psb182

but is it right?.........do you seriously think 13 years would be just punishment for taking the life of "YOUR" 2 year old

Dant3

I honestly don't know, and I hope to God I'm never in the position to know. But I DO know that the justice system is supposed to be governed by reason, not emotion, and hence the tendancy to keep victims out of the sentencing process.

ladylisa

I think all victims of crime or families of victims should be able to have their say in court as to the emotional damage caused by the accused, after a guilty verdict. Also something I've seen here and I think is a good idea is that victims are allowed to meet with the perpetrators in prison. I think this would make any perpetrator think twice if they could put a face to their crime, and feel the consequence of their actions.

As to being given 13 years for murder, I'm in two minds. I know if it were a member of my family I would want the person to stay in prison indefinitely. However putting that to one side in 13 years a person changes dramatically. Think what you were like at 13 and then 23 and then at age 33. To be punished for a crime that you commit in one decade for decades after seems wrong to me. We need to educate the people in our prisons not further punish them, their punishment IS prison. If we are to make changes in our society we cannot treat criminals as animals as what does that say about society. Two wrongs don't make a right. Think how harsh US sentencing is, and does it stop crime? No. The only way forward in my opinion is to attempt to turn criminals lives around, so when they are released into society they can help make it a better place. And if they don't then at least we gave it a try.

Winterwords

Generally, I have to agree with this.

Also what you have to consider is that the UK Justice system is *meant* to be about rehabilitation, not revenge. It's not perfect, but I prefer it to the US system. You are always going get those who cannot be trusted in society, but locking people up forever should only ever be used as a last resort.

Conway7

Be careful about this one, as the "facts" may turn out to be not quite what they seemed at the outset!

Manc

It is to keep people whom are a danger to society away from society.

If a murderer is no longer a danger to society after 8 or so years, why lock them up?

With the likes of Myra Hindly, I think she was kept inside all her life to protect her from society as she'd have been lynched.

tony126

What we are saying is that although the consequences are known they do not act as a deterrent and they should be 'helped' to rehabilitate themselves. So the deterrnet doesn't work and we adopt 'let us help them'. They try it on a lot of them knowing the system is in their favour, imho of course.

Manc

getting 13 years in Wormwood scrubs is hardly in their favour.

and come on guys, deterrent?

most of the USA they put you in a chair and zap 50,000 volts through you..........and this place has the highest murder ratio per populance in the civilised world.

tony126

Basically it is not the prisoners who complain so I cannot say they are not accepting their punishment. It is the do gooders who have a lot to say about it.

emmals

if some one is going to offend they are going to offend....I agree with Manc.....the death penalty doesn't seem to deter people......some people need to be punished....look at crimes of passion they are not constant offenders so why should they be locked up for life?.......every situation is different

Ray

Not so
Annual rate of homicides per 100,000 people for selected countries.
Homicides
Belarus 10.5
Brazil 23.0
China 1.8
Colombia 61.6
El Salvador 55.6
Finland 2.2
France 0.7
Germany 0.9
Mexico 15.9
Russia 21.6
United States 6.9

Manc

and just how many of those countries would you class as truly civilised?
Brazil? I don't think having the police go around shooting homeless kids is civilised.

Colombia? where you can put a hit on someone for the price of $20 and a bag of hash.......

Celtic_Angel

By crimes of passion do you mean murder??..so they aren't constant offenders but they still took a life and what about the victims family?..victims for life grievers for life....the way I see it if you've killed someone intentionally..tough shit you're staying in jail a long time..a repeat murderer /psychopath give them the death penalty .they're beyond help and nobody will miss them.

of course like you said every case is different, in the case mentioned in the OP it seems this idiot just meant to attack a fire truck not kill an innocent child..either way though the kid is dead if he hadn't been firing the gun in the first place that child would still be alive..punish the SOB..so he's ruined 13 years of his life..so what..you have to be alive to even do that yeah?

Celtic_Angel

that's cos we're not killing em fast enough manc ...some murderers have been known to be on death row for over 20 years...

Ray

None are considered third world countries...