wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I'd argue that this country would be more **** if we were hanging 10 year old children. that argument would be spot on too. So instead we release the offender back into society to re-offend and then stand there saying how the rehabilitation programme he was put on didnt work and he was allowed to roam free. The country would be a safer place for my children if scumbags like these were dealt with properly and removed. If that means the death penelty then so be it. That doesn't have to mean the death penalty, though, does it? I think it's your blood lust for hanging 10 year old boys that many on here can't get their heads around. Imprisonment, fine. Imprisonment for longer than these boys/men served, again fine. hanging 10 year old boys (and even 8 year olds as you now espose), not fine. Since when do i have a blood lust? Try reading the thread and understand im not on my own in what i beleive. I cant believe so many people try to make out that this is borderline acceptable. Let me ask you Jon, do you have children? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 no one's saying it's acceptable, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 8, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2010 Megan's Law & Sarah's Law are surely prime examples of why people who are families of victims of crimes should be completely and utterly involved in my opinion. Including the media - both of these laws wouldn't be in place without knowledge of these situations, coverage, questioning, pushing - there's a system, but there's also nothing to say we can't challenge certain things about that system and continue to improve it. It depends on whether you think that Megan's law and its various copies are of any actual benefit. There are many arguments that it has created an illusion of protection, that actually it means that more convicted paedophiles have gone underground and that it distracts from the fact that the majority of child abuse is thought to be carried out by family members and others known to and close to the poor children involved. It may well have helped, statistically, to reduce recidivism rates but whether it has been, overall, a benefit is a very difiicult thing to judge. Well, that's a different subject all together, but the mere fact the laws exist and we are aware of them, in my opinion, is an example of how much impact you can have when you 'get involved' and why I think it's relevant that Mrs Fergus has been asked to pass comment on the current situation. Even though the current events, no matter what they are, have absolutely nothing to do with her or any of her relations as far as we can tell, in fact we don't even know what has happened nor should we be allowed to in this instance until the legal system has come to its proper conclusion. Given all the moral outrage for this, no one actually knows what they are getting all hot under the collar about do they? Has anyone actually thought that he might be innocent of whatever he lies accused of? It is after all a possibility. All this emotive crap serves now is a hinderance to a fair trial for Venebles and probably any 27 year old up in front of a judge for a semi serious crime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I'd argue that this country would be more **** if we were hanging 10 year old children. that argument would be spot on too. So instead we release the offender back into society to re-offend and then stand there saying how the rehabilitation programme he was put on didnt work and he was allowed to roam free. The country would be a safer place for my children if scumbags like these were dealt with properly and removed. If that means the death penelty then so be it. That doesn't have to mean the death penalty, though, does it? I think it's your blood lust for hanging 10 year old boys that many on here can't get their heads around. Imprisonment, fine. Imprisonment for longer than these boys/men served, again fine. hanging 10 year old boys (and even 8 year olds as you now espose), not fine. Since when do i have a blood lust? Try reading the thread and understand im not on my own in what i beleive. I cant believe so many people try to make out that this is borderline acceptable. Let me ask you Jon, do you have children? Why can you not understand that just because people do want to kill these kids they don't think what they did is "borderline acceptable"?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted March 8, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. If you tried to look at it objectively and without emotion. What do you think 'the law of the land' should say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Again, suggesting the death penalty for minors is in my opinion ridiculous. It is indeed lunacy, but is getting a vigorous defence by wiggy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I'd argue that this country would be more **** if we were hanging 10 year old children. that argument would be spot on too. So instead we release the offender back into society to re-offend and then stand there saying how the rehabilitation programme he was put on didnt work and he was allowed to roam free. The country would be a safer place for my children if scumbags like these were dealt with properly and removed. If that means the death penelty then so be it. That doesn't have to mean the death penalty, though, does it? I think it's your blood lust for hanging 10 year old boys that many on here can't get their heads around. Imprisonment, fine. Imprisonment for longer than these boys/men served, again fine. hanging 10 year old boys (and even 8 year olds as you now espose), not fine. Since when do i have a blood lust? Try reading the thread and understand im not on my own in what i beleive. I cant believe so many people try to make out that this is borderline acceptable. Let me ask you Jon, do you have children? Why can you not understand that just because people do want to kill these kids they don't think what they did is "borderline acceptable"?? I dont mean it literally, i just cant get my head round people trying to blame there upbringing and everything else as external factors as to why they did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. If you tried to look at it objectively and without emotion. What do you think 'the law of the land' should say? hang 8 year olds, would be my guess!? :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. If you tried to look at it objectively and without emotion. What do you think 'the law of the land' should say? I suppose the fact that im about to become a parent that thought of this happening to my own scares the living shit out of me. And to answer your question, the parents should decide their fate, what do you think the parents would have liked as their punishment Bof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 The country would be a safer place for my children if scumbags like these were dealt with properly and removed. If that means the death penelty then so be it. Actually the country is a safe place for your children, providing you're there to protect them from things like this. Bulgers mother wasn't, and I suspect that behind all the bitterness and anger towards the killers she feels a ton of guilt too. The one thing about this case that amazes me is that a tiny child was allowed to wander off with 2 total strangers without the parent(s) noticing. Could that happen to your child, do you think? That's really harsh in my opinion. It's hardly neglect of Gerry and Kate McCann proportions to lose sight of your child in a shop for a few seconds. I don't doubt that she feels incredibly guilty about it every day of her life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 8, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2010 Let me ask you Jon, do you have children? Not entirely sure what Jon having children has to do with the price of fish let alone this but I do have a child and not only that I'm about to go to work. Why am I telling you this? Because my office faces the Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle where the start of this sorry chain of events happened. I have lived and do work in the middle of all of this, where everyone has an opinion on it and mostly all share your sense of moral outrage, the ones interviewed on the telly all last week (in fact the TV vans were parked outside our office for days), most of the people interviewed, I rub shoulders with them on a daily basis. They and you are in my opinion wrong, it's that simple. The world you appear to want to live in is the stuff of dark comic books, ultimately what you all want is a caped avenger to come in and clear the streets of scum, well that can't be allowed to happen, we have a legal system and it needs to be allowed to go through its motions without the hindrance of all the emotive crap that currently surrounds these issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCLaura Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Even though the current events, no matter what they are, have absolutely nothing to do with her or any of her relations as far as we can tell, in fact we don't even know what has happened nor should we be allowed to in this instance until the legal system has come to its proper conclusion. I would suppose my opinion on that is perhaps emotive, I just know if it was my child, if one of them re-offended, I would sure as anything want to know. That's why I don't condemn the lady for getting involved. Given all the moral outrage for this, no one actually knows what they are getting all hot under the collar about do they? Has anyone actually thought that he might be innocent of whatever he lies accused of? It is after all a possibility. All this emotive crap serves now is a hinderance to a fair trial for Venebles and probably any 27 year old up in front of a judge for a semi serious crime I do beg to differ that the 'emotive crap' you call it will have any effect on his trial in regards to the courts verdict - maybe the public opinion will be tainted or altered, however I have no doubt the legal system will come to it's 'proper conclusion' whether she and/or the media get involved or not - I'd certainly like to think so anyway. Justice should be exactly that - for whatever crime he may or may not have commited on this occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. If you tried to look at it objectively and without emotion. What do you think 'the law of the land' should say? I suppose the fact that im about to become a parent that thought of this happening to my own scares the living shit out of me. And to answer your question, the parents should decide their fate, what do you think the parents would have liked as their punishment Bof? The trouble with letting the victoms family decide the fate is that it opens up all sorts of problems. The family are not impartial enough to make a rational judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 to answer your question, the parents should decide their fate ... Interesting justice system you advocate there fella! The parents/next of kin etc of the victim to decide on method of punishment for offenders ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 Wiggy, let me turn the "imagine if it was your child" argument back on yourself. Imagine if, for some horrible reason, you had a 10 year old (or 8 year old if you wish) child and they comitted this crime of torturing and murdering a young child. Would you think it was fair to hang your 10 year old child? Obviously not, but im sure the parents of the victim would. Does that not go at least someway to showing that just because the parents of the child would want his killer's hanged, that it may not necessarily be the right thing to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 8, 2010 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2010 to answer your question, the parents should decide their fate ... Interesting justice system you advocate there fella! The parents/next of kin etc of the victim to decide on method of punishment for offenders ... Next step, Batman......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Let me ask you Jon, do you have children? Not entirely sure what Jon having children has to do with the price of fish let alone this but I do have a child and not only that I'm about to go to work. Why am I telling you this? Because my office faces the Strand Shopping Centre in Bootle where the start of this sorry chain of events happened. I have lived and do work in the middle of all of this, where everyone has an opinion on it and mostly all share your sense of moral outrage, the ones interviewed on the telly all last week (in fact the TV vans were parked outside our office for days), most of the people interviewed, I rub shoulders with them on a daily basis. They and you are in my opinion wrong, it's that simple. The world you appear to want to live in is the stuff of dark comic books, ultimately what you all want is a caped avenger to come in and clear the streets of scum, well that can't be allowed to happen, we have a legal system and it needs to be allowed to go through its motions without the hindrance of all the emotive crap that currently surrounds these issues. So i will ask you the Bickster, god forbid, but if it was your child, what punishment would you see fit for the two of them? Just because you think my opinion is wrong doesnt mean i am. The legal system is floored, you, me and everyone who posts on here knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I do beg to differ that the 'emotive crap' you call it will have any effect on his trial in regards to the courts verdict - maybe the public opinion will be tainted or altered, however I have no doubt the legal system will come to it's 'proper conclusion' whether she and/or the media get involved or not - I'd certainly like to think so anyway. Justice should be exactly that - for whatever crime he may or may not have commited on this occasion. You have far more faith in a jury than should be held. If what he's done gets out then ANYONE of the same age up on a similar charge will not get a fair trial. Members of the jury will be sitting there thinking "I bet this is Bulger's killer" and the jury will be poisoned. Public opinion is directly link to jury verdicts, a tainted public opinion is a tainted jury. After the trial, sure, I can see a basis for bringing to light the claims, but until there has been a fair trial free from prejudice, not just for him but for everyone else up on similar charges, then keep it quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 to answer your question, the parents should decide their fate ... Interesting justice system you advocate there fella! The parents/next of kin etc of the victim to decide on method of punishment for offenders ... Well instead of just mocking my posts, lets hear what your justice system would be to deal with Thompson and Venables... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts