Justice done?
- Thread starter Tombstone
- Start date
If they have it so right why do so many people commit crime in America?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
I agree with the professional judiciary of the United Kingdom. You agree with far-right young adults/kids on an internet chat forum.
And my perception is 'extremely distorted'?
lol?
I understand why they will have done it, but you seem to be suggesting that their idea of fun is not so mad when you consider other forms of entertainment such as throwing a pie in someones face are acceptable.
They think its fun because its risky and for some reason, beating up an old man makes them feel good and bonds them as a group.
Understanding someones motives does not absolve them of any responsibility. I dont know quite what your arguing for but it comes across that you dont feel that they should be punished as severely because they were just 'playing around.'
Just remember, its all fun and games till someone loses an eye.
Last edited:
I can understand why they did it too doesn't mean I condone it and feel they didn't get what they deserved at all.
Having a laugh with friends = Ok
Having a laugh with friends by hurting strangers != Ok
Or are you going to ignore me again?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
No you got it completely you understand completely. I say 4 years is fine (the whole thrust of the thread) bearing in mind what they were doing and why - then tried to explain this, mostly explaining 'why'.
Others say 20-30 years (or hang 'em high) with the complete explanation 'they are scum'. That isn't a decent argument. THAT is trolling. I tried to justify my position with my main line of thought .. 'it was a totally stupid kind of joke, that was totally out of hand. 4 years out of their life I think is right'. People went flippin' nuts at me being a troll! People said I don't understand how anyone could think this would be fun. WELL I understand how. I WOULD NOT find it fun. But I understand why some nasty people would. So I tried to explain why. But I think some people don't want to understand or something (but feel perfectly happy declaring a sentence of death, without understanding the whole nature of the crime, and not wanting to understand ..)
I say the fact they were playing around has to be taken into consideration. As in, they should be given less than someone who waits with a penknife outside his ex-girlfriends house, then spends 3 hours cutting her up because she dumped him.
People here 100% disregard the 'they thought it was a laugh and he wouldn't die' aspect. The fact it was MANSLAUGHTER not murder.
You shouldn't ignore such facts when determining sentencing ...
go on .. call me a troll again ..
LeJosh, yes I am ignoring you. Leave me alone. I want to discuss properly with people. Sorry.
Last edited:
It's OK guys it was just a goof!.
Only a few people will get that
Indeed and it seems that the only person in here who actually condones such behaviour is britboy...id love to see him get slapped by some random kids and see how he feels
.Epic trolling by Britboy though...
It's not worth your time explaining anything to him anyway, he's already shown numerous times he is far beyond help.
They didnt go out with the express intention of killing a man but the act of hitting someone unexpectedly, especially when they are elderly is never going to end well. If they had been caught before he had been killed then they should still have got a lengthy sentence of 2-3 years because of the danger they put all their victims in.
I know what you are getting at now but I still dont agree with 3-4 years being the correct sentence. Thats my opinion and you have yours and thats great, GD would be rubbish if we all agreed on these things.
You say "People here 100% disregard the 'they thought it was a laugh' aspect. The fact it was MANSLAUGHTER not murder." however I am not arguing that it was the wrong decision by the letter of the law because of course it wasnt. I am merely saying that in my view, the law is wrong. I dont think many other people are saying that it was intentional murder but simply that they should have been dealt with a lot more severely and if the law prohibits that for this crime, then the law is wrong.
I know what you are getting at now but I still dont agree with 3-4 years being the correct sentence. Thats my opinion and you have yours and thats great, GD would be rubbish if we all agreed on these things.
You say "People here 100% disregard the 'they thought it was a laugh' aspect. The fact it was MANSLAUGHTER not murder." however I am not arguing that it was the wrong decision by the letter of the law because of course it wasnt. I am merely saying that in my view, the law is wrong. I dont think many other people are saying that it was intentional murder but simply that they should have been dealt with a lot more severely and if the law prohibits that for this crime, then the law is wrong.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
Indeed and it seems that the only person in here who actually condones such behaviour is britboy...id love to see him get slapped by some random kids and see how he feels
Epic trolling by Britboy though...
To suggest I condone such behaviour, I think it was 100% fine, by saying '20-30 years in prison is too long' is, well, an interesting tack
Remember I agree with the judges in real life - the professionals who have been sentencing their whole lives (well for a long time anyways). The 'normal' part of society are on my side. GD is on yours!
I'm arguing societys position here! To suggest I condone such behaviour by saying '20-30 years in prison is too long' is, well, an interesting tack
Remember I agree with the judges - the professionals who have been sentencing their whole lives. The 'normal' part of society are on my side. GD is on yours!
Not really it just show how utterly deluded you are to think that their sentences are anywhere near what they should have served. As for these judges...its been shown that they are themselves pretty much deluded when handing out sentences.
Personally ive been saying it for yrs now...the justice system in this country is an ass of itself.
Last edited:
Nah, just most of it. If you murder someone and then laugh in court and spit at the family of the victim and then admit to a few murders you didnt commit you might just about get what you deserve.
I sometimes feel that people dont realise that someone is dead when you kill them. Game over. 3-4 years in prison does not equal a life. Not just their life either. It will take the family and friends of this chap longer than the attackers prison sentence to come to terms with this if they ever do.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
The difficulty is should you bear in mind frailty when determining sentences.
As in if someone, for a laugh, throws icy-water over someone random in the street who gets soaked, what should their jail sentence be? 30 years? Hanging?
No? Well what about if totally unexpectedly it turns out the victim has a heart-murmur and other problems the water-thrower had no idea about, has a massive heart attack because of the sudden drop in body temperature, and dies?
Basically do we really want 'raw luck' at the heart of our judicial system? Do we really want to 'let off' thugs if they happen to fluke upon victims that don't die?
Why do you want to be so nice to thugs that happen, by fluke, to choose victims that survive?
As in if someone, for a laugh, throws icy-water over someone random in the street who gets soaked, what should their jail sentence be? 30 years? Hanging?
No? Well what about if totally unexpectedly it turns out the victim has a heart-murmur and other problems the water-thrower had no idea about, has a massive heart attack because of the sudden drop in body temperature, and dies?
Basically do we really want 'raw luck' at the heart of our judicial system? Do we really want to 'let off' thugs if they happen to fluke upon victims that don't die?
Why do you want to be so nice to thugs that happen, by fluke, to choose victims that survive?