[BBC News] Teenager jailed for death crash

[WTF]

It is not murder, and we can talk about civilised and uncivilised in respect of the response. I just do not believe that the debt should involve ruining someone's life in order to repay the 'debt' to society. I would ask that the debt be paid in a more useful, productive, and more satisfying manner for society.

 

 

and what form would this repayment take?? lots of folks would seem to be against prison for what we will call driving offences, but being a model citizen and contributor to society is how we ALL should be. everybody that ever does something wrong doing x 100's of hours comunity service really isn't going to act as a deterent. you won't be able to tell the genuine 'helpers' in society from the dregs. and all this ofcourse can barely be viewed as 'justice' for the family of dead people. oh dear, little johnnys dead, but never mind the very sorry lad that did it is going to come round and paint your fence for you and mow the lawn, that seems fair to us, is that ok with you??. i don't expect many yes answers! i suppose what i argued against earlier about revenge/retribution may well be seen as such by the victims family if the killer is imprisoned, and go some way to the 'he got what he deserved' aspect. it may even help the bereaved as they 'see' that his life has been 'interrupted' too, hardly ruined as some people suggest, there are plenty of folks out there that have served time only to come out with a different attitude/outlook and more acceptable behaviour ( phil gawne for example?? ) is his life ruined?? so the prison ruins your life argument is not exactly gospel. it may well distress the lad till he settles into it ( part of the punishment?? ) but being 'not happy' doing your punishment is no reason not to serve it.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

everybody that ever does something wrong doing x 100's of hours comunity service really isn't going to act as a deterent.

 

But do prisons deter crime?

 

it may even help the bereaved as they 'see' that his life has been 'interrupted' too, hardly ruined as some people suggest

 

But why can't this sense of recognition of the criminals wrongdoing be conveyed in a different manner?

 

there are plenty of folks out there that have served time only to come out with a different attitude/outlook and more acceptable behaviour ( phil gawne for example?? ) is his life ruined?? so the prison ruins your life argument is not exactly gospel. it may well distress the lad till he settles into it ( part of the punishment?? ) but being 'not happy' doing your punishment is no reason not to serve it.

 

It may be an interruption if it is only for some months. But removing someone from their family, friends, society and placing them in an unnatural environment with an 'unnatural' authority over them to live a shadow of a life for a year or more with feelings of distress due to isolation. Nobody is happy about receiving punishment, but this isn't the relevant issue, it is whether prison is the right response.

 

I really think that people just accept imprisonment because it is all we know of.

[Rog]

WTF? I have said it before and will reiterate for the 'hang em high' brigade. This young man has to live the rest of his life with the memory of the death of a friend on his conscience, is that not punishment enough?

 

@ Vulgarian, He killed someone? Do you suppose he KNEW he would crash and kill someone? Who was the examiner who let him pass? Surely this accident is a pointer at the test examiners failure to notice a 'reckless, irresponsible and stupid driver'.

 

If it were me I would appeal.

 

For what it’s worth I agree. The concept of adding to any punishment where bad driving has caused a death is not about justice or making punishment appropriate to the crime unless the accident was a premeditated thing with the deliberate intent to cause death or injury.

 

It’s a part of sentencing that in my opinion is wrong and has been introduced by politicians simply to be populist.

 

What should be considered is the ludicrous absence of a blanket upper speed limit on the Isle of Man. In my opinion there should be an absolute upper limit of no more than 50 MPH tops. Introduce that and then rigorously enforce it and other existing speed limits especially making widespread use of safety cameras and some good may come out of it.

[Albert Tatlock]

What should be considered is the ludicrous absence of a blanket upper speed limit on the Isle of Man. In my opinion there should be an absolute upper limit of no more than 50 MPH tops.

Hey presto! There you go Rog, there is now a speed limit one for R platers - but a fat lot of use it is to have for some of them. There is an R platers debate currently going on here now - this is not the right place for it IMO.

[WTF]

everybody that ever does something wrong doing x 100's of hours comunity service really isn't going to act as a deterent.

 

But do prisons deter crime?

 

it may even help the bereaved as they 'see' that his life has been 'interrupted' too, hardly ruined as some people suggest

 

But why can't this sense of recognition of the criminals wrongdoing be conveyed in a different manner?

 

there are plenty of folks out there that have served time only to come out with a different attitude/outlook and more acceptable behaviour ( phil gawne for example?? ) is his life ruined?? so the prison ruins your life argument is not exactly gospel. it may well distress the lad till he settles into it ( part of the punishment?? ) but being 'not happy' doing your punishment is no reason not to serve it.

 

It may be an interruption if it is only for some months. But removing someone from their family, friends, society and placing them in an unnatural environment with an 'unnatural' authority over them to live a shadow of a life for a year or more with feelings of distress due to isolation. Nobody is happy about receiving punishment, but this isn't the relevant issue, it is whether prison is the right response.

 

I really think that people just accept imprisonment because it is all we know of.

 

 

better prison than the death penalty?? there are a few out there that don't care about going to prison, what do you do with the habitual drink driver with no licence, no insurance who just WONT do what they should?? there are some folks out there that don't actually do the community service, they'd rather spend a few weeks in clink. prison is not the end of things for some people.

 

we all recognise the actual 'wrong doing', we might aswell do nothing to anyone as we and they know they did wrong! this knowledge of the wrong is what gets them convicted. doing less to folks just makes things more of a slapped wrist and less consequential. all very 'so what' after the event.

 

what punishment would you suggest?? surely if prison is as bad as you claim, keeping the option ( it is an option, hence suspended sentences? ) would be a deterrent. the idea of a 'punishment' the guilty party is 'happy' with is ludicrous. they should be 'unhappy' in whatever form that takes. slapped wrists all round is useless ( as our society shows on other issues )

[Slim]

But do prisons deter crime?

 

Absolutely! I don't want to go to prison.

[r1man]

 

 

This is what happens when the Lunatics try to run the asylum. In this argument no-one committing manslaughter would ever go to gaol.

 

For what it’s worth I agree. The concept of adding to any punishment where bad driving has caused a death is not about justice or making punishment appropriate to the crime unless the accident was a premeditated thing with the deliberate intent to cause death or injury.

 

It’s a part of sentencing that in my opinion is wrong and has been introduced by politicians simply to be populist.

 

One might argue that driving at high speed in a restricted area is a premeditated act and that if one follows the possibility of the consequences through of an incident at high speed in a speed restricted zone then most cognisant people will understand that death or serious injury are likely in the event of a crash. In a speed restricted area that is frequented by pedestrians, it show even less social responsibility on the part of the driver since he / she shows no concern for the vulnerability of other road users.

 

The general public need to be protected from such reckless behaviour and gaol serves two purposes as I have said before. Firstly as a punishment and secondly to act as a deterrent to others.

 

Or should we allow the lunatics to run the asylum?

[Rog]

I do understand the point that you are making, I really do, but to have a separate offence of ‘causing death by dangerous driving’ should not be required. It was another knee jerk reaction by NuLabour as a populist move.

 

Instead the sentences available to the courts in the event of a conviction for dangerous driving should be pretty much open ended, with the sentencing guidelines expanded to include how a death should affect any sentence handed down.

[Albert Tatlock]

But do prisons deter crime?

 

Absolutely! I don't want to go to prison.

Disagree. You may have a fear of prison, and that may be the same fear that helps to keep the majority in line (though the majority of society are actually law abiding anyway), but the fact is that prison is generally not a realisitic deterrent and is generally not rehabilitory and to think otherwise is illusary. The simple fact is that it doesn't deter crime for the majority that have been in it - just look at the reoffending rates in the UK/IOM if you don't believe that. A prison system that offers little in the way of rehabilitation offers little to society in reality. Other than being sat on his arse thinking about it over and over, in this case I too can't see what prison here offers this guy that he hasn't learned already as a result of the accident.

 

There is a compromise though IMO - I'd rather see him given a lesser prison sentence and then for, say, the equivalent of the other half of the sentence, offered the opportunity to be taken around schools (15/18 year olds) with a copper and road safety team and a few slides (not too gory) as part of a series of presentations on the consequences of irresponsible driving. I'm pretty sure that after such an event, many young drivers would like the opportunity to help get that message across too. It would have been a powerful message to me if I had heard such a message at school, and met the guy. Educating young drivers and potential young drivers with schemes such as that and forcing them to look at a reality of the consequences of bad driving is the best way forward IMO.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

But do prisons deter crime?

 

Absolutely! I don't want to go to prison.

 

Don't see the logic behind that. The only thing that is stopping you from committing crime is the chance that you will go to prison? Do you lack any sense of morality Slim?

[Slim]

Don't see the logic behind that. The only thing that is stopping you from committing crime is the chance that you will go to prison? Do you lack any sense of morality Slim?

 

No, but my morality isn't always in line with the law, so for the overlaps, the fear of prison is a deterrent. Example, 'a friend' used to like the odd spliff and his morals at the time were happy to justify that, but it's against the law. It was enough to stop him indulging too often because of the risks, and as he got older it was enough to stop him completely. If cannabis were legal, I'm pretty sure He'd be smoking it.

 

Albert, you appear to contradict yourself, you open saying prison is a deterrent, then say it isn't. I don't understand.

[Albert Tatlock]

Albert, you appear to contradict yourself, you open saying prison is a deterrent, then say it isn't. I don't understand.

Not really. In my world there are often more answers to questions than the yes/no, is/isn't and allow it/ban it answers in your world. And personally, I think you should realise that a little more sometimes as it might give you more understanding of where other people arguments come from when we debate things such as this - instead of coming up with your usual "let's pretend it's everyone/everywhere - and bring in speed limits" type of approach - when it's not everwhere and not everyone. These R plate problems are generally caused by a minority breaking existing laws by driving dangerously.

 

Overall, I don't think prison is a deterrent, though it obviously may be for a few (so obviously therefore I can't say that it isn't a deterrent 'full stop') - but I certainly do think it is not the overall deterrent you perceive it to be generally - i.e. it is your own and other peoples' morals, consideration and respect for society etc. that keeps you/them from speeding and doing other wrongs etc. not just a fear of prison.

 

However, I am saying prison doesn't work, and that is backed by a raft of reoffending statistics and a poor record on rehabilitation. But in this case there is an obvious compromise to be had - as 1. quite a few people want people locked up for this kind of thing, and 2. quite a few don't think it will make much difference locking someone of this age up for so long and that there is other stuff people in this situation could do that would do more good. A bit of both would work better IMO and might just help to save a life in future.

[Slim]

Not really. In my world there are often more answers to questions than the yes/no, is/isn't and allow it/ban it answers in your world.

 

Behave, I've just made exactly the 'things aren't black and white' point in the work permit thread, and have been fighting off the 'death to chavs' in the fat bird thread and I'm constantly fighting anecdotal crap when it comes to these debates.

 

Overall, I don't think prison is a deterrent, though it obviously may be for a few (so obviously therefore I can't say that it isn't a deterrent 'full stop') - but I certainly do think it is not the overall deterrent you perceive it to be generally - i.e. it is your own and other peoples' morals, consideration and respect for society etc. that keeps you/them from speeding and doing other wrongs etc. not just a fear of prison.

 

Didn't I just say the same in my response to LDV? That there are moral deterrents but they overlap with the law.

 

However, I am saying prison doesn't work, and that is backed by a raft of reoffending statistics and a poor record on rehabilitation. But in this case there is an obvious compromise to be had - as 1. quite a few people want people locked up for this kind of thing, and 2. quite a few don't think it will make much difference locking someone of this age up for so long and that there is other stuff people in this situation could do that would do more good. A bit of both would work better IMO and might just help to save a life in future.

 

I wasn't arguing that point. I'm talking of prison purely as a deterrent for the rest of us, I've never argued about it's effectiveness for the individual imprisoned. Do try to keep up.

[Albert Tatlock]

Not really. In my world there are often more answers to questions than the yes/no, is/isn't and allow it/ban it answers in your world.

 

Behave, I've just made exactly the 'things aren't black and white' point in the work permit thread...

Now that things are starting to bite, personally I deeply suspect that's more about self-preservation than anything altruistic.

 

What is the point of raising and arguing something, getting a response, agreeing and wriggling with the response, and then telling the same people off you raised the initial points with about your agreeing with them. Huh? Jebus, you make things hard work sometimes. Wouldn't it be better to think before you fire off a 'it is/it isn't' first, and qualify what you really mean?

[WTF]

so if humanity is so morally enhanced, why have prisons at all, why even have punishments?? as no one is going to do any 'wrong'. i go with LDV's view. the fear of prison 'deter's people from doing things that perhaps nature and emotions tell you you should be doing. the deterent is getting caught and having the consequences heaped upon you. with no consequences there would be no fear of doing anything 'wrong'. fear of consequences= deterent. prison is a big consequence, so a big deterent. i'm sure at one point in everybody's lives they have wanted to erradicate someone else in an argument/fight. this doesn't generally actually happen due to the 'consequences'. there would be a lot fewer 'males' around if our humanity/nature was running things. which is why most arguments remain heated debates with the odd insult thrown in with no physical injury's. i can think of a few scrotes i would happily dispose of if i wasn't going to be punished for it, quite a few folks would actually thank you for 'loosing' them.