Sign in to follow this  
Old Frightful

How many more chances?

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Correct. I'm all in favour of bringing back the death penalty, when its first degree murder.

There is a problem today in British society with these murderers taking taxpayers money.

The British people should have a referendum on bringing back the death penalty just like they did brexit.

So in this specific case you would be in favour of the execution of two ten year old boys?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Phil said:

Kayakman, yes he probably is incurable I would guess, note the guess, I’m not a psychologist.

But I still don’t see how we, as a self proclaimed civilised society can rationally execute children, no matter how heinous their crimes or execute one of those same children now in adulthood for a crime which in another adult without his history would result in at worst a prison sentence. My view is that Venables will remain a grave threat and needs to be kept in a secure institution, probably indefinitely.

 

18 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Correct. I'm all in favour of bringing back the death penalty, when its first degree murder.

There is a problem today in British society with these murderers taking taxpayers money.

The British people should have a referendum on bringing back the death penalty just like they did brexit.

I agree and support your positions.

I think he was having me on, thats pretty clear to me but I think he is well intentioned (as so many are):

Think about what he said, he was a British Infanteer for ten years who doesn't agree with the killing of anyone, under any circumstance, even Adolf Hitler!  That just don't sound right to me...he was clearly having me on or you got BIG BIG problems in that country.

Of course no one is advocating the killing of children, rather the opposite.  The will of the people should be followed in a democracy, for good or bad, its not a perfect system: of course, come on!

 

Edited by Kayakman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Think about what he said, he was a British Infanteer for ten years who doesn't agree with the killing of anyone, under any circumstance, even Adolf Hitler!  That just don't sound right to me...he was clearly having me on or you got BIG BIG problems in that country."

 

And now he accuses me of being a Troll; bizarre.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Phil said:

So in this specific case you would be in favour of the execution of two ten year old boys?

You can't execute 2 ten year old boys, but what you can do is execute all murders over the age of 18 for first degree murder.

There has been a number of cases over the years where murderers have been realised and murdered again.

As my late father use to say "If you have a problem you have to eliminate it"

I'm sure a vast number of people who have had family members murdered would be in favour of it just like a vast majority of British people

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

You can't execute 2 ten year old boys, but what you can do is execute all murders over the age of 18 for first degree murder.

There has been a number of cases over the years where murderers have been realised and murdered again.

As my late father use to say "If you have a problem you have to eliminate it"

I'm sure a vast number of people who have had family members murdered would be in favour of it just like a vast majority of British people

And I’m sure the families of anyone executed and later proven to be innocent would have even more to say about it. 

Your argument is better targeted at locking murderes up and not releasing them.

Share this post


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

"Think about what he said, he was a British Infanteer for ten years who doesn't agree with the killing of anyone, under any circumstance, even Adolf Hitler!  That just don't sound right to me...he was clearly having me on or you got BIG BIG problems in that country."

 

And now he accuses me of being a Troll; bizarre.

 

We have BIG problems because I’d prefer to see a war criminal in prison rather than executed.

ok

tell me again how well it works in Texas 

Share this post


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

I'm not quite sure what you mean but there are thousands upon thousands of examples where harsh punishments have worked to correct/modify behaviour.   It is an accepted pillar in law and has been proven, conclusively, in the field of behavioural science...it is a truth.

How harsh should punishments be, is there a limit? 

There was a time when you could be executed for stealing a sheep. Is that what you want?

How harsh a punishment should Thompson and Venables have received?

I'm all in favour of locking people up. The law abiding public need protection from those who are a danger to them. Although there are thousands of people in prison who shouldn't be. In the UK, conditions in prison have deteriorated drastically, yet at the same time they are becoming more overcrowded, surely the opposite should be the case if you are correct.

There are many reasons that people who commit crimes reoffend. Your one dimensional approach, and unquantified 'solution' means nothing. 

Share this post


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

We have BIG problems because I’d prefer to see a war criminal in prison rather than executed.

ok

tell me again how well it works in Texas 

I like to stick to the facts and the truth, I've checked and I think these ones put forward by you are probably incorrect:

"A defendant's previous record is not brought up in UK courts.

Victim impact statements are read out following the verdict not before,"

Listen, I know you are well intentioned, but sometimes you just have to accept the truth, and that requires hard actions some time...now I'm sure you are just trolling me, and now starting the name calling because you just won't admit your position is a false belief to make you feel good...its tough I know but all the best to you, nothing personal.

And by the way, If I could have shot Hitler I would have blown his skull off his shoulders all the way to Planet Claire...and not lost a seconds  sleep over it either.   There are wolves and there are sheep.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I like to stick to the facts and the truth, I've checked and I think these ones put forward by you are probably incorrect:

"A defendant's previous record is not brought up in UK courts.

Victim impact statements are read out following the verdict not before,"

Listen, I know you are well intentioned, but sometimes you just have to accept the truth, and that requires hard actions some time...now I'm sure you are just trolling me, and now starting the name calling because you just won't admit your position is a false belief to make you feel good...its tough I know but all the best to you, nothing personal.

And by the way, If I could have shot Hitler I would have blown his skull off his shoulders all the way to Planet Claire...and not lost a seconds  sleep over it either.   There are wolves and there are sheep.

Who the hell do you think you are telling people what they should think? 

People can decide for themselves what they think the truth is. You'd think you were the only person to have lived any kind of life, had any kind of experience, have any judgement or know anything. People have responded to your point of view in an informed and respectful way, even though they strongly disagree with you. It seems you are incapable of doing the same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

How harsh should punishments be, is there a limit? 

There was a time when you could be executed for stealing a sheep. Is that what you want?

How harsh a punishment should Thompson and Venables have received?

I'm all in favour of locking people up. The law abiding public need protection from those who are a danger to them. Although there are thousands of people in prison who shouldn't be. In the UK, conditions in prison have deteriorated drastically, yet at the same time they are becoming more overcrowded, surely the opposite should be the case if you are correct.

There are many reasons that people who commit crimes reoffend. Your one dimensional approach, and unquantified 'solution' means nothing. 

The sentencing should be objective in in proportion to the severity of the crime(s).

No one wants to kill someone for killing a sheep...I'm against it.

Did the boys actually receive any punishment...you assume they have?

I'm not in favor of just locking people up (and throwing away the key as some on here suggest), I don't know if there are thousands  in jail who should not be (could very well be true), but the reverse could also be true (and probably is) that there are tens of thousands who commit offences and are never caught and walking around free. ...

Prison construction comes from the general tax revenue, so money is a factor, its a reality of life.  How these resources are utilzied is a more a question of public policy/priorities.

There are many reasons people reoffend, and my approach is certainly not one dimensional and as I said we need a fluid modern updated response to anti social behaviours...I think the thing that set some off is my belief that convicted murderers who re offend, show a probability of reoffendeing and/or fail to comply with terms should suffer strong harsh punishment, and, in the case of recurring first degree child murder, the highest form of punishment.

Every road has an end.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Who the hell do you think you are telling people what they should think? 

People can decide for themselves what they think the truth is. You'd think you were the only person to have lived any kind of life, had any kind of experience, have any judgement or know anything. People have responded to your point of view in an informed and respectful way, even though they strongly disagree with you. It seems you are incapable of doing the same.

Some truths are not subjective.

I haven't told anyone what to think...but others certainly don't have a problem telling me....lashing out is a defence mechanism....and used by those who are weak in their position.

I'm not required to modify my beliefs because you don't agree with them unless you can present a logical reasoning and then I am more than willing to change my position (I really am).

If you want to believe that if I drop a hammer on a distant planet with gravity it will not fall to the ground go ahead...but don't put forward that your belief is an actual fact or even a possibility ...it will fall every time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yes, indeed! As Marcus Aurelius write in his Meditations on the sham trial of Socrates: "Vermin of another sort the Eleven!"

-your are correct...history is littered with such examples!

A deeply wise and compassionate man.  Who also led the persucution of Christians for their beliefs.  The world is complex.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The sentencing should be objective in in proportion to the severity of the crime(s).

No one wants to kill someone for killing a sheep...I'm against it.

Did the boys actually receive any punishment...you assume they have?

I'm not in favor of just locking people up (and throwing away the key as some on here suggest), I don't know if there are thousands  in jail who should not be (could very well be true), but the reverse could also be true (and probably is) that there are tens of thousands who commit offences and are never caught and walking around free. ...

Prison construction comes from the general tax revenue, so money is a factor, its a reality of life.  How these resources are utilzied is a more a question of public policy/priorities.

There are many reasons people reoffend, and my approach is certainly not one dimensional and as I said we need a fluid modern updated response to anti social behaviours...I think the thing that set some off is my belief that convicted murderers who re offend, show a probability of reoffendeing and/or fail to comply with terms should suffer strong harsh punishment, and, in the case of recurring first degree child murder, the highest form of punishment.

Every road has an end.

There are many not in prison who should be; drink drivers, drivers who kill and main people through incompetence or recklessness for instance.

Convicted murderers who reoffend whatever the offence they commit are automatically returned to prison. It is extremely rare for a convicted murderer to murder again. 

You have failed to state what the severity of punishment should be and what form that punishment should take.

You tend to invoke shooting people quite a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

A deeply wise and compassionate man.  Who also led the persucution of Christians for their beliefs.  The world is complex.

It was  a hard political decision for him at the time and he did what he had to do to try and hold everything together...sometimes as a leader you got to make the tough choices...I think 'led' is a little harsh...he did give sanction to some laws though... never shirked his administrative responsibilities but he was not perfect....the persecution was probably historically blown out of proportion due to following events/vested interest writings.

The world is indeed complex...but some things/decisions are very simple.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Some truths are not subjective.

I haven't told anyone what to think...but others certainly don't have a problem telling me....lashing out is a defence mechanism....and used by those who are weak in their position.

I'm not required to modify my beliefs because you don't agree with them unless you can present a logical reasoning and then I am more than willing to change my position (I really am).

If you want to believe that if I drop a hammer on a distant planet with gravity it will not fall to the ground go ahead...but don't put forward that your belief is an actual fact or even a possibility ...it will fall every time.

Yes you have. You have decided what the truth is and told people to accept it.

You can belief what you like and you are free to express those beliefs within the terms and conditions of the forum. Nobody has remotely suggested that you shouldn't. 

Share this post


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

 

I agree and support your positions.

I think he was having me on, thats pretty clear to me but I think he is well intentioned (as so many are):

Think about what he said, he was a British Infanteer for ten years who doesn't agree with the killing of anyone, under any circumstance, even Adolf Hitler!  That just don't sound right to me...he was clearly having me on or you got BIG BIG problems in that country.

Of course no one is advocating the killing of children, rather the opposite.  The will of the people should be followed in a democracy, for good or bad, its not a perfect system: of course, come on!

 

I am ex-British army as well, I served in war zones and did my bit.  Just my personal experience but I think you'll find more pacifists among ex-squaddies than among the general civilian population.  Admittedly, many of us are Theodore Roosevelt type pacifists of speaking softly but carrying a big stick...

I can't see any reason why anyone would commit murder in cold blood and not be mentally ill or damaged in some fashion or other.  Essentially, killing murderers is killing ill people.  Plus, there's been too many injustices over the years for me to tolerate the death penalty.

Share this post


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

There are many not in prison who should be; drink drivers, drivers who kill and main people through incompetence or recklessness for instance.

Convicted murderers who reoffend whatever the offence they commit are automatically returned to prison. It is extremely rare for a convicted murderer to murder again. 

You have failed to state what the severity of punishment should be and what form that punishment should take.

You tend to invoke shooting people quite a lot.

The severity of the punishment should be fluid in nature and in direct correlation to the offence(s).   In coming to a sentence multiple factors should be taken into consideration, e.g. previous offences, public safety, etc.

Its fluid, so each case deserves to be individually judged so that the punishment fits the crime like a hand fits a glove.

It is important that everyone receives a fair and impartial hearing....there is also the appeal process which is important in every case, in the interests of justice, since an error may have been made (because its not always black and white).

I am not a bleeding heart, but I am fair minded logical person who is not afraid to enact a verdict...it is my duty as a law abiding citizen to follow the law(s).

If I find the law is immoral or unjust (against my beliefs)  I can follow the democratic process to try to change it in a peaceful manner.   Just ignoring the law because I don't think its right is not acceptable and has consequences...I don't cry and whine if I make such a decision, i accept my punishment like an adult.

Edited by Kayakman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ckn said:

I am ex-British army as well, I served in war zones and did my bit.  Just my personal experience but I think you'll find more pacifists among ex-squaddies than among the general civilian population.  Admittedly, many of us are Theodore Roosevelt type pacifists of speaking softly but carrying a big stick...

I can't see any reason why anyone would commit murder in cold blood and not be mentally ill or damaged in some fashion or other.  Essentially, killing murderers is killing ill people.  Plus, there's been too many injustices over the years for me to tolerate the death penalty.

I hear you and respect your opinion, although some of my own opinions may be different than yours.

I am not an advocate of violence, rather justice.

Sometimes we have to make hard decisions, such as the case in question, to protect defenceless children from future harm....it is our social collective responsibility.

Share this post


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

The severity of the punishment should be fluid in nature and in direct correlation to the offence(s).   In coming to a sentence multiple factors should be taken into consideration, e.g. previous offences, public safety, etc.

Its fluid, so each case deserves to be individually judged so that the punishment fits the crime like a hand fits a glove.

It is important that everyone receives a fair and impartial hearing....there is also the appeal process which is important in every case, in the interests of justice, since an error may have been made (because its not always black and white).

I am not a bleeding heart, but I am fair minded logical person who and not afraid to enact a verdict...it is my duty as a law abiding citizen to follow the law(s).

If I find the law is immoral or unjust (against my beliefs)  I can follow the democratic process to try to change it in a peaceful manner.   Just ignoring the law because I don't think its right is not acceptable and has consequences...I don't cry and whine if I make such a decision, i accept my punishment like an adult.

this already happens

this already happens

this already happens

you have said nothing.

 

by the way, the boys were punished. they were locked up in secure accommodation. what would you have had happen to them?

Edited by Tongs ya bas

Share this post


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

I hear you and respect your opinion, although some of my own opinions may be different than yours.

I am not an advocate of violence, rather justice.

Sometimes we have to make hard decisions, such as the case in question, to protect defenceless children from future harm....it is our social collective responsibility.

You still seem to be confusing vengeance with justice.

But still you won't tell us what in your opinion the decision should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tongs ya bas said:

this already happens

this already happens

this already happens

you have said nothing.

It doesn't happen sometimes, and I believe the case in question is such an example.

I've said alot (some think too much) and I stand by what I've said.  I believe it to be the truth...the hard stone cold truth of the matter.  If it doesn't sit well with you, maybe you should reassess your position....unless there is some error in my logic?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your perception of the truth.... that's what you believe.

Others may perceive differently. Other may view "the truth" differently.

What you may perceive to be the truth I may not

Share this post


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

You still seem to be confusing vengeance with justice.

But still you won't tell us what in your opinion the decision should be.

I've been very clear and I have voiced my opinion as best I can...if it doesn't sit well with you, well thats another matter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I like to stick to the facts and the truth, I've checked and I think these ones put forward by you are probably incorrect:

"A defendant's previous record is not brought up in UK courts.

Victim impact statements are read out following the verdict not before,"

Listen, I know you are well intentioned, but sometimes you just have to accept the truth, and that requires hard actions some time...now I'm sure you are just trolling me, and now starting the name calling because you just won't admit your position is a false belief to make you feel good...its tough I know but all the best to you, nothing personal.

And by the way, If I could have shot Hitler I would have blown his skull off his shoulders all the way to Planet Claire...and not lost a seconds  sleep over it either.   There are wolves and there are sheep.

http://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/disclosure-previous-convictions-court-proceedings/

It can be done but in general not.

Thanks for letting us know how much you hate Hitler. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Robin Evans said:

Your perception of the truth.... that's what you believe.

Others may perceive differently. Other may view "the truth" differently.

What you may perceive to be the truth I may not

Correct, but I've used hard logic to arrive at my point, rather than some convoluted emotional response.

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.