Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Their punishment is the loss of their liberty. Does it really matter whether they have TV's etc in their cells? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Being able to watch tv is hardly punishment though is it? Unless Keith Chegwin is on the telly though, eh PK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Their punishment is the loss of their liberty. Does it really matter whether they have TV's etc in their cells? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Being able to watch tv is hardly punishment though is it? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No it isn't, their punishment is the loss of their liberty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 No it isn't, their punishment is the loss of their liberty. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And, in my opinion, along with that should be the loss of things that normal, law abiding people enjoy, such as telly, music etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 No it isn't, their punishment is the loss of their liberty. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And, in my opinion, along with that should be the loss of things that normal, law abiding people enjoy, such as telly, music etc. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What would you have them do? To keep them locked up in a bare cell 24/7 just staring at the walls would be inhuman and pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 To keep them locked up in a bare cell 24/7 just staring at the walls would be inhuman and pointless. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Inhuman and pointless............that's exactly what people like Ian Huntley are, so yes! I wouldn't keep them locked up actually, I'd have them all stoned to death........along with Keith Chegwin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverback Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Was 'at hard labour',& PD really so wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Inhuman and pointless............that's exactly what people like Ian Huntley are, so yes! I wouldn't keep them locked up actually, I'd have them all stoned to death........ <{POST_SNAPBACK}> To deliberately plan and carry out the ending of another persons life, whether by stoning, hanging, burning, whatever, is an act of murder regardless of who sanctions it. That would make anybody involved in the act, guilty of the same crime as the person they are punishing. (In my opinion) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Was 'at hard labour',& PD really so wrong. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry, I'm lost!? To deliberately plan and carry out the ending of another persons life, whether by stoning, hanging, burning, whatever, is an act of murder regardless of who sanctions it.That would make anybody involved in the act, guilty of the same crime as the person they are punishing. (In my opinion) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They take a life, why should they deserve to carry on having their life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Was 'at hard labour',& PD really so wrong. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sorry silverback, don't know what it means... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 Sorry silverback, don't know what it means... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thank god, I'm not the only thicko round here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilDDog Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 No it isn't, their punishment is the loss of their liberty.Why do you think some people reoffend? Because they don't care about losing their liberty that's why. To keep them locked up in a bare cell 24/7 just staring at the walls would be inhuman and pointless I would call the murder of two children inhuman and pointless wouldn't you. At least he would be still alive staring at the walls and hopefully banging his head on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 They take a life, why should they deserve to carry on having their life? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> To take anyones life is wrong. He took 2 lives which was wrong. If I were to take his life that would be wrong. How can it be right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 I would call the murder of two children inhuman and pointless wouldn't you.At least he would be still alive staring at the walls and hopefully banging his head on them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He isn't going to reoffend because he isn't getting released. Yes the murder of 2 children was very inhuman and pointless...and very tragic. But to advocate that we treat him in an inhuman manner isn't going to do any good whatsoever, and we should thank god that we are above treating anyone in that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rog Posted August 3, 2004 Author Share Posted August 3, 2004 I would call the murder of two children inhuman and pointless wouldn't you. At least he would be still alive staring at the walls and hopefully banging his head on them. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He isn't going to reoffend because he isn't getting released. Yes the murder of 2 children was very inhuman and pointless...and very tragic. But to advocate that we treat him in an inhuman manner isn't going to do any good whatsoever, and we should thank god that we are above treating anyone in that way. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Today there are a great many people who find the thought of capital punishment offensive in the extreme and that is a view with which although I do not agree I do understand. Instead of society taking the life of an extreme criminal like huntley why not provide him with the means to take his own life but only after a period of say 15 or 20 years imprisoned under a real punishment regime. It would then be his choice if he wanted to continue to live under the same conditions or end it by a form of self administered euthanasia. That way the choice is his and he would die by his own hand. To believe that the simple removal of freedom is punishment enough for a criminal act is naïve to say the least. There is another matter and that is revenge. Revenge is good and wholesome. It frequently helps the process of recovery of a victim to know that the person who has brought them pain is now also suffering. Not just inconvenienced, but soul destroying mind numbing suffering utterly hopeless suffering. I want such people to face an inhuman and pointless regime of punishment. I want them destroyed body and soul. Not for the average ‘Joe Bloggs’ with his swag-bag or even the snotty nosed little scrote who commits numerous crimes of opportunity, but those creatures who injure people either physically or mentally. Paedophiles, pleasure-killers, sadists, terrorists, the really bad people in our society. They are the ones who should face a regime that is harsh, pointless, utterly soul destroying, endless, repetative, bioring to the n-th degree, with no hope of parole and above all obvious to them as being unforgiving. Society forbids an individual to take revenge himself and provides the criminal justice system as a means of taking revenge by proxy. Unless the punishment of a criminal, especially one who has committed an inhuman act like huntley, includes an obvious extraction of vengeance upon him then society is letting down the victim and their family. It is long past time that such 'people' were paid in their own coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted August 3, 2004 Share Posted August 3, 2004 But to advocate that we treat him in an inhuman manner isn't going to do any good whatsoever, and we should thank god that we are above treating anyone in that way. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He is a total and utter scum of the earth, evil man and should be treated accordingly. He should have everything taken from him just as the parents of Jessica and Holly probably feel they have had everything taken from them. I believe that he should have his life taken from him, but as that's not going to happen then he should be properly and severely punished, and be reminded every single day of his life of the horrendous crime he has committed. I would have people like him locked up 24/7 without any form of mental stimulation like television or books etc. Sod his human rights, he doesn't deserve any, he murdered those poor children and I bet he didn't give a thought to the fact that he was treating them in an inhuman manner so why should we give any thought to him?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.