Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Just when is something going to be done...."
When the police force was initially set up, its job was to maintain the peace - to prevent laws being broken, and to (try to) ensure the safety of the public. It was specifically not designed to investigate crime, or to track down miscreants. That job was for the magistrates.
But I would have thought that part of the purpose of the law and order system would be to provide a deterrent to stop bad things happening in the first place.
When the police force was initially set up, its job was to maintain the peace - to prevent laws being broken, and to (try to) ensure the safety of the public. It was specifically not designed to investigate crime, or to track down miscreants. That job was for the magistrates.
Does the panel think the kind of thing would be less common if our national pastime wasn't going down the boozer, getting stoned and behaving like drunks?
Possibly, but the underlying cause is that we are an arrogant nasty shallow individualist society - unpleasant characteristics that Thatcher and others tapped into.
There is no correlation with death penalty and murder and if anything the fact that there has been so many miscarriages of justice should be the main reason for not having it. The death penalty should only apply to war criminals, politicians and corrupt civil servants.
Does the panel think the kind of thing would be less common if our national pastime wasn't going down the boozer, getting stoned and behaving like drunks?
You are falling victim to the fallacy that a broken society can be fixed with more laws. It can't: you need to fix society, and that can not be done with a stroke of the pen (especially if you believe that there is no such thing as society).
As John Ruskin said in the 19th century, if you fix the schools then you won't need to fix the prisons.
I agree but I also believe that if a crime is committed the punishment should fit it - in many cases now it clearly doesn't. For example, the two thugs in Norwich who were beating up a homeless man - a passer by tried to help him and so they killed him. Sentence - seven years for one thug, seven and a half for the other.
I didn't mean literally just the schools but our society in general needs fixed. It took a long time to get this way, it won't be quick to fix, but if you just try to fix the broken individuals by jailing them, you will never be free of the problem because you are creating more of them as fast as you jail them.
I know what you mean.
My post was what to do about the backlog once the fix has been implemented
Even if we fix the schools, that still leaves a backlog of feral anti-social yobs that need to be taken care of. Hanging may not be a deterrant but it sure stops them beating or killing any other poor sod
I didn't mean literally just the schools but our society in general needs fixed. It took a long time to get this way, it won't be quick to fix, but if you just try to fix the broken individuals by jailing them, you will never be free of the problem because you are creating more of them as fast as you jail them.
You are falling victim to the fallacy that a broken society can be fixed with more laws. It can't: you need to fix society, and that can not be done with a stroke of the pen (especially if you believe that there is no such thing as society).
As John Ruskin said in the 19th century, if you fix the schools then you won't need to fix the prisons.
Even if we fix the schools, that still leaves a backlog of feral anti-social yobs that need to be taken care of. Hanging may not be a deterrant but it sure stops them beating or killing any other poor sod
You are falling victim to the fallacy that a broken society can be fixed with more laws. It can't: you need to fix society, and that can not be done with a stroke of the pen (especially if you believe that there is no such thing as society).
As John Ruskin said in the 19th century, if you fix the schools then you won't need to fix the prisons.
Leave a comment: