djdabush Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 Very interesting to see people on social media wrestling with the fact one of the men who they called a hero yesterday is a convicted murderer themselves. It's almost as if it's not as binary as heroes vs villain after all. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 The government have a finite number of cells and a finite number of trained staff. For a long time they haven’t wanted to spend any money in this sector. But they do want to be seen to be tough on crime and locking ‘em up. So the only way to put more in, is to let more out the other end. Every time we get anywhere near capacity, we have to cast around looking for the least bad we can kick back out to make space. We can get less reliant on prison, or we can follow the U.S. model and just keep building private prisons. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amsterdam_Neil_D Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 19 hours ago, Dr_Pangloss said: Saw the video too, good to see this word removed getting lit up. He was being electronically tagged I think ? On a separate note, has anyone seen the film Wedlock ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 6 minutes ago, Davkaus said: I'm not going to pretend I know exactly where the line is drawn at what is and isn't considered 'a terrorist offence'. That guy that joked about blowing up Robin Hood airport, for example, was tried for something to do with terrorism wasn't he? Sometimes these laws are clearly abused and used for much wider scope than was intended, so it's tricky. But I find absurd the idea that someone can be rehabilitated when they've previously engaged in efforts to bomb a public place, hoping to kill a huge number of people. Is there going to be a murky grey area somewhere? Possibly. It's somewhere far from the level of offence that this man was convicted of though. I don't think someone planning to bomb civilians can ever again be considered to not be a threat to the public But you're going to have to draw that line if you're not going to include every single person who is convicted of anything under any terrorism laws - even the broad spectrum of people who may have been convicted of the same offence, i.e. preparing for acts of terrorism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 A house in Stafford is currently being searched. Known now for something different to where Rolf Harris was incarcerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: The government have a finite number of cells and a finite number of trained staff. And I'm not sure that finite number isn't lower than it was a decade ago (I just had a look and it seemed to be lower in 2016 that at the start of the decade when there was talk of some investment to increase numbers). And then you've got the cuts to police numbers and police budgets, the issues with evidence and disclosure, the court closures, the other cuts in the MoJ, &c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Pangloss Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 30 minutes ago, snowychap said: It wouldn't be 'in this circumstance', though, would it? It would need to be in every single circumstance. You can differentiate between terror offences because of how the terrorism act is defined. Clearly there's a difference between plotting mass murder and being a member of a proscribed organisation. It's in the former case where the punishment needs to absolutely be the harshest as our laws allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Dr_Pangloss said: You can differentiate between terror offences because of how the terrorism act is defined. I don't think that is correct. It's fine if you're going to put (a) 'plotting mass murder' vs (b) 'being a member of a proscribed organisation' but it doesn't apply to the wide spectrum of offences that may be prosecuted under the following (which is what I believe they were found guilty of in 2012): Quote Section 5 Preparation of terrorist acts (1) A person commits an offence if, with the intention of— (a)committing acts of terrorism, or (b)assisting another to commit such acts, he engages in any conduct in preparation for giving effect to his intention. (2) It is irrelevant for the purposes of subsection (1) whether the intention and preparations relate to one or more particular acts of terrorism, acts of terrorism of a particular description or acts of terrorism generally. (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life. Indeed, the sentencing guidelines for the offence would appear to indicate that they foresee a very wide range of possibilities under this one offence: Quote Maximum: Life imprisonment Offence range: 3 years’ custody – Life Imprisonment (minimum term 40 years) Edited November 30, 2019 by snowychap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turvontour Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 1 hour ago, Xela said: One of the men who took down the terrorist was a convicted murderer on day release. He cut the throat of a disabled girl in 2003. The Police had to ring the family of the murdered girl to tell them that they might see the murderer on TV and he is being called a "hero" Take care out there folks, you never know who you are walking past! The Donald Trump approach to stopping murderers; get a bigger murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Xela Posted November 30, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted November 30, 2019 25 minutes ago, turvontour said: The Donald Trump approach to stopping murderers; get a bigger murderer. Don't bring a knife to a tusk and fire extinguisher fight. 5 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PompeyVillan Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 3 hours ago, Xela said: One of the men who took down the terrorist was a convicted murderer on day release. He cut the throat of a disabled girl in 2003. The Police had to ring the family of the murdered girl to tell them that they might see the murderer on TV and he is being called a "hero" Take care out there folks, you never know who you are walking past! Interesting moral question then. Is he a hero? I think we'll hold fire on the knighthood, as it would be inappropriate. His actions in this context were heroic. Perhaps that's best way to frame the actions of the members of the public that were involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will87 Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 3 hours ago, Xela said: One of the men who took down the terrorist was a convicted murderer on day release. He cut the throat of a disabled girl in 2003. Whilst we're on the subject of soft sentencing, wtf! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 30, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 30, 2019 1 hour ago, PompeyVillan said: Interesting moral question then. Is he a hero? I think we'll hold fire on the knighthood, as it would be inappropriate. His actions in this context were heroic. Perhaps that's best way to frame the actions of the members of the public that were involved. Given that it's reported One of the men who took down the terrorist was a convicted murderer on day release. I'd like to think it shows people can change. Maybe, just maybe, this person wanted to in some way compensate, or act in the way they did because they'd done such a bad thing earlier in their life. I dunno. Maybe that's trite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 I think it shows life isn’t as binary as twitter and the daily mail would like it to be. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram85 Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 Does this man have any history of mental health? On drugs at the time? Any other reason? Because if he doesnt then he is a man who cut the throat of and killed a disabled girl. That doesnt change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 5 hours ago, PompeyVillan said: His actions in this context were heroic. Perhaps that's best way to frame the actions of the members of the public that were involved. I think this is correct. A bad person can do a great thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 30, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2019 They were both in the same prisoner rehab session that day - I wonder if he had some inkling that the guy was going to go postal, and was ready for it? Although, I assume the nutter didn't have his fake suicide vest on at the meeting, so when and where did that get donned? Only to coincidentally bump into his fellow probationer on the bridge? Something doesn't add up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 I'd just chop all their hands off. Much cheaper solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted November 30, 2019 Share Posted November 30, 2019 (edited) Whether someone is a hero is dependant upon opinion. For instance the heroic Afghanistan Freedom Fighters who resisted the USSR invasion. The UK and the USA armed them and taught them how to make improvised roadside bombs. They passed on their skills to their murderous terrorist children who resisted the USA invasion. Like it or not, the loser on London Bridge is a hero to some. But I am not sure why we are classing him as a "Terrorist". Dare I suggest that a white man stabbing people who attended the same conference would be "unhinged", "warped" or "mentally ill". Edited November 30, 2019 by Mandy Lifeboats Speeling mishsteaks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 30, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted November 30, 2019 5 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: I am not sure why we are clashing him as a "Terrorist". Dare I suggest that a white man stabbing people who attended the same conference would be "unhinged", "warped" or "mentally ill". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts