Clare's law

placeholder said:
Where is the line drawn?
Click to expand...

That is the problem - somewhere in between is the answer but there isn't a hard and fast way of quantifying it. There would likely be a few issues with implementing it and a few arbitrary lines in the sand would need to be drawn.

I'm just saying I don't have an issue in principle with certain information being available. I'm not saying I've got a solid view on the exact parameters used when implementing such legislation other than the common sense examples that a fight 10 years ago is silly domestic violence conviction 1 year ago is not silly.
 
AcidHell2 said:
Because you give consent, that by itself makes it massively different.

Why should women get the information? What makes this so different from any other crime and risk?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that only they should. I'm just saying that the idea of sharing some relevant information regarding an individuals recent criminal past isn't necessarily a bad thing.
 
jp_bl_68 said:
No, if you introduce Clare's Law then it is no longer up to them to decide whether or not they tell their wife/gf. It is up to the wife/gf to decide whether or not they want to pry into their partner's past.
Click to expand...

Well yes - you'd presume they'd be open about it before that happens - that is their call knowing that she may or may not find out. If she does find out and they'd not been open about it then that is their problem to deal with.
 
dowie said:
erm no, you've just completely missed the point

a single mother, by defenition, has kids

If you want to spend 1 hour a week coaching kids football, or working in a school you need a CRB check.

If you want to move in full time with say a single mum...

edit - my original post was:
Click to expand...


Well I would hope that our system currently would be monitoring sex offenders and not letting them be able to commit those sort of offenses again by even being around children.

A man in his past who may have beaten someone up in a bar or had a street fight is not anything like a person who abuses kids.
 
Its the cliché of grief stricken parents looking to blame someone for the death of their child due, for one reason or another, to some form of guilt that they feel.
 
Do we really need to rely on the state to tell us who to go out with, who to marry, what to wear etc? Forget Orwellian dramatisation, we are begging for it to happen!

The whole thing is stupid. she knew he was violent, but she didn't leave him. End of.
 
It's handing people's personal responsibility to the state. The false illusion of security, just like a CRB check makes people feel safe when they are not.

Nevermind the massive amount of abuse this law would get if (and I really hope it doesn't) pass.

Like I said laws should never be made to gain votes.
 
mejinks said:
Do we really need to rely on the state to tell us who to go out with, who to marry, what to wear etc? Forget Orwellian dramatisation, we are begging for it to happen!
Click to expand...

It's OK you can marry Dave* because Dave has a clear CRB check and has also never committed any violent acts.

Five years later when you are bashed black and blue and youR kids have been abused it's OK because the Government said Dave was OK.



* Or Bob. It's an example.
 
Have I got this right?

A law is being proposed to try to ensure that any men ever rumoured to have ever committed any violent crime are publically vilified as abusers of women for the rest of their lives. The law is being deceitfully promoted by abusing a murder which it would have done absolutely nothing to prevent and would not protect anyone from anything because it wouldn't tell anyone at risk anything they didn't already know.
 
That's what some people haven't grasped - The "information" (and I use that term loosely) is NOT just convictions but also, what they call, "soft intelligence" which ranges from accurate information all the way down to malicious gossip and here-say.

How many women would use this to "get back at their ex" for dumping them? We all know women are cr-azy when it comes to breakups....



Edit: This "information" is also the type they use for Sarah's Law i.e. NOT just convictions but also, what I would call, malicious gossip which is used to "build a picture of possible offending" :rolleyes:

Want to ruin a person's life? Give an anonymous tip-off of kiddy fiddling against someone you hate. The police have a duty to investigate and, even if they don't find anything, an initial report is raised and intel logged.
 
Last edited:
And don't forget, that it all centres around 'the internet' where people can meet 'strangers', because that doesn't happen in real life..

I think the next logical steps will be to have a yearly publication, that lists all people living in the United Kingdom, along with their criminal records.. we could even have a dedicated website where you could enter their name, and it would give you all the data. At the same time, we could have a second publication for financial data, and state mental health checks.. oh, and publicised medical histories too.. that should cover most things..
 
Sin_Chase said:
Only if there is a register for all the CRAZY MENTAL woman.
Click to expand...

lol the first thing I thought of when I heard about this proposed 'clare's law' was, "Great! all well and good so long as I get to see if she has a history of mental illness and emotional instability... offsets the possibility of her getting bashed about a bit with me not wasting my time with a nut-case."

But then I have a particular interest in not wasting another ten years of my life with someone who is irreparably broken inside. :o

This appears to be proposed legislation based upon an emotional foundation (understandable perhaps) but ultimately doomed to failure. Rightly so imo, preferably being shot down in flames before it even gets close to becoming a 'law'..
 
Hell, why not allow people to check if their neighbours are housebreakers so that they know never to invite them into their house or tell them about the latest gadget they just bought...
 
So with this not just being limited to things the person is found guilty of say woman A is a bit of a nutter and breaks up with man A, she then leaves an anonymous report he is violent etc, police log it find nothing nothing happens.

years later woman B falls in lvoe with man A, checks his record and is told he has a history of violence, woman B leaves him/tells others, people beat **** out of man A out of some misplaced sense of "justice".
 
If any woman has the gall to check up on me via this law, then she'll be getting a bunch of fives and kicked to the kerb. That'll show 'em.

Anyway, does this not break the Data Protection Act or something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom