bickster Posted March 9, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 9, 2010 Right, this stops now, if the standard of debate has sunk this low then the thread is over, either posters start making the debate a worthwhile one again or it gets locked. Two posts have been deleted and a pm sent, the rest of you need to start respecting each others opinions a bit more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 If I had my way shit ripostes would be a hanging offence This. Although I'd probably let 10 year olds off for that too, I probably came up with those sort of replies when I was about that age. How old are you starsailor? Old enough to know certain VT-ers are apologists for scum like Venables. I know he's a cockney but he wasn't that bad an England manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Old enough to know certain VT-ers are apologists for scum like Venables. I know he's a cockney but he wasn't that bad an England manager He he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWeedMcGrass Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 I see two fundamental schools of thought here, as I've seen on many a debate on the death penalty or related issues. The first one espouses a fair chance at reform for even the most sadistic criminal if the said criminal is a juvenile/underage.They believe in a 'reformative' justice system whose main purpose should be to reform and rehabilitate the perps with some punitive elements. The second one , the one I feel makes more sense is about 'Retribution' and a type of poetic justice. If A , who is 12, hacks B to death with a Machete and there are no mitigating circumstances , A should be punished suitably and in proportion to the crime that was perpetrated , with the element of 'Deterrence' also high in this case. Justice cannot simply be there to reform, the victims need to factored in to the equation as well, which is what many in this thread are failing to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 9, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2010 Well obviously the strict life licence business hasn't worked or he wouldn't have ended up in back in prison. You don't understand a life licenee do you? It's ok to admit it. The life licence isn't capable of stopping someone from doing something - it's to discourage it, harshly, by dint of punishment if they do it. If they then do it, the life licence simply gives justification for immediate reimprisonment. It is effectively just a terms of their release. In fact, if it has ended up with someone being back in prison by breaking those terms, it's worked swimmingly, has it not? After reading many post's from you on varying subjects, from child abusers to murderers.... I can only take away one thing from them, and that is you are an apologist for those who commit the most heinous crimes. Right, well you're wrong then. At what point did I make out that what they did was ok? I said it was an horrific and disgusting crime. Engage your brain, should you own one (I don't hold out hope). you try to say it's people like me, who want to bring back hanging who are the problem with society. You are. You're reactionary idiots who seem incapable to understand compassion or, at the least humane end of things, hypocrisy. Take a long hard look in the mirror, you'll see the real problem staring right back at you. I won't, as I won't see anything than a normal person with an a modicum of intelligence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 9, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 9, 2010 Has there actually been any justification for why Bulger's mother has absolutely any right to be involved in this yet either? Because as far as I'm concerned, she shouldn't be any more than any other member of public as far as this is concerned, but she seems hell bent on involved when it's none of her business. I find that attitude completely heartless and quite patronising on Mrs Fergus. Her 4 year old sone was tortured and killed by 2 warped 10 year olds. She has every right to know every time they squat and take a shit if she so wishes; anything that brings her solace. I understand and feel for Mrs Fergus. She's been given an horrendous burden on her life and worse, had perhaps the worst thing a parent can ever comprehend happening, the murder of her child. However, she does not have any say in anything from the moment they were convicted, and even then she had nothing to offer but evidence. Thats the way our justice system works and it's the way it should be for any chance of justice being done. A victim cannot be impartial. She has no right to know anything about them, she has no right to be consulted on this, a (seemingly, as we don't know what he's done, but it would only be her business if it directly involved her) seperate crime. It may seem heartless, but thats the way the justice system must be. As said, I feel for her obviously, anyone would. But if one understands anything of the legal/justice system, they would realise that her involvement is wrong and unrequired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWeedMcGrass Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Has there actually been any justification for why Bulger's mother has absolutely any right to be involved in this yet either? Because as far as I'm concerned, she shouldn't be any more than any other member of public as far as this is concerned, but she seems hell bent on involved when it's none of her business. I find that attitude completely heartless and quite patronising on Mrs Fergus. Her 4 year old sone was tortured and killed by 2 warped 10 year olds. She has every right to know every time they squat and take a shit if she so wishes; anything that brings her solace. I understand and feel for Mrs Fergus. She's been given an horrendous burden on her life and worse, had perhaps the worst thing a parent can ever comprehend happening, the murder of her child. However, she does not have any say in anything from the moment they were convicted, and even then she had nothing to offer but evidence. Thats the way our justice system works and it's the way it should be for any chance of justice being done. A victim cannot be impartial. She has no right to know anything about them, she has no right to be consulted on this, a (seemingly, as we don't know what he's done, but it would only be her business if it directly involved her) seperate crime. It may seem heartless, but thats the way the justice system must be. As said, I feel for her obviously, anyone would. But if one understands anything of the legal/justice system, they would realise that her involvement is wrong and unrequired. Sorry , but Justice without some degree of compensation for the direct victims of the said crime is not justice at all. I think we need to refocus on what we expect justice to be. The legal system is there to determine if an accused person is guilty or not and to mete out suitable and proportional punishment to the perp. Rehabilitation is a nice idea which might work in case of petty crimes or motive driven violations of the law. A 10 year old thief or a bully is different from a 10 year old sadistic murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Sorry , but Justice without some degree of compensation for the direct victims of the said crime is not justice at all. Quite agree. However Mrs Fergus is an INDIRECT victim of the crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 with any luck venables will get some terminal illness and everybody wins. Apart from Venables, but who honestly cares about what happens to him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingerlad Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 I agree they shouldn't have been executed at 10yrs old but nor should they ever have been released. They took a young innocent boys life. So in turn they should lose their right to a life. Oh, and the life licence obviously hasn't worked. Otherwise he wouldn't have re offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Oh, and the life licence obviously hasn't worked. Otherwise he wouldn't have re offended. Except a life license isn't a guarantee someone won't reoffened, it's saying the parole board don't think they will, but if they do (or it even looks likely that they will) they'll be back inside immediately. So it worked perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 The one thing on this thread that has astonished me more than the apparent desire of some to hang 10 year olds and to see justice meted out by murder victim's families, is the inability of the same people to comprehend Snowy's point despite him, and others who share it, making it perfectly clearly, time and time again. I think you're banging your head up against a brick wall here Snowster mate. :nod: Jon FTW? :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 just be aware that are legal system isn't perfect. There will be cases in the future that shape the laws regarding all sorts of crime. I bet you if venables had killed again they would review the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCLaura Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 Has there actually been any justification for why Bulger's mother has absolutely any right to be involved in this yet either? Because as far as I'm concerned, she shouldn't be any more than any other member of public as far as this is concerned, but she seems hell bent on involved when it's none of her business. I find that attitude completely heartless and quite patronising on Mrs Fergus. Her 4 year old sone was tortured and killed by 2 warped 10 year olds. She has every right to know every time they squat and take a shit if she so wishes; anything that brings her solace. I understand and feel for Mrs Fergus. She's been given an horrendous burden on her life and worse, had perhaps the worst thing a parent can ever comprehend happening, the murder of her child. However, she does not have any say in anything from the moment they were convicted, and even then she had nothing to offer but evidence. Thats the way our justice system works and it's the way it should be for any chance of justice being done. A victim cannot be impartial. She has no right to know anything about them, she has no right to be consulted on this, a (seemingly, as we don't know what he's done, but it would only be her business if it directly involved her) seperate crime. It may seem heartless, but thats the way the justice system must be. As said, I feel for her obviously, anyone would. But if one understands anything of the legal/justice system, they would realise that her involvement is wrong and unrequired. I felt the same as myb to be honest when I read what you wrote, I think it just feels shocking because the initial point you chose to make about the whole subject is the fact that you don't understand what it's got to do with the mother of the child that the man previously killed and why she is involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 just be aware that are legal system isn't perfect. There will be cases in the future that shape the laws regarding all sorts of crime. I bet you if venables had killed again they would review the system. He shouldnt under no circumstances have been released again, and have the chance to reoffend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 9, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 9, 2010 What has it got to do with her though, the reason he's back behind bars isn't related to her in the slightest, yet she is demanding to be at any trial involving him. Its got no more to do with her than it has any of us, she is not a direct nor an indirect victim of the current situation whatever that is, which yet again, none of us knows what that situation is, and the longer Mrs Fergus and her friends in the media keep going on about it, the less chance there will be an actual trial as a fair trial will become unlikely for Venebles or and fair trials for young men of the same age too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 What has it got to do with her though, the reason he's back behind bars isn't related to her in the slightest, yet she is demanding to be at any trial involving him. Its got no more to do with her than it has any of us, she is not a direct nor an indirect victim of the current situation whatever that is, which yet again, none of us knows what that situation is, and the longer Mrs Fergus and her friends in the media keep going on about it, the less chance there will be an actual trial as a fair trial will become unlikely for Venebles or and fair trials for young men of the same age too! of course it has, what was the reason he went to jail in the first place? just because this offence is different doesn't mean she is 'any old member of the public'. because she isn't as far as he is concerned and he isn't as far as she is concerned. she DOES have more right to know than any old punter about what he has done. He murdered her son. She is an indirect victim as well because him being back behind bars has brought what happened to her to the surface again, and with no one telling her what he has done, she is left to speculate like everyone else. he could have nicked some sweets, or had sex with a 6 year old. Who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 just be aware that are legal system isn't perfect. There will be cases in the future that shape the laws regarding all sorts of crime. I bet you if venables had killed again they would review the system. He shouldnt under no circumstances have been released again, and have the chance to reoffend. yes I agree, anyone who tortures and murder in cold blood, who understands the magnitude of what they have done, should never be released from jail. manslaughter and aggrivated murder should be seen in a slightly different light because circumstances are different. BUT if someone has killed someone because 'oh my life is shit' or where the victim doesn't know the murderer and has done nothing whatsoever to aggrivate the murderer then they should be in jail for life. Same goes for paedos. Again different if the defendent is a mental because they didn't know what they were doing. But some people with mental disabilities know what they are doing, they just don't give a shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 just be aware that are legal system isn't perfect. There will be cases in the future that shape the laws regarding all sorts of crime. I bet you if venables had killed again they would review the system. He shouldnt under no circumstances have been released again, and have the chance to reoffend. yes I agree, anyone who tortures and murder in cold blood, who understands the magnitude of what they have done, should never be released from jail. manslaughter and aggrivated murder should be seen in a slightly different light because circumstances are different. BUT if someone has killed someone because 'oh my life is shit' or where the victim doesn't know the murderer and has done nothing whatsoever to aggrivate the murderer then they should be in jail for life. Same goes for paedos. Again different if the defendent is a mental because they didn't know what they were doing. But some people with mental disabilities know what they are doing, they just don't give a shit. Best not get me started again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 9, 2010 Share Posted March 9, 2010 just be aware that are legal system isn't perfect. There will be cases in the future that shape the laws regarding all sorts of crime. I bet you if venables had killed again they would review the system. He shouldnt under no circumstances have been released again, and have the chance to reoffend.Why limit it to just him? Why not say any criminal should under no circumstances be released to have the chance to reoffend? Why lock someone up for life when there is a chance they could have been rehabilitated? He was a kid when he did it, probably didn't understand the true extent of his actions, probably had some major issues to make him capable of doing it in the first place, and in all likeliness could have been treated. I doubt many of us are the person we were when we were 10. Sure none of us killed anyone (I hope), but who we are and what we are capable of has changed a great deal since then, our boundaries have changed and what was acceptable then is in many cases not now. There's nothing to say that just because you kill at 10 you're going to do it again in later life, especially if it was the result of underlying mental conditions that have been treated. yes I agree, anyone who tortures and murder in cold blood, who understands the magnitude of what they have done, should never be released from jail. Does a 10 year old understand the magnitude of what they have done? I'm guessing not, and the law at the time agreed seeing as how children under 14 were presumed to not know the difference between right and wrong and them being on the cusp of the age of criminal responsibility being 10. The UN go further and actually recommended that our age of criminal responsibility be raised to 12, something that states they clearly believe that Bulger's killers not only didn't realise the magnitude of their actions but they weren't criminally responsible for them, which would mean the pair would have walked free. I'd be interested in reading the thread that would have been created if that happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts