Sign in to follow this  
Old Frightful

How many more chances?

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

Simple question requesting simple answer. Did the 11 years old not realise they were killing someone?

Quite possibly not 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't had any opportunities to read how much they understood about anything.

I suspect they did but lacked capacity to understand the enormity of their action and the consequences/impact their actions had on others.

This doesn't excuse their behaviour or mitigate justice..... but may provide some insight into how we protect society in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

Sometimes you have to admit reality, wipe the chalkboard clean with a damp cloth and start all over again.  Its the hard reality of nature.

I know its hard to do, but sometimes you just have to admit defeat, cut your losses and start fresh.

One time I was kayaking with my daughter, landed on an isolated beach and we found about 20 beautiful loons, all fully developed and they were all in various forms of dying...it was sad to watch them suffer...best I could figure it was botulism from the water turning over and they were doomed.  My daughter was mortified since I had always exposed her to wild nature from the very start and she loves the wilderness and its creatures

I explained to my young daughter our responsibility, as I prepared the clubs from local trees, and then I killed each one individually by bashing in the backs of their necks (most humane way to bring death to an animal), and breaking their necks...such a majestic bird, it was sort of sad.  My daughter had trouble with it so I explained (it was a very important teachable moment as a parent)....

...leaving the dying birds there would have been quicker and easier but the poor loons would have suffered for hours and days, slowly starving to death and incapacitated,  just to placate her conscience and make her feel better...you have to own up to your responsibilities, you have a moral duty to perform the hard tasks to help the other animals though.

This guy is finished, he has been given more than enough chances, explain why you keep him around, ad nauseam, to suffer,  as you tell his next victims and why it was a good idea at the time....

Sometimes you just gotta bite that bullet for the good of everyone involved...its the way of things....and its our duty to society as good citizens.

If you are talking about the harsh reality of nature, the human race would have no compassion, caring, support for the weak and old: such people would be left to die.

Human society is different.

The philosophical and ethical issues regarding how we deal with people who break society's rules and mores and who's behaviour causes damage to their fellow humans go a bit beyond the call of the wild.

Thompson and Venables were infants when they committed this atrocity. Even if you believe in capital punishment, then it is difficult to argue in favour of executing two ten year olds.

One of them has been charged with looking at pornographic images of minors. This is a serious offence. Are you saying it should carry a capital sentence? This disturbed man if he's been found guilty should be locked up. He should be locked up for this offence and for breaching the conditions of his licence.

Please bear in mind that the subject of capital punishment has been discussed many times on here already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mumby Magic said:

Simple question requesting simple answer. Did the 11 years old not realise they were killing someone?

Nobody, apart from the professionals dealing with them can possibly know. They were ten year old infants. The principles of child development would strongly suggest not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

 

Sometimes you just gotta bite that bullet for the good of everyone involved...its the way of things....and its our duty to society as good citizens.

 

Never in my name, never on my watch.

It is a duty to protect all, that includes those that are a danger to others and themselves.

Killing a killer makes you a killer, should you therefore be killed and who kills you then becomes a killer.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Padge said:

Killing a killer makes you a killer, should you therefore be killed and who kills you then becomes a killer.

This is obviously a very difficult subject, however...

Venables and Thompson killed James Bulger, a victim who surely could not possibly be any more innocent.

If somebody were to put Thompson or, especially, Venables to death, how on Earth could you class the two killings as being of parity?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Old Frightful said:

how on Earth could you class the two killings as being of parity?

 

Sane people killing insane people is probably, bizarrely, the worse of the two.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

This is obviously a very difficult subject, however...

Venables and Thompson killed James Bulger, a victim who surely could not possibly be any more innocent.

If somebody were to put Thompson or, especially, Venables to death, how on Earth could you class the two killings as being of parity?

 

They were children when the killings took place. Are you advocating killing children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only the experts involved in the case know their full backgrounds when they killed the other small child. 

For me, the feral reaction of the community after the young children were caught was also very disturbing. 

The whole package, the murder and reaction, showed signs of a sick community.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crime reflects personality, it doesn't matter what the age of the offender is. They committed a very grown up crime that was pre meditated, they should never have been let out. You cannot rehabilitate a person who was not habilitated to begin with. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, johnmatrix said:

Crime reflects personality, it doesn't matter what the age of the offender is. They committed a very grown up crime that was pre meditated, they should never have been let out. You cannot rehabilitate a person who was not habilitated to begin with. 

 

2 hours ago, Padge said:

Never in my name, never on my watch.

It is a duty to protect all, that includes those that are a danger to others and themselves.

Killing a killer makes you a killer, should you therefore be killed and who kills you then becomes a killer.

Dealing with death is very difficult for some people but it is a reality of life, part of the circle of life. Death will always occur and you can't just wish it away; its real.

Sometimes it is actually merciful to enact death; its true.

Slowly, society is starting to come to grips with this (we have mercy killing in Canada;its legal), but there is still alot of controversy.

Its a touchy subject; but the path forward in the case of this one is a no brainer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

 

Dealing with death is very difficult for some people but it is a reality of life, part of the circle of life. Death will always occur and you can't just wish it away; its real.

Sometimes it is actually merciful to enact death; its true.

Slowly, society is starting to come to grips with this (we have mercy killing in Canada;its legal), but there is still alot of controversy.

Its a touchy subject; but the path forward in the case of this one is a no brainer. 

I am struggling to put this politely, but I will do my best.

That is utter b0ll0cks.

Yeah that is as polite as I can make it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

 

Dealing with death is very difficult for some people but it is a reality of life, part of the circle of life. Death will always occur and you can't just wish it away; its real.

Sometimes it is actually merciful to enact death; its true.

Slowly, society is starting to come to grips with this (we have mercy killing in Canada;its legal), but there is still alot of controversy.

Its a touchy subject; but the path forward in the case of this one is a no brainer. 

And what is that path?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Padge said:

Does Broadmoor still have a spare bed?

I'm sure Brady's bed is still warm

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shadow said:

They were children when the killings took place. Are you advocating killing children?

Of course not, apologies, I wasn't thinking very clearly when I posted what I did and shouldn't have involved Venables and Thompson in my argument.

As I said at the start of the thread, my view is perhaps it's time to lock him up and throw away the key.

I simply objected to the suggestion by Padge that somebody who performs a legal execution on a murderer of innocent(s) in a democratic country that voted for the death penalty should be in any way be compared to the person they put to death.

Stating that they are both killers is far too simplistic if you are forming an argument against the death penalty.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, johnmatrix said:

Crime reflects personality, it doesn't matter what the age of the offender is. They committed a very grown up crime that was pre meditated, they should never have been let out. You cannot rehabilitate a person who was not habilitated to begin with. 

You can actually. But not always. I used to do it for a living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kayakman said:

 

Dealing with death is very difficult for some people but it is a reality of life, part of the circle of life. Death will always occur and you can't just wish it away; its real.

Sometimes it is actually merciful to enact death; its true.

Slowly, society is starting to come to grips with this (we have mercy killing in Canada;its legal), but there is still alot of controversy.

Its a touchy subject; but the path forward in the case of this one is a no brainer. 

None of this remotely addresses the subject of the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shadow said:

And what is that path?

The path splits into three ways;

1) We become harsher,

2) We become more lenient,

3) We stay the same.

I believe, in this specific case, Path 1should be chosen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

The path splits into three ways;

1) We become harsher,

2) We become more lenient,

3) We stay the same.

I believe, in this specific case, Path 1should be chosen.

It has nothing to do with harshness or leniency and everything to do with appropriateness.

This man has committed two offence in this instances from what I can gather; viewed illegal pornographic images, violated the conditions of his release on license in doing so. There is a tariff in place for these offences. Disappointingly for you that tariff doesn't include the death penalty. It involves him going back to prison should he be found guilty, and rightly so.

As a small child he was involved in the commission of a vile and bizarre crime. Are you saying that as a ten year old he and his accomplice should have been executed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

It has nothing to do with harshness or leniency and everything to do with appropriateness.

This man has committed two offence in this instances from what I can gather; viewed illegal pornographic images, violated the conditions of his release on license in doing so. There is a tariff in place for these offences. Disappointingly for you that tariff doesn't include the death penalty. It involves him going back to prison should he be found guilty, and rightly so.

As a small child he was involved in the commission of a vile and bizarre crime. Are you saying that as a ten year old he and his accomplice should have been executed?

Not at all. Your assumption that he is automatically going back to prison if found guilty is not necessarily true, and people are found guilty all the time and serve no time....alternative measures and the like (this is factual). 

He is charged with the current crimes, not the previous ones, which were already adjudicated.

I believe in progressive discipline and therefore a harsher path should be chosen in this case.  The level and severity of the punishment is, of course by its very nature, debatable.

There is a very dangerous pattern of behaviour with this individual however and , I believe, the protection of the society at large should receive heavy weight...to protect the most vulnerable; our children.  It is our obligation as law abiding adults.

A convicted felon of the most heinous crime the following question is a fair one: "What steps has this individual made to become a law abiding citizen and full member of the society, has he changed himself (and I'm sure many individuals/organizations have worked with him in the past); this is his personal obligation, if he is not fulfilling his personal responsibilities to the community at large and willingly continues with his very troubling pattern of anti social behaviour, he could very possibly be incurable.  A logical argument can be made that wasting the valuable resources of the community on such a lost cost is an incorrect path, and those resources could be utilized for greater good elsewhere.

In this case the way forward should be harsh, very harsh indeed!; but I agree, there are no easy answers and it is problematic.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Not at all. Your assumption that he is automatically going back to prison if found guilty is not necessarily true, and people are found guilty all the time and serve no time....alternative measures and the like (this is factual). 

He is charged with the current crimes, not the previous ones, which were already adjudicated.

I believe in progressive discipline and therefore a harsher path should be chosen in this case.  The level and severity of the punishment is, of course by its very nature, debatable.

There is a very dangerous pattern of behaviour with this individual however and , I believe, the protection of the society at large should receive heavy weight...to protect the most vulnerable; our children.  It is our obligation as law abiding adults.

A convicted felon of the most heinous crime the following question is a fair one: "What steps has this individual made to become a law abiding citizen and full member of the society, has he changed himself (and I'm sure many individuals/organizations have worked with him in the past); this is his personal obligation, if he is not fulfilling his personal responsibilities to the community at large and willingly continues with his very troubling pattern of anti social behaviour, he could very possibly be incurable.  A logical argument can be made that wasting the valuable resources of the community on such a lost cost is an incorrect path, and those resources could be utilized for greater good elsewhere.

In this case the way forward should be harsh, very harsh indeed!; but I agree, there are no easy answers and it is problematic.

 

 

 

Are you familiar with the license/parole system in the UK? Are you familiar with the tariff for viewing child pornography? Although enables and Thompson were too young to receive an actual prison sentence, they were committed to secure provision, which will have had strict conditions should he reoffend, the fact that he has reoffended in this way is particularly significant.

If the issue revolves around the cost of locking people up, then you have opened up a very dangerous tableau.

Edited by Tongs ya bas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

Are you familiar with the license/parole system in the UK? Are you familiar with the tariff for viewing child pornography? Although enables and Thompson were too young to receive an actual prison sentence, they were committed to secure provision, which will have had strict conditions should he recorded, the fact that he has reoffended in this way is particularly significant.

If the issue revolves around the cost of locking people up, then you have opened up a very dangerous tableau.

No I am not familiar with the specific laws in the UK in this regard so I admit I am going a little blind here...but I think my guiding principles are true and just.  Other, stronger minds than mine, have espoused them in the past. 

I fully understand the concept that the initial crime had no mens rea because of the age (in Canada it is 12).  I see that the 'secure provision' and all the therapy worked really well!

My point is there are some success stories and these should be celebrated!  There are also abject failures and these should be investigated and changes made...sometimes.  I agree the fact that he has willingly reoffened is very significant! It makes not a little of the difference but the whole of the difference!

Although monetary costs are always present, it is not the issue at point. 

The issue at point is the specific question I asked, which you fail to address:

"What steps has this individual made to become a law abiding citizen and full member of the society, has he changed himself (and I'm sure many individuals/organizations have worked with him in the past); this is his personal obligation, if he is not fulfilling his personal responsibilities to the community at large and willingly continues with his very troubling pattern of anti social behaviour, he could very possibly be incurable."

-the moral principle, not money, is the main issue in question.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

No I am not familiar with the specific laws in the UK in this regard so I admit I am going a little blind here...but I think my guiding principles are true and just.  Other, stronger minds than mine, have espoused them in the past. 

 

And many have opposed them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

No I am not familiar with the specific laws in the UK in this regard so I admit I am going a little blind here...but I think my guiding principles are true and just.  Other, stronger minds than mine, have espoused them in the past. 

I fully understand the concept that the initial crime had no mens rea because of the age (in Canada it is 12).  I see that the 'secure provision' and all the therapy worked really well!

 

 

What are your views on the efficacy of said approach with Thompson...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.