|
Post by mrmagoo on Sept 14, 2010 22:57:09 GMT 1
Three Strike Rules: * On November 4, 1995, Leandro Andrade stole five videotapes from a K-Mart store in Ontario, California. Two weeks later, he stole four videotapes from a different K-Mart store in Montclair, California. Andrade had been in and out of the state and federal prison systems since 1982. By the time of these two crimes in 1995, he had been convicted of petty theft, residential burglary, transportation of marijuana, and escape from prison. As a result of these prior convictions, the prosecution charged Andrade with two counts of petty theft with a prior conviction, which under California law can either be a felony or a misdemeanor. Under California's three strikes law, any felony can serve as the third "strike" and thereby expose the defendant to a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life in prison. * Kevin Weber was sentenced to 26 years to life for the crime of stealing four chocolate chip cookies (previous strikes of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon).[20] However, prosecutors said the six-time parole violator broke into the restaurant to rob the safe after a busy Mother's Day holiday, but he triggered the alarm system before he could do it. When arrested, his pockets were full of cookies he had taken from the restaurant.[21]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2010 23:03:50 GMT 1
I dont understand the point of view that prison is there to somehow rebuild people back into model citizens or solve their myriad of problems (whether violence, drugs, alcohol). Prison is there to punish people by removing their freedom, rehabilitation that occurs in that time is positive and needed but the primary purpose is to punish and to prevent them from offending. Too many people think we need to try and 'cure' people, what needs to be accepted is that a percentage of people are uncurable horrible, thieving, violent, druggie, paedo, rapist, murdering, blackmailing etc scum. So a percentage of the population need to be under lock and key, just as they have always been since medieval times. I dont think George Michael has much grip on reality and the fact he endangers so many peoples lives (plus his own) means he needs to be locked away for everyones safety, whether 4 weeks makes any odds will be seen. There are many cases where I would prefer people are simply locked away and I would happily pay more tax to keep them there - build more jails please, anyone who has raped, murdered or abused children etc should be kept away for life. Edit - Baystonblue - i doubt you'd be so flippant if one of your family had been travelling along the same road as George Michael during his accidents over the last few years. To be honest, a ride in the back of Georgie boys car around Wimbledon Common would be a lot safer than walking down the street where lie in wait all those thieving,violent, druggie,paedo, rapist, murdering, blackmailing scum, according to you that is.
|
|
|
Post by siabod on Sept 14, 2010 23:06:33 GMT 1
Turn that around and ask what 4 weeks in jail and a fine of £12000 - to a muliti millionaire, will achieve ? This bloke is a serial offender and should have been sentenced as such and in the same way as anyone of us would have been treated. A complete joke. Should we not accept him as being flawed, weak and impressionable, capable of getting things wrong as we all are? Sorry, that was your defence of Rooney, the serial hetrosexual shagger ( until that abhorrent newspaper NotW provides evidence otherwise) not to be used in defence of a homosexual pop star. Should we not form our own morals and stick to them and not force them onto others as some sort of moralistic evangelist. Oh, sorry, that was you again in defence of the serial hetrosexual shagger Rooney, aimed at those who dared see things slightly differently as your good self. Strange one this, two men, both serial offenders of a sexual nature, both multi millionaires, both subject to the pryings of our national press, and yet you defend one but not tother. Am i missing something here? [/quot Yes you are, only one of them put other peoples lives at risk.
|
|
|
Post by saladsaladsalad on Sept 14, 2010 23:08:49 GMT 1
Three Strike Rules: * On November 4, 1995, Leandro Andrade stole five videotapes from a K-Mart store in Ontario, California. Two weeks later, he stole four videotapes from a different K-Mart store in Montclair, California. Andrade had been in and out of the state and federal prison systems since 1982. By the time of these two crimes in 1995, he had been convicted of petty theft, residential burglary, transportation of marijuana, and escape from prison. As a result of these prior convictions, the prosecution charged Andrade with two counts of petty theft with a prior conviction, which under California law can either be a felony or a misdemeanor. Under California's three strikes law, any felony can serve as the third "strike" and thereby expose the defendant to a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life in prison. * Kevin Weber was sentenced to 26 years to life for the crime of stealing four chocolate chip cookies (previous strikes of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon).[20] However, prosecutors said the six-time parole violator broke into the restaurant to rob the safe after a busy Mother's Day holiday, but he triggered the alarm system before he could do it. When arrested, his pockets were full of cookies he had taken from the restaurant.[21] learn to read (again) Can be modified to lesser offences, with a lesser ultimate penalty but a good idea and deterrent.If you can't be bothered to read peoples posts correctly, or if doing so renders your posts pointless, why bother
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2010 6:38:21 GMT 1
So the question is if short term prison is not the answer and the offence does not warrant a longer term as defined in law, what is the answer?? Monday night flogging live on SKY HD?
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Sept 15, 2010 7:00:44 GMT 1
Should we not accept him as being flawed, weak and impressionable, capable of getting things wrong as we all are? Sorry, that was your defence of Rooney, the serial hetrosexual shagger ( until that abhorrent newspaper NotW provides evidence otherwise) not to be used in defence of a homosexual pop star. Should we not form our own morals and stick to them and not force them onto others as some sort of moralistic evangelist. Oh, sorry, that was you again in defence of the serial hetrosexual shagger Rooney, aimed at those who dared see things slightly differently as your good self. Strange one this, two men, both serial offenders of a sexual nature, both multi millionaires, both subject to the pryings of our national press, and yet you defend one but not tother.[glow=red,2,300] Am i missing something here?[/glow] Yes, you are. As is the norm. Wayne Rooney may be guilty of all manner of moral and matrimonial misdeamenours but to my knowledge he has never been convicted in a court of the land as a result of any such actions. He has never repeatedly put the lives of other motorists and pedestrians at great risk through his own arrogant and selfish actions either. What he has done is a matter for him and his family, that is all. George Michael is the exact opposite. He is a seriel offender which the state has given previous leniency to in order for him to address his issues. He chose to ignore all that and once again expose the public to great danger. His sentence this time is a joke. So yes, you did miss something. Quite a bit actually.
|
|
|
Post by mrmagoo on Sept 15, 2010 11:22:45 GMT 1
Three Strike Rules: * On November 4, 1995, Leandro Andrade stole five videotapes from a K-Mart store in Ontario, California. Two weeks later, he stole four videotapes from a different K-Mart store in Montclair, California. Andrade had been in and out of the state and federal prison systems since 1982. By the time of these two crimes in 1995, he had been convicted of petty theft, residential burglary, transportation of marijuana, and escape from prison. As a result of these prior convictions, the prosecution charged Andrade with two counts of petty theft with a prior conviction, which under California law can either be a felony or a misdemeanor. Under California's three strikes law, any felony can serve as the third "strike" and thereby expose the defendant to a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life in prison. * Kevin Weber was sentenced to 26 years to life for the crime of stealing four chocolate chip cookies (previous strikes of burglary and assault with a deadly weapon).[20] However, prosecutors said the six-time parole violator broke into the restaurant to rob the safe after a busy Mother's Day holiday, but he triggered the alarm system before he could do it. When arrested, his pockets were full of cookies he had taken from the restaurant.[21] learn to read (again) Can be modified to lesser offences, with a lesser ultimate penalty but a good idea and deterrent.If you can't be bothered to read peoples posts correctly, or if doing so renders your posts pointless, why bother I was actually being supportive of your posts, maybe it's you that needs to read.
|
|
|
Post by mrmagoo on Sept 15, 2010 11:24:16 GMT 1
So the question is if short term prison is not the answer and the offence does not warrant a longer term as defined in law, what is the answer?? Monday night flogging live on SKY HD? I like the idea of that...
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Sept 15, 2010 13:03:03 GMT 1
This is only a huge case because so many people are homophobic (massive amount in the media) and they can exploit it to make the homosexual look even worse! When afterall, he is only human and is entitled to make mistakes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2010 14:11:14 GMT 1
This is only a huge case because so many people are homophobic (massive amount in the media) and they can exploit it to make the homosexual look even worse! When afterall, he is only human and is entitled to make mistakes. Don't think that is true, and a poor generalisation, being a botty basher has little bearing to the crime for what he has committed!!
|
|
|
Post by froggy on Sept 15, 2010 15:03:40 GMT 1
This is only a huge case because so many people are homophobic (massive amount in the media) and they can exploit it to make the homosexual look even worse! When afterall, he is only human and is entitled to make mistakes. Don't think that is true, and a poor generalisation, being a botty basher has little bearing to the crime for what he has committed!! The Suns headlines about him are clearly homophobic, it is true. Many of straight celebs have done similar offences and nowhere near this much detail is focused on them.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Sept 15, 2010 16:45:42 GMT 1
On a more serious tack to my other posts, I'm generally of the opinion that rehabillitation is preferable to incarceration but when the offender is unable to take advantage of opportunities to reform then prison beacomes inevitable.
'Drug driving' is surely as, if not more, dangerous than drink driving. It endangers the lives and well being of the public, and is therefore not a minor offence that can be excused as a 'mistake', as, say, possession of cannabis or frequenting the gents with intent could.
Getting caught showing your winky to PC Plod is one thing, recklessly endangering others due to your decadent lifestyle is another.
If Michael wants to smoke pot and drive so much I'm sure he has the means to buy a s**t load of draw and hire out Silverstone for the weeked.
Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Sept 15, 2010 18:16:54 GMT 1
This is only a huge case because so many people are homophobic (massive amount in the media) and they can exploit it to make the homosexual look even worse! When afterall, he is only human and is entitled to make mistakes. God help us ! Don't think that is true, and a poor generalisation, being a botty basher has little bearing to the crime for what he has committed!! God help us mk2 !
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Sept 15, 2010 19:35:23 GMT 1
This is only a huge case because so many people are homophobic (massive amount in the media) and they can exploit it to make the homosexual look even worse! When afterall, he is only human and is entitled to make mistakes. The case is massive because he is a famous person and a repeat offender, it has nothing to do with plugging portholes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2010 18:22:30 GMT 1
Don't think that is true, and a poor generalisation, being a botty basher has little bearing to the crime for what he has committed!! The Suns headlines about him are clearly homophobic, it is true. Many of straight celebs have done similar offences and nowhere near this much detail is focused on them. Can you give some details as to these straight celebs who constantly take drugs and drive but get away with it? I can think of straight celebrities who take drugs and are constantly lambasted in the press (eg Pete Doherty, Amy Winehouse etc) But hey, if you cant play the race card, then next best is the homophobic card. Actually isnt George Michael of Greek origin? So you could have played the race card as him being sent down is just another example of the racist Tories targeting immigrants
|
|
|
Post by keithyshrew25 on Sept 16, 2010 20:50:24 GMT 1
Not come across the expression 'devils advocate' before then? Thanks for your input Several times. Have always found it interchangable with 'talking s**te', strangely enough. I'm afraid I can't compete with such devastating wit
|
|
|
Post by hooverfoxhat on Sept 17, 2010 17:59:52 GMT 1
Apparently George is in the hospital prison wing after having had a chocolate bar forced up his bournville highway by fellow inmates, the doctor said it was an accident and no more than a careless wispa.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Sept 17, 2010 18:07:37 GMT 1
Several times. Have always found it interchangable with 'talking s**te', strangely enough. I'm afraid I can't compete with such devastating wit It's admirable when a man recognises his own limitations. Well done you
|
|