Bet many on here would play the conscientious objector card if it came to dispensing corporal punishment to the far-rights poster boys Thomas Mair and Tommy Robinson, however.
Since you ask, a full job would be to finish him off. Bleeding heart do gooders seem to forget that he killed an innocent person. Criminals generally have stepped out of civilised society and have forfeited all the advantages of it. Why should law abiding citizens pay to look after people who have done dastardly crimes. Prison needs to be a place no-one wants to go back to, otherwise there's no incentive to go straight.
Needs to be a balance though. Prison needs to be tough, but it needs to prepare prisoners for return to the streets. I remember watching a few epsisodes of LockUp. That was full of young men serving life without parole for offences committed inside prison. That helps no-one. Equally what is the point in turfing out ex cons on to the street who have spent years surrounded by violence. Tough, austere but productive is the best approach.
Thank you for replying. So you'd approve had they finished him off? Fair do's - I have to confess it would give me some mixed feelings too. But why? It would presumably give you some satisfaction, and probably with no mixed feelings about it. It would undoubtedly save the tax payers a bit of cash too. But I wonder what the Lawrences would have made of it, what with their astonishing dignity in the face of this tragedy and the police's subsequent lack of care. Would it have made them more satisfied?
According to the article these events took place before he was convicted of any crime. He'd been charged and was awaiting trial, so, at the time he was legally innocent. Or so the saying goes.... Does he deserve compensation following the attacks? I'd say yes. Do the perpetrators of the attack also need punishing? I'd say yes to that too. After all, they are the guilty ones. Not the state. Why is this not mentioned?
For the 1st time. Where as BTIW2 often disagreed with DA, never thought to mention that though.??? Thought not.
One wonders if you truly understand 3/4 of your inane ramblings DA. ( specially the advice to always use masonry paint on everything )
I guess it’s where you stand on what’s the purpose of a prison sentence, is it to punish, rehabilite or a mixture of the two, from what I remember about the Lawrence case, I wold have liked Norris to dangle, unfortunately that option is now not open to the courts, But that is not to say I agree with hanging for every murder verdict, each case will have its own unique circumstances, I will say where the proven murderer is beyond rehabilitation and will always pose a risk, as a taxpayer I am not in favour of him/her hanging on to their worthless lives.
I disagree with the every human deserves human rights. For example murder if you have murdered someone thus taking away their very basic right to live then why do you deserve to still have rights. Same for rapists and all other violent crimes of a similar level. I also think that criminals should be put to work as part of their punishment so many things in local governments are underfunded and understaffed. Our roads for example get them to work on them.
I think this is a great idea. How about Anjem Choudary and Abu Hamza start doing Bob-a-job weeks. They could start off with digging over RS's garden.
Obviously seriously danger criminals wouldn't be used but there a large number in for minor crimes and non violent ones why cant they be used. Its just a suggestion and my thoughts on it what are yours? Im gonna go with that you feel they should be rehabilitated (so why not put them to work) to become members of society again after there release which is great and we should but we cant close people off from the world for say 2 years and then let them loose and expect them to jump straight back in.
Just an observation. Read back in this thread, you will find I am on the same page. Prison needs to be tough but it needs to balanced with preparing prisoners for release.