|
Post by x emz x on May 24, 2005 10:06:05 GMT 1
found this article today, and had to say i wasnt sure what to make of it www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1625212,00.html basically saying that they want to change the justice system so that only those convicted for the most serious murders would be sentenced to life, and then those who are found guilty of less serious ones to get a lighter sentence. normally id say that anyone who takes anothers life should be put in prison-shouldnt be killed themselves- but kept in prision. but the article goes on to say about doctors imjecting patients who beg for them to help them die. and how under the new system these doctors would get lesser jail terms? cant really make up my mind if id prefer a new ruling, as what the judge may find a lesser murder, others will find horrific what do u think? good idea or not?
|
|
|
Post by pistolrover on May 24, 2005 10:21:03 GMT 1
firstly i believe that life sentences should mean life sentences. isnt it right that a life sentence is only 30 years. i believe that punishment shoulnt be downgraded like being suggested in the article. i believe that harsher sentences should be introduced to any one who commits a murder of any sort. i think the idea is good though that they are trying to punish the serious offenders more.
|
|
|
Post by Southern Fried Afro on May 24, 2005 10:25:08 GMT 1
Murderers should be castrated
|
|
|
Post by pistolrover on May 24, 2005 10:27:40 GMT 1
whow!!!!!! thats extreme and a very painful dont you think but funny
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 24, 2005 10:28:57 GMT 1
if it was someone close to me i'd quite happily end their life myself
failing that they should be tortured in prison every day for the rest of their life, i'd do that as well
murder rate would drop somewhat if i ran the country ;D
(not counting the state executions) ;D
|
|
|
Post by x emz x on May 24, 2005 10:42:52 GMT 1
failing that they should be tortured in prison every day for the rest of their life, i'd do that as well exactly....alot of people believe that those who take a life should have theirs taken. however, its mental torture for them to serve a life imprision for what they have done, they would have to think about it more or less every day. one thing that annoys my like pistol said, was that alot of people who get banged up for life, dont get life, they are let our for "good behaviour", its a load of nonsense, life should mean life edit- forgot to say that why do they get such rosey lives in prision any way? all the tax payers money goes on them giving them 3 meals a day keeping them fed and water and keeping a roof over their head! they should get a hard life and pay for what they have done? i know there is some times uproar that people hang themselves in prision, but if they are doing life and want to kill themselves, that seems fine to me, their choice, do what they want, they aint human beings they are monsters, and should never be allowed out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2005 10:43:25 GMT 1
I believe, to a certain extent in reform.
There is a chance that after x years in prison a person will have chenged dramatically.
However some murderers are never likely to change, that is more due to an-incurable physceatric (sic?) state.
|
|
|
Post by Loud and Proud on May 24, 2005 12:38:10 GMT 1
This is yet another stupid idea from those that deem themselves to be superior.
There is already a different charge ie manslaughter.
All those guilty of Murder along with all Rapists and Child Molesters should loss all rights (If you wish to have normal rights as the rest of society you must abide by them.)
Therefore they should be placed in soundproof padded cell not feed and left to die slowly and extremely painfully.
|
|
|
Post by rob on May 24, 2005 12:43:30 GMT 1
Not a great believer in human rights then....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2005 12:45:46 GMT 1
Life should mean life. A murderer should lose all basic rights and be made to suffer for the rest of their worthless life.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 24, 2005 12:47:32 GMT 1
we should learn from vlad the impaler just pop the murderer on a pole (up their bums) and watch them slide down and then shout things like "oh do be quiet, i'm trying to eat my lunch"
|
|
|
Post by NeathShrew on May 24, 2005 12:48:38 GMT 1
Just a few thoughts for those who want mandatory life sentences (meaning "for life") for anybody who takes a life.
What about the two boys who killed James Bolger when they were about 10 years old?
What about a woman, whose husband/partner has beaten and abused her regularly for years and has dragged her back every time she has tried to leave: she decides that enough is enough, the law has failed to protect her - she does him in. Worth a life sentence?
What about a member of the armed forces who, having been trained for years to kill without a second thought in times of war, has been prepared for a mission to invade (say) Iraq but, during a couple of days leave before departure, kills somebody after a quarrel. Entirely the fault of the soldier? Worth life?
And what about the elderly couple, where one is in constant, crippling pain and begs their partner to end their life? If the partner does so, should they be banged up for the rest of their life?
Be very careful before asking for blanket rules - very few aspect of life are so black and white that no discretion should ever be applied
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2005 12:56:18 GMT 1
"What about the two boys who killed James Bolger when they were about 10 years old?"
I think I was 11 at the time. I was horrified and sickend, still am. They knew what they were doing and were of sane mind children or not.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 24, 2005 12:57:24 GMT 1
my mums one time best mate killed her husband and buried him under the patio she only did about 2 years she has suffered a lifetime of beatings and eventually died from them the justice system isn't always wrong
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on May 24, 2005 17:14:36 GMT 1
Good points raised above, my concern would be this.
If we were to adapt the law from it's present state to recognise 3 classes of Murder, each case would be classed as 1, 2 or 3 depending upon facts, mitigating factors and the like.
It would only be a matter of time before some very clever lawyer managed to get a high grade murder downgraded to one of the lesser catorgories. My point being the system designed to help those weaker ones would be abused by legalities.
I know they would say "we will put in measures to ensure blah blah blah". But they said that when capital punishment was abolished and look where we are today That is why I don't believe this new idea will work.
|
|
|
Post by lazyshrew on May 24, 2005 17:40:45 GMT 1
I too think the circumstances need to be considered first. Looking at the example above if someone has been subjected to years of mental and physical abuse then it is slightly more justifyable and i think maybe a lesser sentence should be applied. However if a killing is just a random, malitious and cold blooded attack then why do these people deserve to even live? In this case life should mean life.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 24, 2005 17:41:40 GMT 1
Before the hang 'em, shoot 'em, flog 'em brigade start beating their predictable drum they should properly look at what is being suggested.
The law in it's present state gives a sentencing judge absolutely no power to pass a sentence that takes into account any extenuating circumstances in any particular case. There is but one sentence, life.
Not all murders are cold, calculated, pre planned affairs and a compassionate society should reflect this when dealing with the perpetrators of such crimes. There needs to be a degree of flexibility available to those who dispense justice.
This does not mean that all murderers will be given light easy sentences and does not mean that those guilty of truely heinous crimes will not serve the remainder of their lives incarcerated.
I believe this proposal is worthy of support and shows us to be realistic and mature in our approach to dealing with such matters.
|
|
|
Post by Shrews and Royals on May 24, 2005 18:27:17 GMT 1
Today I find myself in a difficult situation.
One of the toughest lads in school (an angel for me) sat his ICT exam yesterday.
Nothing remarkable about that until you consider that his brother was charged with murder the night before, following a punch up over a chap trying to chat up his girlfriend (and a bit more).
I'm astounded that the charge is murder, manslaughter with mitigating circumstances I would have no doubts about. The line between murder and manslaughter can be very blurred and lead to confusion.
I can deal with parents and brothers/sisters of pupils dying. I can just about deal with a kid who is terminally ill. This is something I am finding difficult as the kids are talking about it all the time, and have given the lad a rough time. How the heck do you deal with that at 15?
|
|