QT last night - Will Self - what a fool

StevieJ

JonnyBravo wrote: »

(Incidentally, I have no such qualms about being "at their level" or the like I simply could not abide this happening to one innocent person.)

Have we all seen the Green Mile

ninky_2

The_White_Horse wrote: »

the truth of the matter is, under a very right wing approach loads of people get murdered and under a very left wing approach loads of people get murdered. the only difference is under a right wing stance, the murderer gets executed or imprisoned for life, and under the left wing stance, they get a safari trip, arts and crafts, tv, playstation, dole, three meals a day( with 5 options for each meal), gym, exercise and all the things decent people can't afford. they then get let out as rehabiliated people, only to offend again.

white_horse why don't you move to somewhere with sharia law? it sounds like you would quite like their sense of justice.

moggylover

The_White_Horse wrote: »

Do you know what I like about Cleaver? He doesn't resort to the name calling nonsense you do. Why is it ok to execute me for my valid opinion, yet you wish to save child murderers???? I think only one of us is sick, and it certainly isn't me.

Yesterday, you kindly highlighted a spelling error I made. I am not usually petty, but it is "vicious" not "viscious".

I see the argument you are trying to make, and I note Cleaver attempts to use the same argument - namely:



So, if a man is arrested for kidnapping and locking up their victim for many years - say like that Austrian bloke who kept his daughter under the house or that American case, Jaycee something or other, have we not lost the moral highground there by incarcerating the incarcerator??????? Same thing I think. You are just choosing to think of it differently.

Again: pot, kettle, black:D You really don't even see the irony of the fact that whatever subject is up for "discussion/debate" you come on with the pedantic "stupid lefty whatever" rants but when it is turned back on you you become a petulant five year old.

My own possible "sickness" does nothing at all to mitigate your own vicious, vengeful and hate-filled persona:)

Many thanks for pointing out my typo:D

Absolutely pointless comparison really. We either choose to "murder" people under licence or we "lawfully" incarcerate them as punishmentfor their crimes and in an attempt to rehabilitate them: to choose to keep someone incarcerated without trial, for ones own sexual perversion or private pleasure is a totally different ball game and I see nothing there that equates.

I have seen you talk of "putting down" almost anyone who does not equate to your own twisted view of "decent": this certainly doesn't appear to be either a rational mind, or a balanced one. You have only yourself to blame for other peoples perception of your personality;) I am sure that many of us are capable of a moments "rage against the machine". To continually rage and rant at ALL aspects of life is hardly productive and is hardly indicative of a stable mental state.

To clarify! I have no desire to "save" child murderers in the way that you suggest, but feel there is far more for society to gain from studying them in an effort to understand the psychopathy of their crime than there is in killing them.

Furthermore, I don't actually have any problem with you having an opinion. I DO have a problem with your paranoia and the aggression and intolerance you display so freely.

Really2

JonnyBravo wrote: »

If you cannot answer "yes" to that question how do you propose to introduce a death penalty with a 0.00% failure rate?? For that is what is needed.

Not that I want one (death penalty) but if the legal system went down that route could they not do a death row type incarceration (say 10-15 years in jail) and retrials allowed on new data that could prove innocence .

Most probably not fool prof and completely impractical but the only real way to avoid wrong conviction would be open up the time to prove innocence/ appeal.

Incarceration is the way forward IMHO but I presume the right wing side of thing is how do you get people who recommit serious crime down to 0.00%.

I presume for every wrong murder conviction there would be not far off as many murderers who go on to commit serious crimes after release.

This thread I a tin of worms, I wish I never posted in.
I think from my point of view both stand points of right wing and left wing have faults but both are so far apart a happy medium is impossible.

Unless life term meant life Incarceration perhaps. (that would be my preferred punishment TBH)

moggylover

The_White_Horse wrote: »

i didn't say I didn't do it. I just said that is why I like Cleaver better than Moggy.

fool.

Do I get an apology soon, seeing as you said I made it up to fit my belief system. Remember, I never have to make stuff up about lefties. They really ARE THAT STUPID!!!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

moggylover

tomterm8 wrote: »

not for a lot of people, no. Lets face it, recently a family was arrested for stealing £700,000 worth of caravans. They probably stole much more than that (caravan thefts went down 50% the week after they were arrested). They will get... What... Maybe at the outside 15 years? Out in 7? Thanks to thatcher.

Opportunity cost... It would take 40 years of being employed for someone to earn that.



I'm sure its gone the other way, largely because there's not enough money in the system. Unlike whitehorse, i want prisoners to work. Work very hard indeed. Unless there is a medical reason, i want no one to be released until they are both able to fulfill a role in normal society, and have been trained to do so. Once they have been trained, i want them to work at a real job, repaying money to the state, and after they are released the full costs for the training and imprisonment should be worked out, and they should repay it: Every last pence.

:t:t:t:t:t:t my clapping smiley appears to be broken:(

The_White_Horse

ninky wrote: »

white_horse why don't you move to somewhere with sharia law? it sounds like you would quite like their sense of justice.

some of their justice is good, some is unacceptable.

the death sentence could be reserved for cases where there is zero chance of an incorrect decision. all convictions must be "beyond reasonable doubt" but granted, that does not mean 100%. However, there are cases where we are 100% sure. Why not use it then?

Also, what is the difference between the state killing a killer and the state locking up and kidnapper who has locked up his victims?

If I say that a man plunged a knife into my chest and pulled my heart out, you may think that that deserves a prison sentence. However, if he is a heart surgeon, then he wouldn't. You need to look at the facts. In that scenario, the man will have the right to stick a knife in you. same act, different facts and circumstances. that is why the state can do the same act as the criminal but not lose the moral highground.

StevieJ

It is like discussing religion with The Reverend Paisley :eek:

The_White_Horse

i am one of the most reasonable people on here.

moggylover

Cleaver wrote: »

Both cracking points. I love it when this forum makes me question my views.

With regard to the first one, I probably phrased that badly. What I mean is, you get 6 years for something. But you might be out after 3, or maybe 5, or possibly even 2. I agree that a judge should have some room for bespoke sentencing, I meant more that what the judge dishes out is simple, clear and non-negotiable. For example: you have 6 years. If you meet this stringent set of criteria then you can get out in 4. Job done.

For the second point, I can't really argue with that as you've really made me think. However, at the risk of sounding like the Daily Mail, do you think we've maybe gone too far the other way? I had a friend go to prison last year for drug dealing and he served around 6 months. He had never been to prison before, but found it quite shocking how lapse it was and how little he was asked to do. He basically said that he watched TV and played video games in his cell pretty much all day every day. Just seems weird to me.

You have some "interesting" friends Cleaver:eek::rotfl: I shall be honest and admit that I have also had "friends" who have been in prison, one for dealing pot and another for getting into a fight and causing more damage than intended:D

I do think that some prisons are far too lax and I think the standards of prisons for "white collar criminals" (like Jeffrey Archer) are more like holiday camps than prisons. I feel this needs to be addressed and would much prefer to see the sort of system that tomterm suggests and stricter sentencing/longer terms.