Justice

[Duncan Berry]

Reading Robbo's post about end's justifying the means about not throwing an innocent infront of a train as opposed to throwing a conviceted murderer infront got me thinking.

In the this country is there really justice?
Is a life sentence reasonable for taking a life?
Should the death penalty still be enforced?
Once you have done your time should you be treated equally or forever treated as a criminal?

 

[Codiak]

Well most of those who offend, get locked up and then go on to re-offend. They are just an endless cost / drain on society.

Im sure if you ask one of the do-gooders then prison is more than enough, if you ask an grieving family then im sure you will get a different answer.

 

[Duncan Berry]

Well most of those who offend, get locked up and then go on to re-offend. They are just an endless cost / drain on society.

true 55% i think they said on T.V but is that however due to society shunning them and thus forced back into a life of crime (eg. unable to get a job due to a record) or they are just bad eggs.
Of course there are going to be both on either side and alot in the middle, what i was getting at was our society as "do we the general public think justice is served and fair in our land"

 

[Smally85]

I'm a firm believer in giving someone a second chance once they have served their time. Not sure on how "spent" and "unspent" convictions work, but I'm under the impression that once your conviction is "spent" it no longer has to be declared to an employeer.

The problem with the statement above is twofold, firstly the severity of the punishment when set against the crime committed always seems to be lacking. Life no longer means life, and whilst I can understand that the government tries to make space in the prisons (and thus save money) by sending the inmates off on rehabilitation or freeing them for good behaviour, this means the victims of crime find themselves short changed.
Secondly, its clear that the deterent factor of being sent to prison is no longer sufficient to stop people breaking the law. Short prison terms make the risk worthwhile taking, and lets face it, when you are in prison life isn't exactly tough anymore. Prisoners should be made to work full time whilst inside, they should have their liberties restricted, i.e. no TV, sharing cells, limited access to recreation. Maybe then justice would be closer to what is should be.

The death penalty is another kettle of fish. The problem with the death penalty is the clear possibility for misscarriages of justice. Clearly this can be avoided by only applying the death penalty when the murder is proven beyond ALL doubt. If my rusty law studies serve me correctly, at present the burden of proof for a concviction currently only stands as beyond all reasonable doubt.
When you look at the process in the US where it takes decades to finally execute the convicted person, you've got to wonder why it takes so long. Surely if he is guilty then it should be cut and dried, why does it take so many appeals and so many years to decide to go ahead with it. Sure allow an appeals process, but it needs to be fastracked, otherwise you are essentially torturing the person who may or may not be about to be executed. That torture isn't part of the sentence.

2p.

 

[renie]

To be honest the UK's justice system is a joke, if you get a 4 year sentance u serve 2 on good behaviuor, life isn't life etc etc.

i know someone who got 4 years for fraud, he sevred 18months and spent most of this time in prison playin on a playstation and watching TV !! real punishment !!

Prisons should be Tough! and somewhere you really dont want to go, i know some are worse than others but most are like holiday camps, what sort of message are we giving out? were almost welcoming crime..

The death penalty is a tough call but, for instances like Murder etc where the offender purposely killed, then its an eye for an eye i my books.

 

[Smally85]

To be honest the UK's justice system is a joke, if you get a 4 year sentance u serve 2 on good behaviuor, life isn't life etc etc.

i know someone who got 4 years for fraud, he sevred 18months and spent most of this time in prison playin on a playstation and watching TV !! real punishment !!

Prisons should be Tough! and somewhere you really dont want to go, i know some are worse than others but most are like holiday camps, what sort of message are we giving out? were almost welcoming crime..

The death penalty is a tough call but, for instances like Murder etc where the offender purposely killed, then its an eye for an eye i my books.

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

 

[Missy-Q]

Prison-time can be tough or easy, depending on how good looking you are.

 

[Tom Allen]

A life sentence should mean life, you're locked up until you die, and that gives you plenty of time to appeal. Unfortunately that give the inmate no reason to behave when in prison, so basically if it cant get any worse, he'll carry on killing.

Serving half the time on a given sentence is a double edged sword. it gives the prisons more room and offers the inmate a dangled carrot. Basically if he behaves he can get out at half the term, but if he misbehaves he looses part of the free half and serves more time.

 

[no-infernomark]

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind

im glad you quoted Gandhi


i speak as someone who has spent 7 years as an officer in her majesty's pleasure.

firstly i shall make it clear that i do agree our justice system is severely flawed, even beyond the reasons stated above, there is a lot more that shouldnt be happening to reduce re-offending but does.

a life sentence is not a life sentence however they are governed by life. when an inmate gets life they get 99 years with a tariff before eligible for parole. now when and if this person reaches this point they may or may not be released. if it is the case that they do get released, while they draw breath they are watched and checked up on and if they are even suspected of committing a further offence whether it is shoplifting, speeding or much more serious crimes then they are returned to prison until the parole board say release him, they only become free when they no longer walk this earth. like Sir Allen said, if no reason to survive why continue on being good. might aswell create carnage and destroy more peoples lives. dangle a thread of hope upon release and compliance is bound.

The whole point of punishment is taking away their liberty. not being able to go paintballing or play on the xbox would destroy me. however most crime is drug related so for dealers they earn four times the street value of drugs, even if they have been smuggled in the arse of a mule. nice huh. more occupational hazard.

Our prison system is ruled by Human rights but agreeably these rights are in effect more in prison than out of prison. in every crime there is a victim and if their is a victim their rights have been broke. we should not then give all human rights to criminals only the right to life. We all have this but by taking away this right we are then hypocrites. The police and government are already the biggest gangsters going we do not to re-enforce this by executing people because the civil unrest would be catastrophic and also in humane.

For me, i have seen countless times how easy it is to land your self in prison, would you want to be treated with a certain amount of respect, would you want to be disrespected in front of family when they visit, by being away from family with no control over how they are coping and no control over your own lives with the simplest of tasks like eating then is it really that easy? we could all easily end up here.

liberty is defined as "The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life." by being placed in prison is the punishment.

the death penalty is in no way a good thing to me, a victim of rape has to live with what happened for life so why offer an easy way out. let them live with the guilt and knowledge that from here on out its a big brother life they will lead.

 

[Robbo]

I've read the post above a few times now and every time I read it, the more I wanna know what you must be on to explain what you've written ..... I'll start at the end of your post and for the sake of my sanity, I'll only address this one point because I run a serious risk of suffering from interminable brain damage.

You wrote the following:-

the death penalty is in no way a good thing to me, a victim of rape has to live with what happened for life so why offer an easy way out. let them live with the guilt and knowledge that from here on out its a big brother life they will lead.

Your statement above is based upon the notion of a person feeling some form of guilt and those feelings of remorse proving to be a cogent argument against the death penalty.

Now, I'm assuming here you made a mistake when talking about the victim of rape, the victim of rape being the person who was raped ..... I think you mean the rapist don't you?
If you didn't then why are you talking about the victim of rape living with the guilt and being monitored?
Let's move on and assume you meant the rapist here .... OK, I'm afraid while the vast majorities of rapists may say they are sorry thus inferring they have a degree of guilt, the truth is, they don't give a flying fuhk and if you think that letting them off and believing the guilt of what they have done is sufficient punishment then let's hope to God you are not put in charge of any prisons.
And before you say, 'what the fuhk do you know Robbo'? I have been around many criminals for one reason or another and I've also been banged up and so I know what I'm talking about.
Psychopathic criminals do not feel guilt, it is not part of their make-up and so we really do need to incarcerate people not only to protect society but also to punish criminals .. jail term acts as a deterrent, all that's in question when pondering the notion of deterrence is, to what degree does it deter?