from my cold dead hand

[SuitsBlue]

I see all too well that victims rights are a distant second place to the offenders.

justice portrayed as blind is an excuse in the making, it allows a 'we did our best at the time attitude' after the fact.

hindsight is a wonderful thing, in the case you have just raised, it cut both ways.

so people attacked the home of a known child molester... what a shame they didnt get hold of him and tear him to pieces - would the police arrest and charge 10, 20, 50, 100+ ?

rabid dogs are put down

cancer is cut out

harbouring violent criminals invites them to do it again.

"the inability of society to properly condemn its violent law breakers ironically condemns itself to suffer from their crimes" - suitsblue oct 2007

 

[monty]

I see all too well that victims rights are a distant second place to the offenders.

justice portrayed as blind is an excuse in the making, it allows a 'we did our best at the time attitude' after the fact.

hindsight is a wonderful thing, in the case you have just raised, it cut both ways.

so people attacked the home of a known child molester... what a shame they didnt get hold of him and tear him to pieces - would the police arrest and charge 10, 20, 50, 100+ ?

rabid dogs are put down

cancer is cut out

harbouring violent criminals invites them to do it again.

"the inability of society to properly condemn its violent law breakers ironically condemns itself to suffer from their crimes" - suitsblue oct 2007

Tbh Suits I get an inner glow knowing that Brady wants to take the easy way out and can't. The mental torture that prick is going through gives me some satisfaction, to have hung him would have let him off!

 

[neonleon]

"the inability of society to properly condemn its violent law breakers ironically condemns itself to suffer from their crimes" - suitsblue oct 2007

It would be nice if there were some precedents somewhere in western society that could support your backward (this is not meant as a snide remark, it can be proven to be backward because this system of justice was widely prevalent in the past) system of justice.

I can condemn violent law breakers (provided I have respect for the particular law) but do I have the wisdom to deny them their lives? I really don't believe I'm intelligent enough to know whether someone should live or die.

As for the child molestor's house that was attacked. It turned out late that the "child molestor" was a pediatrician. Someone who had dedicated their life to helping and caring for children and treating their sicknesses. Still, the lynch mob tried to get them, 'cos they "knew" he was guilty.

Do you see?

 

[SuitsBlue]

to have hung him would have been to channel tax payers funds to other far more worthy far more needy people.

it would also have been a signal to other sick [Poor language removed] that 'commit violent crime and if the state catches you, you organs are ours'.

human beings are defined by their actions and inactions, brady and hindley proved themselves to be subservient dogs. both a disease.

i wonder if the hippies would welcome them as neighbours after they had been "rehabilitated" (rehabilitation?... ha [Poor language removed] ha)

 

[monty]

to have hung him would have been to channel tax payers funds to other far more worthy far more needy people.

it would also have been a signal to other sick [Poor language removed] that 'commit violent crime and if the state catches you, you organs are ours'.

human beings are defined by their actions and inactions, brady and hindley proved themselves to be subservient dogs. both a disease.

i wonder if the hippies would welcome them as neighbours after they had been "rehabilitated" (rehabilitation?... ha [Poor language removed] ha)

rehabilitation was never a choice...................nor should it have been

 

[SuitsBlue]

"the inability of society to properly condemn its violent law breakers ironically condemns itself to suffer from their crimes" - suitsblue oct 2007

It would be nice if there were some precedents somewhere in western society that could support your backward (this is not meant as a snide remark, it can be proven to be backward because this system of justice was widely prevalent in the past) system of justice.

I can condemn violent law breakers (provided I have respect for the particular law) but do I have the wisdom to deny them their lives? I really don't believe I'm intelligent enough to know whether someone should live or die.

As for the child molestor's house that was attacked. It turned out late that the "child molestor" was a pediatrician. Someone who had dedicated their life to helping and caring for children and treating their sicknesses. Still, the lynch mob tried to get them, 'cos they "knew" he was guilty.

Do you see?

i see in the case you highlight that misinformation was prevalent, and it was the authorities fault for not executing the child molester and allowing IT out that was at fault.

do you have the wisdom to deny them their lives? no, only they do by their actions.

wheres this sense of right and wrong in the minds of the offenders? where are the rights of the victims? suddenly the hippies fawn over the rights of the criminals, 'im pro life' - 'i cant be sure'. Whats sure as [Poor language removed] is that in some cases the element of doubt is non-existant and people like peter sutcliffe deserve a most agonising and painful death like what he served up for his victims.

i want criminals to pay, i'm not willing to let them off with comfortable prisons for a couple of years then their freedom (which they abused initially)

leon, do YOU want sutcliffe, brady, west, whiting living on YOUR street around YOUR family?

 

[neonleon]

i see in the case you highlight that misinformation was prevalent, and it was the authorities fault for not executing the child molester and allowing IT out that was at fault.

do you have the wisdom to deny them their lives? no, only they do by their actions.

wheres this sense of right and wrong in the minds of the offenders? where are the rights of the victims? suddenly the hippies fawn over the rights of the criminals, 'im pro life' - 'i cant be sure'. Whats sure as [Poor language removed] is that in some cases the element of doubt is non-existant and people like peter sutcliffe deserve a most agonising and painful death like what he served up for his victims.

i want criminals to pay, i'm not willing to let them off with comfortable prisons for a couple of years then their freedom (which they abused initially)

leon, do YOU want sutcliffe, brady, west, whiting living on YOUR street around YOUR family?

no, it was not the authorities fault. Even if they summarily executed every paedophile in the land, there would still be a ground surge of lynch mob justice towards paedophiles. Incidentally this is a peculiarly english phemonemon, many other countries don't have this kiddie fiddler hysteria running through their collective psyches. The paedophile in question was a pediatrician, the lynch mob weren't intelligent enough to know the difference between the two. In other words they didn't engage their brains.

You seem to be suffering from something similar in proposing something akin to Sharia Law (did you see the story about muslims beheading alleged prostitutes in pakistan because they were imposing sharia law?) You can explain that as a local geographical cultural phenomenon - but then so is attacking potential paedophiles - its a witch hunt.

As for, the implied threat of having brady, west et al living on my street (and noting that west is dead and brady probably couldn't hurt a fly anymore), the question is redundant, as under any system of justice I proposed, they'd be off the street anyway.

you make massive presumptions that because I don't believe in your draconian stone age sense of justice, I'm somekind of ultra libertarian that thinks every psycho in the world should be free to walk the streets.

that you make such massive and erroneous presumptions only serves to strengthen my conviction that you really aren't bright enough to propose a new ethos for the judicial world.

 

[SuitsBlue]

you miss the point, who keeps the psychopaths (as you call them) ?

i suggest money is better spent elsewhere, and why would i subject prison guards (with families) and doctors and nurses (again with families) to individuals that have proven themselves to be extremely dangerous?

people live in poverty in this country, why keep those in society that dont deserve it?

what is your system of justice?

you point out a case where the locals cant tell the difference between paedophile and pediatrician, im unsure how accurate that story is.

when i hear about prisoners rights im sickened, wheres the consideration for the victims and their families - i find it overwhelmingly selfish, but i also see it as amazingly hypocritical, because when certain crimes are commit against the selfish hippy pro life wank bags, suddenly their position changes.

with victims or against victims. i condemn the criminals everytime.

do you see?

 

[neonleon]

you miss the point, who keeps the psychopaths (as you call them) ?

i suggest money is better spent elsewhere, and why would i subject prison guards (with families) and doctors and nurses (again with families) to individuals that have proven themselves to be extremely dangerous?

people live in poverty in this country, why keep those in society that dont deserve it?

what is your system of justice?

you point out a case where the locals cant tell the difference between paedophile and pediatrician, im unsure how accurate that story is.

when i hear about prisoners rights im sickened, wheres the consideration for the victims and their families - i find it overwhelmingly selfish, but i also see it as amazingly hypocritical, because when certain crimes are commit against the selfish hippy pro life wank bags, suddenly their position changes.

with victims or against victims. i condemn the criminals everytime.

do you see?

You were talking of Brady, West and others, that's why I used the world psychopath - which obviously doesn't apply to the vast majority of the population of prisons in our country.

Psychopath I believe to be the medically correct term for such individuals, but correct me if you have contrary information.

The "mistaken identity" case is well documented.

I got the gender wrong but the essence of my arguments remains valid.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,361031,00.html

that people live in poverty in this country is probably the root cause behind a majority of crimes. Execution of criminals instead of incarcerating them is hardly going to solve everyones problem and eliminate poverty in england.

Closing loop holes in corporate tax could help though.

It is part of the job description for prison guards and people in the caring profession, to face some element of danger - same as fire fighters have to be able to tackle a fire.

"selfish hippy pro life wank bags" - jesus. Who programmed that stereotype into you? I'd suggest most pro life supporters aren't "hippies" for a start. They're more than likely religious fanatics.

Or do you mean pro life as in against the death penalty? Why does this make them selfish hippy wank bags, or have you resorted to derogatory name slanging in a vain attempt to express a perspective.

Have you considered the thousands of blacks that died as a result of lynchings in America? They had no voice. It was culturally condoned. The jews were scapegoated for a plethora of ills in german society. They met a draconian justice that was the order of the day (apologies for invoking Godwins Law) . When you start wallowing in the blood of justice where does it stop?

Justice resolutely has her blindfold on again.

Do you see?

Sadly, no.

 

[SuitsBlue]

thankyou for answering for me

Sadly, no.

break my balls for correct in your eye?

I got the gender wrong but the essence of my arguments remains valid.

you mention danger in terms of fighting fires, fire relies on heat oxygen and fuel, i put it to you that bleeding hearts that protect vicious criminals provide any of the three that allow them and similar to do the same, time and time and time again.

***********

lets go deeper

people live in poverty in this country is the root cause behind a majority of crimes.

'enough for everyones need not for eveyones greed' - i can take that

what i dont buy into is that poverty is an excuse for rape or murder.

sorry.

re reading, what possible vanity allowed you the recourse to answer for me? in the same post no less.

the 'peace and love'... "sunshine lollipops and rainbows" ideal doesnt work, because not all people are good law abiding citizens, so far your inability to condemn of suggest condemnation is a major issue to this subject.

as for blacks and jews in the bad old days, hindsight again, and at no point have i suggested those bad old days were in any way right.

wallowing in the blood of justice, where does it stop? quite simply where criminality stops.

cause and effect, a very simple equation. see that?

 

[neonleon]

Incidentally, whilst I was living in Manchester, after the terrorist attacks in London, some local mob decided to flex the muscles of street justice against local muslims. This involved attacking a local place of worship.

the lynch mob system really works eh?

 

[SuitsBlue]

im not defending the lynch mob, had it found appropriate targets i wouldnt condemn it either.

unfortunately the way things are, due to the way the so called authorities deal with the criminal scum, and allow them back into law abiding society, there will be a flash point.

you can pick on mob wrong doings, hows about occasions where the mob got hold of the right criminal and doled out ''an eye for an eye''?

leon, when will you admit that some people are good law abiding people, and some are bad people that dont give two [Poor language removed] about the law or anyone else?

 

[neonleon]

thankyou for answering for me



break my balls for correct in your eye?



you mention danger in terms of fighting fires, fire relies on heat oxygen and fuel, i put it to you that bleeding hearts that protect vicious criminals provide any of the three that allow them and similar to do the same, time and time and time again.

***********

lets go deeper



'enough for everyones need not for eveyones greed' - i can take that

what i dont buy into is that poverty is an excuse for rape or murder.

sorry.

re reading, what possible vanity allowed you the recourse to answer for me? in the same post no less.

the 'peace and love'... "sunshine lollipops and rainbows" ideal doesnt work, because not all people are good law abiding citizens, so far your inability to condemn of suggest condemnation is a major issue to this subject.

as for blacks and jews in the bad old days, hindsight again, and at no point have i suggested those bad old days were in any way right.

wallowing in the blood of justice, where does it stop? quite simply where criminality stops.

cause and effect, a very simple equation. see that?

break my balls for correct in your eye?

english is my prefered language for debate. Whilst I'll admit the sentence above contains english words, I'm not sure they are the correct ones in the right place. a syntax error?

I'll agree that poverty is not an excuse for rape and murder with the caveat that if you allow a government carte blanche to invade countries over resources (in other words monetary issues, relating to realities of the poor and the rich) then you really are excusing murder and rape.


as for describing my sense of justice as "sunshine and lollipops", because I don't believe in the death penalty. A little childish don't you think?

You misinterpret me. i do condemn rape and murder. Are you suggesting I don't? Please quote previous post that suggest this hypothesis. I just believe summary execution for such atrocities is wrong.
You seem to think that because you advocate a stiffer penalty you have a more finely judged sense of justice and a greater capacity for empathy for the victims.

the blacks and jews issue wasn't brought up to piss you off, as a clever reposte in hindsight. It could and can happen again. Your proposed changes to the justice system would enable such potential atrocities. I agree you have not suggested these deaths were right. I'm sure you are totally against such deaths, but your polices, are so bluntly callous as to provide the space for such atrocities to happen again.

cause and effect you say?

you seem to have calcified your philosophy as far as effect goes. What do you do to combat cause?

 

[neonleon]

im not defending the lynch mob, had it found appropriate targets i wouldnt condemn it either.

unfortunately the way things are, due to the way the so called authorities deal with the criminal scum, and allow them back into law abiding society, there will be a flash point.

you can pick on mob wrong doings, hows about occasions where the mob got hold of the right criminal and doled out ''an eye for an eye''?

leon, when will you admit that some people are good law abiding people, and some are bad people that dont give two [Poor language removed] about the law or anyone else?

it didn't suits. can't remember the precise details (you can google it if you want), but they attacked either a hindu or a sikh temple.

Justice may wear a blindfold but the first casualty of vengance always seems to be reason.

 

[SuitsBlue]

just had an an entire post erased due to the beauty of whatever. too angry at having time and effort erased.

i assure you i will respond tomorrow.

courtesy - a very unimpressed SB.