NationStates Jolt Archive

Generally are we too harsh or too lenient? On one hand were considering buying prison ships to ease jail overcrowding, on the other rapists let out after 6 months.

Whats the general feeling?

I was actually thinking about posting a thread about the prison Briggs yesterday and how we must of fell through time to 1806

But anyways too harsh the whole retribution thing is a bit redundant if you ask me

I was actually thinking about posting a thread about the prison Briggs yesterday and how we must of fell through time to 1806

But anyways too harsh the whole retribution thing is a bit redundant if you ask me

When you are a victim of unwarranted assault, rape of violence then will you maintain the same opinion?

I personally feel we are too kind to idiots ("chavs" and "neds") on the street and we need to take stern and harsh action to remove them from society. Conscription seems better than prison to be honest for repeat offenders. Send them to Iraq and perhaps when its their lives being ruined they will accept the incompetence of their decision.

S'alright. Nothing more than that, really.

It's quite fair, and it stops people getting killed for breaking into peoples' houses, which I suppose is quite good.

When you are a victim of unwarranted assault, rape of violence then will you maintain the same opinion?

I personally feel we are too kind to idiots ("chavs" and "neds") on the street and we need to take stern and harsh action to remove them from society. Conscription seems better than prison to be honest for repeat offenders. Send them to Iraq and perhaps when its their lives being ruined they will accept the incompetence of their decision.
Neds are often victims of things massively outside of their own control, getting them shot in Iraq isn't going to change that at all.

Neds are often victims of things massively outside of their own control, getting them shot in Iraq isn't going to change that at all.

They are firstly human beings and all are aware of the basic laws of society. They make the decision to break them therefore they need to be punished. Simply accepting that "they can't help it." Only allows them to conduct such behaviour without penance.

The government needs to do what is best for society, and rehabilitative measures are not working. Remove them from society, but at the same time enforce military discipline.

When you are a victim of unwarranted assault, rape of violence then will you maintain the same opinion?

that would also make me biased

I personally feel we are too kind to idiots ("chavs" and "neds") on the street and we need to take stern and harsh action to remove them from society. Conscription seems better than prison to be honest for repeat offenders. Send them to Iraq and perhaps when its their lives being ruined they will accept the incompetence of their decision.

you want to teach criminals to kill :eek:

They are firstly human beings and all are aware of the basic laws of society. They make the decision to break them therefore they need to be punished. Simply accepting that "they can't help it." Only allows them to conduct such behaviour without penance.
They're only conducting said behaviour because they basically haven't got anything else to do. If you give neds, as you'll call them, something to actually do, then you don't get as much crime, because you're keeping them occupied and happy.

Maybe if some proper money was being spent on rectifying the situation, then it'd be solved. Currently we have people like you doing fuck all but moaning.
The government needs to do what is best for society, and rehabilitative measures are not working. Remove them from society, but at the same time enforce military discipline.
What's best 'for society' is not locking up or shipping the poor off to the Middle East, it's spending a bit more on helping the poor bastards in the council estates out. If they had a bit more money around, maybe they wouldn't steal so much, and if they had something to do, they wouldn't be on the streets.

you want to teach criminals to kill :eek:

They can already kill, we need to accept that and realise that we must enforce discipline upon them. It must be made clear how where and when they can use their lethal abilities. The military is fantastic at this, and hopefully it will also allow the conscripted to mature.

The military option gives people qualifications, a career and a focus which can help them once their service is up, helping to break the cycle.

The "You want to teach them how to kill" excuse is far too weak to be held as substantial. It's a scare mongering tactic based upon alienating public opinion.

They're only conducting said behaviour because they basically haven't got anything else to do. If you give neds, as you'll call them, something to actually do, then you don't get as much crime, because you're keeping them occupied and happy.

Maybe if some proper money was being spent on rectifying the situation, then it'd be solved. Currently we have people like you doing fuck all but moaning.

Oh please, I'm moaning because I was attacked on Friday night, by these people without "anything else to do." That is simply another weak excuse. There is plenty to do. They can get a job, go to school, go to the many recreational facilities that are free for the under 18's in Glasgow. Instead of simply walking up to someone like myself, grabbing me, and asking "What are you looking at?" Then proceeding to kick the shit out of me.

I hold no sympathy for such people, and last time I checked I was offering a reasonable solution to the problem and not moaning.

What's best 'for society' is not locking up or shipping the poor off to the Middle East, it's spending a bit more on helping the poor bastards in the council estates out. If they had a bit more money around, maybe they wouldn't steal so much, and if they had something to do, they wouldn't be on the streets.

Did you ever look to see how much it costs to train a soldier. It's a considerable invetement. Money does not solve problems shown by the scandelous shape of the National Health Service. You look at them as if their poor souls who need our help. They make choices, they choose to attack someone, they choose to randomly stab someone and they choose to do what they do. They know the laws of society and they choose to break them.

Now it's liberal attitudes such as yourself which leaves them practically invulnerable from prosecution. Being born in a disadvantaged state is hardly an excuse to begin assaulting and attacking innocent people.

Generally are we too harsh or too lenient? On one hand were considering buying prison ships to ease jail overcrowding, on the other rapists let out after 6 months.

Whats the general feeling?

Hey, dont worry. Our legal system is just like that!

Except for crime is really never solved. You hear of all those school shootings/stabbings? Bush talks about it for 5 minutes in a speech, and it's never mentioned again.

When you are a victim of unwarranted assault, rape of violence then will you maintain the same opinion?

I personally feel we are too kind to idiots ("chavs" and "neds") on the street and we need to take stern and harsh action to remove them from society. Conscription seems better than prison to be honest for repeat offenders. Send them to Iraq and perhaps when its their lives being ruined they will accept the incompetence of their decision.
Actually, what we need to do is stop the media (or just the Daily Mail) whipping up a storm about 'chavs'. There are some people who are actually chavs, but far too much 'information' disseminated through tv and press news is actually bollocks. It tars all young people with the same brush. In areas with few or no social provisions for teenagers, is it so surprising that groups of them will gather together on street corners. It's not necessarily their fault that other people are intimidated by them - in fact, at least some of the blame can be laid at the media's door, because they effectively tell people that they should be intimidated by groups of young people.

What we need to do is give these people something to do other than hang around on street corners or in parks. Some of them will still do this even when there's something else to do, but many of them do actually want to do something else. That would reduce crime far more than giving out ASBOs left right and centre.

I dont care about punishment as much as I do about harm reduction.

I dont know about everyone else, but it isnt fear of punishment that prevents me from committing crimes.

It doesnt make sense to approach crime from a punishment angle when punishment doesnt seem to be what prevents crime in most cases.

Punishment might well be one of the branches that a better approach includes, but it isnt the right starting point.

other rapists let out after 6 months.


Are you going to provide an example?

The day has come! Britain is going to fall fast, the government is now being told what to do by tabloid newspapers.

Since he can't provide an example of his central claim, this argument can be quietly dismissed.

Actually, what we need to do is stop the media (or just the Daily Mail) whipping up a storm about 'chavs'. There are some people who are actually chavs, but far too much 'information' disseminated through tv and press news is actually bollocks. It tars all young people with the same brush. In areas with few or no social provisions for teenagers, is it so surprising that groups of them will gather together on street corners. It's not necessarily their fault that other people are intimidated by them - in fact, at least some of the blame can be laid at the media's door, because they effectively tell people that they should be intimidated by groups of young people.

What we need to do is give these people something to do other than hang around on street corners or in parks. Some of them will still do this even when there's something else to do, but many of them do actually want to do something else. That would reduce crime far more than giving out ASBOs left right and centre.

Exactly - although I would still argue that we are perhaps a little too soft on the real offenders. Instead of a 'badge of honour' ASBO, a £500 fine for the parents should get them to reel little XYZ back into line.

And of course, reopen the closed Council pools, and other local facilities.

Generally are we too harsh or too lenient? On one hand were considering buying prison ships to ease jail overcrowding, on the other rapists let out after 6 months.

Whats the general feeling?

No prison ships, just send them to penal colonies in Australia. :D

Neds are often victims of things massively outside of their own control, getting them shot in Iraq isn't going to change that at all.

Being from the "other side of the pond" I have no idea, what a Ned is. However, if you are saying they are bad because they are "unprivileged" you are way off base. I do not believe that anyone’s ability to choose right over wrong is out of his or her control.

No offence, but if I was out in Iraq risking my life, I'd like to be surrounded by comrades that I could trust to watch my back, not convicted murderers, thieves and rapists who didn't choose to be there in the first place...

They can already kill, we need to accept that and realise that we must enforce discipline upon them. It must be made clear how where and when they can use their lethal abilities. The military is fantastic at this, and hopefully it will also allow the conscripted to mature.

The military option gives people qualifications, a career and a focus which can help them once their service is up, helping to break the cycle.

At one time, some judges in the US offered petty criminals a choice, jail or the Army. Many chose the Army and straightened their life out. I wouldn't be surprised if some judges are still doing that. Some things the military teaches are self discipline, self respect, and respect for authority, which is what a lot of these young people are lacking.

At one time, some judges in the US offered petty criminals a choice, jail or the Army. Many chose the Army and straightened their life out. I wouldn't be surprised if some judges are still doing that. Some things the military teaches are self discipline, self respect, and respect for authority, which is what a lot of these young people are lacking.

Nothing make me prouder to know that our country is being represented by criminals who haven't even served their time.

Conscription seems better than prison to be honest for repeat offenders. Send them to Iraq and perhaps when its their lives being ruined they will accept the incompetence of their decision.

Modern soldiers need to be motivated, trained on high tech equipment, and carry very expensive gear into battle. They also need to be disciplined. No first-world military wants conscripts, especially if they're criminals. Not to mention Iraq is guerilla warfare, mostly urban, and is not the type of environment where you shove a rifle into the hands of a draftee and tell them which direction to fire.

Also, being acquainted with over a dozen people who have served in Iraq, and having met about two dozen more in chance meetings, it's hardly a life ruining experience if you come back in one piece. And if you look at the statistics for US soldiers (have no clue about British ones, sorry), there's a less than 1% chance of getting killed. Out of the people I know who went over there, no one has suffered any major wounds and one guy died.

Nothing make me prouder to know that our country is being represented by criminals who haven't even served their time.

They stopped that practice in either the late 70s or early 80s. The Army is an all-volunteer force, and they don't want the problems associated with trying to teach conscripted criminals discipline and respect.

Nothing make me prouder to know that our country is being represented by criminals who haven't even served their time.

I said "at one time" and I also said "petty criminals." There are many petty criminals who never serve any time; it's called probation or community service. Unfortunately, many times these people re-offend where as those who did serve in the military were rehabilitated. I’m not sure if judges are still doing it or not but if it works why not?

Don't blame the justice system for the screwed-upness; it's the politicians to blame. They are reducing sentences and giving orders to judges not to jail unless absolutly necessary to cover up for the fact that they have not provided adequate prison space.

Then they jump in and interfere in an attempt to look 'tough', but end up tying up judges hands when they do want to impose tough sentences. Take that man who raped the three year old and was eligible for parole in just under six years. That wasn't a 'weak' judge, that was a Blunkett sentencing formula (18 years for the offence, minus a third for guilty plea, half for parole elibibility, minus time already spend on remand).

Welcome to Blair's Britain. If it costs, we ain't doing it.

Capital mother fucking punishment!!!
Life sentences that actually incarcerate for life!!!

And most of all, just privatise the prison service. Render prisoners of some use, and, provided a government regulatory body is in evidence, problem is solved.

It obviously depends on the crime whether we're too harsh or too lenient, as wellas it being subjective what ought to be punished more harshly. I consider it insane, for example, that you'll get virtually the same sentence as a rapist for selling magic mushrooms where it was completely legal to sell them as long as they were not "prepared" until June 2005.

getting back to the issue as the blessed chris has, the UK is far to lenient. I benefit from a duel citizenship and although the US is still a very messed up place to live, reading about rapist who continually get off early and go out and rape again blows my mind.

I agree with capital punishment, some may say the fear of punishment may not deter but that is BS. Not that I live my life saying, I'm not going to murder because I don't want the death sentence but a lot of neds might consider ending the fight at a beating rather than carrying out the murder if they new they were going to die for it.

Stricter enforcement, harsher sentences. It might not scare all people straight but it would for a good number of them.

getting back to the issue as the blessed chris has, the UK is far to lenient. I benefit from a duel citizenship and although the US is still a very messed up place to live, reading about rapist who continually get off early and go out and rape again blows my mind.


Can you demonstrate that?


I agree with capital punishment, some may say the fear of punishment may not deter but that is BS. Not that I live my life saying, I'm not going to murder because I don't want the death sentence but a lot of neds might consider ending the fight at a beating rather than carrying out the murder if they new they were going to die for it.

American murder rate is 14 times that of the UK with the death penelty. Still think that it scares people straight?

Don't blame the justice system for the screwed-upness; it's the politicians to blame. They are reducing sentences and giving orders to judges not to jail unless absolutly necessary to cover up for the fact that they have not provided adequate prison space.

Then they jump in and interfere in an attempt to look 'tough', but end up tying up judges hands when they do want to impose tough sentences. Take that man who raped the three year old and was eligible for parole in just under six years. That wasn't a 'weak' judge, that was a Blunkett sentencing formula (18 years for the offence, minus a third for guilty plea, half for parole elibibility, minus time already spend on remand).

Welcome to Blair's Britain. If it costs, we ain't doing it.

And like everything else it would be no different under the Tories. Or the Liberals. Or the Scottish/Welsh nationalists. Or anyone else, for that matter.

Are you going to provide an example?
I think there was one case or something and the Daily Mail went mental over it. And I mean actually one case. In exceptional circumstances.

I think there was one case or something and the Daily Mail went mental over it. And I mean actually one case. In exceptional circumstances.

Well the Daily mail is hardly a reptuible source. While it may have happened, I doubt they covered it in sufficent detail to explain it fully

Well the Daily mail is hardly a reptuible source. While it may have happened, I doubt they covered it in sufficent detail to explain it fully
Yes, I know full-well, I don't read it all, just mock those who do because it's such a piece of shit. An article on thet police having to get more variation in its ranks was headlined with :

"YOU CAN'T JOIN THE POLICE, YOU'RE A WHITE BRITISH MALE"

As if this was something of an outrage, that we needed more women and ethnic minorities in the police. Eugh...