egafd.com

Thank you, Nostradamus. Lacking the ability to see into the future myself, I'll wait for the trial and the sentencing.

Wall carac, these things (leninent sentences for teenage yobs) are all too common - I don't see why you should think it to be such an improbable fucking scenario.

I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong and see these low-lifes sent down for several decades - but I'd bet money on it not happening.

It's more than likely to happen---I just don't think complaining about the sentence when the arrested men haven't appeared in court yet is very helpful.

For what it's worth, if a person takes the life of another, and there are no extenuating circumstances, then they should go to prison for at least 20 years. The person can repent as much as they want, it doesn't change the fact that another life has been snuffed out, that there's a person-sized hole in the lives of their family and friends.

I'd like to see some kind of sense introduced to sentencing rules. Why should armed robbery carry a higher tariff than some murders? Why doesn't someone sort out the mess that is rape prosecution? The problems are deep and depressing---and not helped by the fact that prisoners' rights seem to get more attention than victims.

If I killed someone, or ruined someone's life, not only would I expect to be punished, I'd deserve to be punished. Even then, I don't think I could live with what I'd done (might be wrong; we tend to be a rather resilient species, and capable of brushing our own faults and crimes under a mental carpet). But that's the result of having a conscience, and being able to think beyond myself. Why should we expect the morally-bereft to show similar feelings?

Re-introduce capital punishment for murder. There is huge public support for this measure. If the likes of Chakrabati and Mansfield believe they are right, why aren't the public given an opportunity to express their views in the form of a referendum?

I agree but labour wont do it.

Tories were once for it.warren zevon rip wrote:

> steve56 wrote:
>
> > I agree but labour wont do it.
>
> No party will, for the basic reasons outlined above (flat
> view).
>
>

warren zevon rip wrote:

> 1) So what? There is huge public support for buying the Sun,
> but it is still shit.

Sales have dropped dramatically over the past 10 years or so.

> A majority of adults supported the Iraq invasion.

Wrong!

> 2) Murder is murder,

Although this government, and previous administrations, have changed the law on murder in order to massage the actual figures.

> or by a legally sanctioned state executioner.

Wrong again. Therefore to take this point to it's ultimate conculsion you would argue that medical staff who perform abortions are murderers?

> governments should be more rational than some Buckfasted out of
> their skulls yobs.

It only happens by accident that government policies equate to rational decisions.

> 3) Given that many convictions for murder have turned out to be
> false (Guildford 4! The salt baby woman!) how would you propose
> compensating the innocent victims of a death penalty?

The instruments of detection have vastly improved since the abolition of capital punishment. E.g., the use of DNA, and if there were a DNA database of every person in the country it would assit in reducing errors.

> 4) Death sentences are no deterrent

Who mentioned 'deterrents'? What about justice for the victims?

> 5) Many murders are committed by mentally ill people.

If they can prove their are mentalist, then they could be excused capital punishment and have a life sentence imposed.

> 6) Executing people is much, much, more expensive than locking
> up people for real life.

How much does a gallows cost to build?

Evidence -see the USA!

The use of 'death row' in the US you mean?

> The House of Commons, elected to represent the public,

What rubbish! M.P.s only represent a tiny proportion of the populace - and they have a steadfast propensity to ignore public concerns.