Summer riots arsonist jailed for 11½ years

Personally should be a life sentence, for the amount of history he destroyed. Had no right to destroy something of previous generations.

Assuming he does, what, 6 years? It's still a very long time indeed. If you think back in your life 6 years how things were different...

My problem with it isn't the length of sentences, broadly speaking (some are too short) it's that prison isn't used for what it should be. It should be a rehabilitation boot camp. It shouldn't be cruel for the sake of being cruel, but it should be cruel as a result of prisoners being taught day after day to bring their literacy and numeracy up to scratch, to give them some practical skills, and to get some kind of work done by them in prison.
 
this is one thing i dislike, sentences should not run along side each other they should be cumulative.

As along side each other it's basically being unpunished for anything but the worst offence.

IIRC consecutive sentences are taken into account when it comes to things like early release, so if you've got two (or more) sentences running at the same time they push back the earliest release date, even if both are the same length.


Personally for the size of the crime, the crime itself and the damage it did I think the sentence is probably about right.
The fact it may also act as a deterrent is a bonus.

IIRC it set fire to nearby buildings, and several people had to be rescued from them, so it was probably at the most severe end of the arson scale short of loss of life.
 
Definitely a harsh sentence... They're definitely making an example of him...

I have no sympathy for him though, he endangered many lives and crushed a business that had been around for years. Apparently, he also had 20 other convictions on him, so I imagine that is one of the reasons for such a long sentence.
 
Assuming he does, what, 6 years? It's still a very long time indeed. If you think back in your life 6 years how things were different...

My problem with it isn't the length of sentences, broadly speaking (some are too short) it's that prison isn't used for what it should be. It should be a rehabilitation boot camp. It shouldn't be cruel for the sake of being cruel, but it should be cruel as a result of prisoners being taught day after day to bring their literacy and numeracy up to scratch, to give them some practical skills, and to get some kind of work done by them in prison.

How is prison cruel? From what I have read they get TVs and all sorts. Also, he doesn't look like the type of person who will be on the receiving end of other prisoners cruelty.

I do agree they should be rehabilitated. I also think they should be made to work, thus teaching them the valuable lesson that you have to work to pay your way.
 
He burnt down a building and endangered lives.

And not only did he endanger the lives of the public he also put at risk the lives of my colleagues attending as fire crews to deal with what was a large scale incident. Some folk don't or indeed can't appreciate the absolutely massive risk that a property of this type, fully involved in fire and well alight can hold for members of the fire and rescue service.

My opinion is that the sentence is perhaps a little harsh but that said I'm not going to complain too much about it. The downside is that no matter whether the powers that be wanted to "make an example" out of this individual in the misguided hope that it was a deterrent to others, it won't have the necessary effect. The type of people who commit crimes like this are far too thick to understand what possible consequences can be for them so setting examples doesn't go anywhere to getting through to their tiny brain cell.
 
Back
Top Bottom