Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
15 November 2009
17:1333163#1
An immigrant Malaysian woman, who held (her?) child by the ankles and swung him round against a wall and killed him, is to get a £4,500 voucher from us taxpayers, to go home to Malaysia! Cheaper than keeping her here I`m sure. If she were white, we know how many years she`d get here, but is it that we really don`t bother much because 2 immigrants are involved? There`s a fuss about the money, but again, I`m sure she wouldn`t go without that offer, so we`d have to keep her. I`d personally say, send her off to Saudi Arabia and let them deal with her. No messing about over there.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
15 November 2009
17:5733180#2
why is she not in jail?
mind you after the story of the convicted murderer yesterday going awol on a shopping expedition it may not be worth doing.
15 November 2009
18:5033191#3
Yesterdays story was about a convicted murdered housed in a "secure" hospital. No doubt the bleeding heart (read "gullible") social workers made their report to fit. Mental health challenges no doubt add to risks, but if someone has committed a crime that killed or injured someone (or is a paedophile) I suspect not much will remove the risk completely. In my various jobs I have seen how this works.
Alec Sheldon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 18 Aug 2008
- Posts: 1,037
16 November 2009
00:4133206#4
According to the news tonight she has been captured in South London. They couldn't miss her I suppose as she apparently weighed 23 stones.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
16 November 2009
09:3233225#5
Doesn't it show what a sick society we have become ?
Sick because we give someone £4,500 to go back home after killing a child ?
Sick because we seem to have created a society where there is so much child-abuse
Sick because we've almost become numb to this kind of behaviour; sentences are never strong or long enough - we (or rather they, the children) are not being protected by the State - it is their responsibility to protect the vulnerable, but they are not locking these people away for anywhere near long enough.
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
16 November 2009
09:3833227#6
Here goes this debate again.
So we clearly CANNOT jail everyone as we dont have room in jails to do so, so what do we do?
release lighter sentences? (debate there why should they get off if they are convicted)
jail only serious offenders
(who makes the decision whats serious)
do more with lighter sentences like making them work in the community?
long debate
but just LOCK THEM ALL UP
cannot be achieved and is also not the answer
16 November 2009
09:5933232#7
Child abuse has always been there, possibly more than today - it is, perversely, encouraging that it is being huighlighted and reported so much now, as it gives us the opportunity to do something about it.
16 November 2009
10:0133233#8
Keith - it is my own personal, and my professional, opinion that we should indeed confine all convicted paedophiles for life. My experience of them as a professional is that they do not change. Why would they? They have urges and needs that will not just go away, and which leave them a risk to our children. The risk is not one worth taking.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
16 November 2009
10:4633239#9
free up space by giving community sentences to those who are not violent is a logical step.
we have enough work that needs doing cleaning up our towns and cities to keep all miscreants busy for the foreseeable future.
16 November 2009
11:5233245#10
Absolutely! Prison is, in part, to protect society (amongst other things) - bang up the ones who pose a risk to us, scope out alternatives for the others.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
16 November 2009
18:1733264#11
Yes, I've said this many times on here, that we should find an alternative solution to "white collar" crime and crimes that don't involve violence.
Prisons are full of people that are not a threat to society, but have offended and so need punishment for it - Community Pay-Back teams could and would work wonders for Dover.
I've already made contact with them and hope to have a talk with them very soon.
Roger
Guest 641- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,335
16 November 2009
20:1933278#12
The recent Paul Gadd (Gary Glitter) Hanging Docutype drama for me hit the nail on the head, paedophiles are the worst form of criminal in my view and we should save taxpayers monies and bring back the death penalty for all paedophiles.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
16 November 2009
20:5633287#13
Here here.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
16 November 2009
21:1933296#14
I can't ever agree to the death penalty, but realistically they are never going to change, so keep them away from society and reduce the risk to our children. Their human right to freedom vs our children. No contest!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
17 November 2009
08:1533315#15
I have no problem agreeing with Barry WS. A convicted paedophile can never be cured and what they have done is just about the worst crime possible, so put them down.
It is the responsibility of the Government - any Government to safeguard the public, but on this, they are failing in very serious and fundamental way; the judges never seem to get it right either, but they are so far removed from reality, it's not surprising.
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
17 November 2009
10:3633335#16
A number of issues come to light here,
thankfully most are moving towards thre "community service" route for less offenders.
Of course on this, someone who has NOT been violent, yet burgled some one the person being burgled, would they be happy that someone found guilty and just getting a community sentence??
interesting debate though
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
17 November 2009
12:0633337#17
We have far too many soft options and need to be a lot tougher with criminals. Longer sentences and yes, that means buidling more prisons and, even more important make the prison regimes a lot tougher and a lot more unpleasant than they are. Young thugs, give them the only thing they understand, the birch and a lot of humiliation to go with it.
17 November 2009
12:4133339#18
Part of me agrees, but most of me doesn't! Humiliation does not, on the whole, provide for rehabilitation, and there are many young felons who are capable of rehabilitation. There are some who aren't, but many who are - perhaps consistent repeat offenders might more merit the harder approach? I do, however, believe in a short sharp shock! I stop short of violence, though.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
17 November 2009
12:4733340#19
What about re-instating the medieval pillory, into Dover castle, then selling to visitors, Tescos eggs, past their sell by date?
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
17 November 2009
13:1133343#20
Now you really are talking Colin.....
One reason we are going wrong today is that while some may respond to the softer options to others they are just a joke and do not deter.
Yes we must rehabilitate and that must be part of any solution but it needs backing up by good old fashioned fear. Fear not only of being caught but of the punishments. In this day 'status' and 'image' are so important so why not use that as a way to punish, bring them down a few pegs and publically humiliate wrongdoers...
The carrot is not good without the stick, these days we, society, does not weild a big enough stick.