Terror Plot Foiled
- Thread starter sachinbadiani
- Start date
Rubbish, most murderers never commit a serious offence upon being released under license and peadophiles have one of the lowest reoffending rates out of all classes of offender. The factual basis of your position is fatally flawedEntai said:
Most don't reoffend and using the US example its cheaper to imprison them for life than to have a trial system and resultant appeals process that can sentance people to death.
Prisons are full of people convicted for minor offence relating to drink and drugs. Now unless you are advocating killing burgulars and people banged up for assault charges then killing a few murderers and rapists isn't going to effect the prison housing crisis.
Not going by the US example it isn'tVIRII said:
Where do you draw the line? Should it be only would be muslim terrorists who are killed? Or people convicted of serious assaults and murders?
You do make it easy for people to call you a nazi don't you. Look up T4 and 'special treatment' for a similar worded sentiment.
BTW it wouldn't work anyway as criminal or terrorist tendancies are not generally heriditory and often the criminals you'd be targetting have allready reproduced. Thus to enact your goal you'd have to sterilise them, which brings us back to Nazi medical programs.
Excellant conflate two seperate arguments into one. Excellant tactic for when you've lost one argument.
It goes to show the law system is a joke in this country. When Life inprisonment is classed as what is it, 15/20 years max? Life should mean life.
Another example is the ex-boxer Naseem-Hamed. He is convicted of dangerous driving (under the influence, I'm not sure on that). Killed 1 person and left a second critically injured in hospital.
He gets released after 15 months, but has to wear an electronic tag...15 Months are they taking the ****?
Another example is the ex-boxer Naseem-Hamed. He is convicted of dangerous driving (under the influence, I'm not sure on that). Killed 1 person and left a second critically injured in hospital.
He gets released after 15 months, but has to wear an electronic tag...15 Months are they taking the ****?
Life means however long the authorities want and you are never technically freed but are released under license and thus could technically be reimprisoned. Some are sentanced to whole life tarrifs by a judge, ie life means life.bigbadish said:
Didn't kill anybody
The US system is flawed then. A trial should not cost more than keeping someone in jail for life. Perhaps they need to take a look at what they pay their lawyers.Sleepy said:
People convicted to life imprisonment seems to be a good starting point.Sleepy said:
ROFL. Ooooooh i don't agree with you so you must be a nazi oneoneone.Sleepy said:
What a classic reaction. I'm simply looking at things from a logical viewpoint without all the bleeding heart emotional baggage that the name callers like to cry over.
Remove them from the gene pool is an expression. Look up "expression"Sleepy said:
Really? Is that like calling someone a nazi rather than addressing the logic of the argument? ExcellEnt tactic for when *you've* lost an argumentSleepy said:
Will the irony of resorting to mocking your spelling strike a chord You get what you pay for, and given how flawed the US system is, implementing an on the cheap system here strikes me as a less than sensible approach.VIRII said:
There are probably more crimes that are punishable by life than you might imagine. Given that you are talking about killing someone I think a little more precision is in order.
I didn't insult you in any way least of all by calling you a nazi. Reread what I wrote.
Given the association you raised above and the fact that you are proposing killing people it seems a logical reading of your point.Remove them from the gene pool is an expression. Look up "expression"
Trying to overcome a dependancy on spell checkers is an admirable trait, merging two seperate and disparate arguments into one is a tactic worthy of nuLabour.ExcellEnt tactic for when *you've* lost an argument
Have you forgotten who I vote for? I have no problems with priosners serving there actual sentance and for some crimes longer maximum sentances.VIRII said:LOL. Doubtless you'd want to forgive the person and talk to him and ask him not to do it again would you?
I think I'm more human than that
Anyway I just wanted to highlight another similarity between your views and those of a religion you aren't fond of.
Sleepy said:
Sorry that is completely wrong life does not mean life.
The following is taken from here
"For those serving four years or more, the system of parole is as follows: you will be eligible for release on parole once half of the sentence has been served; at the two-thirds stage of the sentence you will be released automatically on a non-parole licence. Recommendations by the Parole Board to release prisoners serving fifteen years or more must be approved by the Secretary of State.
Between the two-thirds automatic release point and the three-quarters point in the overall sentence, the ‘at risk provisions’ with regard to further offences which are imprisonable apply as they do for short-term prisoners. If a further prison sentence is imposed for committing an offence whilst on licence, this stands as a sentence in its own right and will normally be ordered to be served consecutively with any further sentences imposed.
Long-term prisoners who are in breach of parole licence conditions may be recalled to prison and if recalled, you may remain in prison until the three-quarters point of the original sentence. If recalled, you must be told of the reasons for recall and can appeal against the decision in writing to the Parole Board. In those circumstances, your licence will run until the very end of your sentence and if you breach this licence again, then you can be held until your sentence expiry date."
Therefore if you get a life sentence, 15 years say, you will automatically be out after 10 and as long as you behave for the next five you are totally free after that.
Either way 10 or 15 years does not sound much like life imprisonment to me.
Edit: just read at the bottom of that webpage where it says after 2004 you will automatically be released under licence after half of any long term sentence.
Last edited:
FFS no where did I claim that all life sentances meant life. However there is a catergory of sentance called whole life tarrif or more accurately "whole life order" which applies as per s269 (4) Criminal Justice Act 2003, Schedule 21Entai said:
And if you'd read my post you'd note that I said people sentanced to Life are released under License, which remains in force till death. The relevant powers to do so derives from s31 Crime (Sentances) Act 1997 and recalls to prison derive from s32 of said act
To be eligible for release requires convincing a parole board of your suitablilty for reentry into society. It is not an automatic right.
Only applies to "fixed-term prisoner" doesnot apply to those serving life sentances
We can always be more efficient and thrifty without losing quality. Not that the US legal system is a pinnacle of quality. Unless you're called OJ ...Sleepy said:
It is a sentence. Life imprisonment. I simply ask why if we are giving a real life sentence we don't just execute instead. Or don't these life sentences really mean life? If the crime is so serious that the person can get life for it then why not the death penalty as an option to be used at the Judges discretion.Sleepy said:
How is it logical? Death sentence = you're a Nazi. Um ok....Sleepy said:
Which 2 disparate arguments would these be?Sleepy said:
Economics? There is no reason why locking someone up for life should be cheaper than hanging them at all.Sleepy said:
Morality? That is rather subjective, how can you be sure that your morality is better than anothers?
Irreversibility? If it was reversible it wouldn't be the death penalty would it. How reversible is locking someone up for 40 years and then deciding that they are innocent? Does the Tardis take them back in time?
We are already different from Iran. We don't kill people for being gay.
Sleepy said:
Yeah so someone convited of a crime and given a life sentence can, most likely, get back out into the community at some point, granted they are on licence and if thay cause concern they may go back to prison.
What I am trying to say is that if you are given a life sentence you should spend the rest of your life in prison never to be released under any circumstances, therefore life should mean life, and the next time you come out of prison is to be stuck six foot under, or preferably cremated so that they do not waste any more valuable space.
I think the US system is a piece of **** But its the only model we've got. Its unlikely that convicted felons wouldn't be granted leave to appeal a sentance. Thus guarenteing two trials. You can hardly skimp on the legal resources that the defendant has access to. Both of these measures will cost a lot. And then there's appeals to the Lords as well in some if not all cases.VIRII said:
For reasons I've allready posted.
Nope but you have to know the details of T4 to make the association between nazi policy and your comment.
You said earlier "[a]lthough some here seem to wish to excuse or "understand" such actions." @if ®afiq et al excuses whereas I've talked of understanding. Two issue by two seperate posters.
Last edited: