.

Stuff like that doesn't deserve a 4 year (less for so called good behaviour) term, it requires life long monitoring and psychological observation at the very least and if that's too costly then just hang them. Makes the towns more safer that way too and saves money at the same time.
 
Last edited:
LeJosh said:
Get rid of morons who think hitting people for fun on the street is hilarious?

Get rid of murderers, rapists, tormenters, paedophiles. I just don't see why people such as this should be allowed a chance after ruining an innocents parties life. - especially re-offending. :eek:
Click to expand...

Watch 'the Shawshank redemption'. Morgan Freeman's character. You'd have kept him in prison forever?

That's just pointless & expensive revenge for revenge's sake.
 
Khaaan! said:
Makes the towns more safer that way too and saves money at the same time.
Click to expand...

Using the US model (the best we have), the death penalty costs more money than banging them up for life.

Oh, and doesn't work as a deterrent (no difference in homicide rates per capita between 'non death penalty' and 'death penalty' states).

Oh, and in the last 10 years they've executed over 90 people that science has PROVED later on (new DNA capabilities etc) were completely innocent (goodness knows how many more were innocent).

But apart from that ...
 
Disgusting, a friend of my dad's was beaten up by several "doormen" outside Opium in Romford and later died in hospital, guess what sentence they got?

Nothing, despite witnesses including the guy's brother who got a broken arm as well as CCTV. The doormen all collaborated their story together so the finger couldn't be pointed at the one who dealt the fatal kick to the head.
 
britboy4321 said:
Watch 'the Shawshank redemption'. Morgan Freeman's character. You'd have kept him in prison forever?

That's just pointless & expensive revenge for revenge's sake.
Click to expand...

I havn't watched it but did he get put in prison because it was genuinely an accident? Or because he ran up to an elderly and smacked him on the head for no reason?
 
As un-graphic as the footage is, it is very shocking. They run up, hit him and run off. People come and have a look and then walk away. It only looks like one person does anything to help :(.
Ridiculous sentences in my opinion, they should be away for life.

As this was just down the road from me. Tooting, a place I stay clear of after dark.
 
LeJosh said:
I havn't watched it but did he get put in prison because it was genuinely an accident? Or because he ran up to an elderly and smacked him on the head for no reason?
Click to expand...

What the character did on that film was not an accident. But if you haven't seen it, forget I said anything ..
 
britboy4321 said:
Watch 'the Shawshank redemption'. Morgan Freeman's character. You'd have kept him in prison forever?

That's just pointless & expensive revenge for revenge's sake.
Click to expand...

I have watched the movie and I know what you mean.

However, if you kill someone why should you expect better? Either way I am not suggesting that someone should be locked up indefinitely for manslaughter, but a minimum of 20-25 years is necessary without exception.
 
britboy4321 said:
Using the US model (the best we have), the death penalty costs more money than banging them up for life.

Oh, and doesn't work as a deterrent (no difference in homicide rates per capita between 'non death penalty' and 'death penalty' states).

Oh, and in the last 10 years they've executed over 90 people that science has PROVED later on (new DNA capabilities etc) were completely innocent (goodness knows how many more were innocent).

But apart from that ...
Click to expand...

Science doesn't have to prove anything when you have video evidence (like in this case, Telegraph has the video on their site).
 
On a slightly insane note, I think we should have the punishment mirror the crime. If intentionally kill someone you should be killed! Muhahahaha! Also, if you rape someone, then you get raped back. I see no flaw in this plan! We could even invent a machine to beat people up in precise ways.
 
Last edited:
This is why when i was younger i wanted to be a judge.

I would be a right **** to anyone that came in for murder or any serious crimes.

these kids came into a courtroom then i would give them 20+ years without hesitation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom