This sums up our justice system to the full - Page 2

Boeing Guy · 22-12-2009, 15:41

Just found this off one of the big two parties....

...We insist on individual responsibility for crime, and will attack the causes of crime by our measures to relieve social deprivation.

....We will relieve the police of unnecessary bureaucratic burdens to get more officers back on the beat.

....
We will implement an effective sentencing system for all the main offences to ensure greater consistency and stricter punishment for serious repeat offenders. The courts will have to spell out what each sentence really means in practice. The Court of Appeal will have a duty to lay down sentencing guidelines for all the main offences. The attorney general's power to appeal unduly lenient sentences will be extended.
The prison service now faces serious financial problems. We will audit the resources available, take proper ministerial responsibility for the service, and seek to ensure that prison regimes are constructive and require inmates to face up to their offending behaviour

....have forgotten the 'order' part of 'law and order'. We will tackle the unacceptable level of anti-social behaviour and crime on our streets. Our 'zero tolerance' approach will ensure that petty criminality among young offenders is seriously addressed.

Sounds good.. well it was the Labour parties manifesto back in 97, so bearing that in mind I don't think the Conservatives can do any worse on this front.

If you want the link its:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/election97/back...b/labman6.html

Eric · 22-12-2009, 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

The problem is we have to put up with the Guardian reading human rights brigade Wynonie, which is a pain in itself. I have often said that the current law books should be piled high on the green out side parliament and put to the torch, and replaced by new laws tailored for the 21st century not the middle ages. We may not like a lot the Yanks do but in a lot of cases they get their sentencing right, if a criminal gets life in the states,it means life. I often laugh at sentences give here, when they say somebody is given a life sentence and must serve a minimum of 18 years, so why call it life, when it quite obviously isn't. I also think that the word concurrently be deleted from the law books, if you commit 4 crimes and get six months on each count, to me you get 2 years end of

Are you trying to say that the laws you have now are medieaval

If this were the case, then you should be more than happy .... torture, whipping, burning at the stake ... oh, and let's not forget hanging, drawing and quartering, fun stuff

And what would 21st century punishments be like: twenty years of watching the best of Oprah, over and over and over.

? And you like the American attitude to punishment, yet fail to consider that they have a crime rate that you wouldn't really want: I mean, more murders in Detroit per annum than there are in the whole of the British Isles.

I still don't see any advantage in sacrificing human rights, so that some scumbag can spend a few more years behind bars.

There have to be other ways of dealing with the problem without going from one knee-jerk to another every time a particular nasty crime occurs. And I always notice in discussions like this one, that white collar crimes, and crimes against humanity like the US/UK unprovoked invasion of Iraq don't bring down the heat they deserve.

katex · 22-12-2009, 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

I often laugh at sentences give here, when they say somebody is given a life sentence and must serve a minimum of 18 years, so why call it life, when it quite obviously isn't.

What it actually means Jaysay is that it will be 18 years before the criminal is up for consideration of parole ... doesn't mean he will be let out after this time.

As for this case, I don't agree with what the victims did .. chasing him and then beating the pulp out of him, however, is disgraceful that the perpetrator has got away with this.

Wynonie Harris · 23-12-2009, 07:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Cameron has said he'll scrap it and introduce our own rights bill

This is the same Cameron who gave a "cast-iron promise" on holding a referendum on the European Constitution? Yeah, sure...

jaysay · 23-12-2009, 08:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

This is the same Cameron who gave a "cast-iron promise" on holding a referendum on the European Constitution? Yeah, sure... :roll eyes:

As I said at the time what would have been the point, when the Constitution had been ratified, just meaningless posturing and a waste of money, just to find out what we already know, namely that the majority of British people woUld have rejected it. These referendums cost money, why waste it when we are already deep in the mucky stuff

Wynonie Harris · 23-12-2009, 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

As I said at the time what would have been the point, when the Constitution had been ratified, just meaningless posturing and a waste of money, just to find out what we already know, namely that the majority of British people woUld have rejected it. These referendums cost money, why waste it when we are already deep in the mucky stuff

That's strange...when he made this "cast-iron promise" I don't remember him putting any qualifications on it. Doubtless, there'll be reasons why we can't leave European Human Rights Act, either, which we'll only discover that when he gets into power.

The real reason why he doesn't want a referendum is that the inevitable rejection would then lead on to more general questions about whether we should leave the EU altogether and Cameron desperately wants to avoid that.

As for the cost, a mere drop in the ocean compared to the £14 billion we'll be handing over to Brussels next year!

cashman · 23-12-2009, 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

As I said at the time what would have been the point, when the Constitution had been ratified, just meaningless posturing and a waste of money, just to find out what we already know, namely that the majority of British people woUld have rejected it. These referendums cost money, why waste it when we are already deep in the mucky stuff

No matter what ya said at the time yer beloved leader Did Not,seems to me if labour cock up, quite a few socialists slag em off, yet when the Torys do, ya just deflect away from saying so, which to me proves me owd saying = Put a Pig in a Blue Rosette, ya will support it.

jaysay · 23-12-2009, 09:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

No matter what ya said at the time yer beloved leader Did Not,seems to me if labour cock up, quite a few socialists slag em off, yet when the Torys do, ya just deflect away from saying so, which to me proves me owd saying = Put a Pig in a Blue Rosette, ya will support it.

You may want to take that back cashy, in the near future

cashman · 23-12-2009, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

You may want to take that back cashy, in the near future

Why are ya voting Labour?

jaysay · 23-12-2009, 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

Why are ya voting Labour?

Wash your mouth out wi soapy water

Wynonie Harris · 23-12-2009, 11:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Wash your mouth out wi soapy water

...don't tell me, you're voting UKIP.

accyman · 23-12-2009, 12:40

teh law does protect the house owner you can beat the snot out of somone if you feel your life is in danger in your home but once you leave your house and chase down the attacker you are no longer in fear for your life you are chasing down and seeking retribution.

not saying i agree that he should have gone to prison but he should have beat teh attacker on his property or dragged him back to his property and claimed he never made it to teh street and all teh attacking happened in his home.

i am 100% behind anyone who gets teh better of a burgular or worse but the moment he gave chase the fear for his life excuse went out the window

Neil · 23-12-2009, 15:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

Are you trying to say that the laws you have now are medieaval

If this were the case, then you should be more than happy .... torture, whipping, burning at the stake ... oh, and let's not forget hanging, drawing and quartering, fun stuff

That is not punishment, just a good night out with a friendly girl

jaysay · 23-12-2009, 15:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

...don't tell me, you're voting UKIP.

Same advice I gave cashy, Wynonie

Boeing Guy · 23-12-2009, 15:39

Interesting, knocking a party that has yet to come into power. the current crop of idiots have had 12 years, they have screwed the NHS/ Education/ Pensioners/ Working people/ took us into a war under false pretences/ the transport system/ put us in Eurpoe without the promised referendum, and it;s all Maggies/ Ted Heaths, John Majors, Boris's fault*

Insane......

* Delete where appropriate