Should the UK remain as a member of the EU?

I have to completely disagree.

That's just too easy.

It's like some discussions I've had with people over capital punishment, and I say "What about those who were wrongly convicted?". And they reply "Oh, we'd only kill the ones we're completely sure were guilty..."

As though life imprisonment for the ones we aren't 'completely sure of' is ok...

What ISIS is trying - and will fail - to destroy is everything that is good about us in the West - the rule of law, fairness, human rights, tolerance, freedom, etc etc.

We mustn't compromise on these things in the least, however tempting it may be at times. Once we do 'compromise', ISIS will have scored a moral and propaganda victory - they will have changed our constitution. And not for the better.

There's another more basic and practical reason we mustn't compromise on our ideals - imagine the ISIS spokesman saying "See?! It's one law for the French and one for suspected ISIS supporters..."

And that is precisely what they would say. And they'd be right to do so.

These guys are heinous, repulsive individuals - but they ain't 'stupid'.

 

Where do you stop? And who decides?

Whatever the crime, whoever the criminal - the law must be applied equally.

It simply must - or it's failed.

 

I didn't say the exceptions should only apply to terrorists.

 

No. The law has penalties to deliver. The penalties should match the severity of the crime.
I'm not talking about basic human rights(humane rights) I'm talking about privileges/choices/any nice stuff that deserving human beings get. I certainly think that a person that commits this kind of atrocity should NEVER have freedom again.
In your post above, this will be one of those occasions where there can be no question of guilt.

 

Nor did I.

And it doesn't matter to whom the laws apply anyways.

If they are all human beings the laws must be applied equally.

For the reasons I mentioned before:

1) We have to do what's morally right even when others do wrong against us - the whole idea is that we set the standards for our society, and not anyone else.
2) Where do you draw the next line once you start? Who will draw that line? Does this line flex with each new government in post? ('Cos it certainly would.)
3) If it's a terrorist offence we are dealing with, once you alter the requirements for a conviction - or alter the punishment given out - then they have won a victory; "See?! We told you so - they treat Muslims different from themselves!"

They will have changed our legal constitution - and won a victory.


A question: what should we do with that thug who so cruelly murdered Jo Cox? (And what does her husband wish? And what would she have wished?)

 

Sorry, I still think it's too simplistic to use the "Oh, I'm absolutely CERTAIN of their guilt in this one - so we can 'safely' cut to the chase and deprive this person of lots of stuff..." which is the same argument I've used against the death penalty above.

'Cos - however much you want to imagine it's as simple as this, there will be instances which are not quite as clear-cut. Where do you draw the line? And why?

Apart from making some people 'feel a bit better' about it - the crim will be treated more harshly - what is the actual point?

How does this serve a civilised society better?

 

Looks like the Turkish coup has failed...

 

If France decided to re-introduce capital punishment, specifically for murder, then the ISIS spokesman (yeah coz you just know they wouldn't accept a woman spokesperson) couldn't say "See?! It's one law for the French and one for suspected ISIS supporters." Because what they'd have to admit is that ISIS are murdering b'stards, who murder indiscriminately.

 

The 'coup' couldn't have worked out better for Erdogan if he'd planned it himself.

 

Would you like France to reintroduce capital punishment?

(And do you really think the ISIS spokesman (you are right - it's the men wot rool in religious worlds, even RC and CofE) would be forced to admit they were 'murdering bar stewards'? I suspect not. They would say "Another martyr sitting with Mohammed!" - and a dozen new recruits would join.)

 

Perhaps the old goat does have Allah on his side...

 

Dunno about that. He's given secularism a good boot in the baws though.

 

Ataturk is spinning in his grave

 

"The Turkish government is considering restoring the death penalty for those who attempted the coup, Mehmet Muezzinoglu, the deputy head of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has said."

 

Another backwards step for mankind.

And another reason why Turkey ain't gonna join the EU any time soon...

 

Turkey seems to be taking many backwards steps hence the coup attempt.

 

Innit time to admit that all these 'forward' steps ain't working?

 

Erdogan is trying to take Turkey from a secular state to a theological one, do you think that is a good idea?

 

No. Now thousands of judges have been sacked. I wonder who will replace them. Sharia courts?

 

What a *