Thread: Wtf

Originally Posted by Sidney

It was a rhetorical question, have a stab at how inequitable that would become..... and how quickly we would descend into anarchy

We are. With the current lack of action at the bottom end, and over use of the wet bus tickets, the crims are lulled into a sense that nothing much will really happen. If you look at countries where the penalties are harsher for more minor crimes they tend to have less of the major crimes.

I have a feeling that you don't really understand what anarchy is. How do you explain a 15 year low in serious crime and overfull prisons in terms of your wet bus ticket theory...?

Originally Posted by Sidney

I have a feeling that you don't really understand what anarchy is. How do you explain a 15 year low in serious crime and overfull prisons in terms of your wet bus ticket theory...?

Changes in reporting and definitions? I'm not sure. There was a social experiment, implemented many years ago, where more emphasis was placed on lighter sentencing and other measures in order to correct behaviours with earlier offences in order to avoid people becoming career criminals. With this how do YOU explain why the prisons are fuller? To start with they think, "Wow, I'm treated pretty good. I's not so bad, ...", and they simply continue.

I know it is not a simple problem to solve. There are other factors:

Lack of corporal punishment in schools, for many a quick whack to put them in line worked. Some it didn't. The current situation where they don't want to be there and don't care if they are forced not to be doesn't really worry them.

Economic influences/unemployment. Sometimes people just have to survive, it has been happening for thousands of years now.

Drugs, often started as a release from social/economic issues. Being illegal they are driven underground which makes them expensive and crime is often the only means they can find to pay for it.

Social changes. It is instilled in the young that they have the right to be respected, to a certain extent yes. But in large true respect is something earned.

It is not easy, and I'm not sure you truly know the difference between a legal system and a justice system.

perhaps you can tell me what justice is then...

Originally Posted by Sidney

perhaps you can tell me what justice is then...

I'll tell you what justice isn't Sidney....the 10 years jail served of a life sentence by the 16 year old low life who shot my father in the back of the head, killing him. It affected my whole life, but it seems that shouldn't matter. Instead we should think of the perpetrator's well being and rights above those of the victim and family. I wish I had been able to get up in court and express how this mongrel's actions had affected my family's lives.

"Do we now have to sentence people according to how the victims feels appropriate? Is that sort of emotional decision making how we should run a justice system?"

Why not? Lawyers constantly appeal to the emotions of judges and juries. How many times do we have to hear of lawyers trying to mitigate the perpetrator's crime by stating 'the offender had an unfortunate upbringing, was socially and economically deprived, used alcohol/illicit substances etc. etc. ad nauseam. I believe the courts really are doing a disservice to the victim, family and society if not taking into account how it affects them when sentencing the perpetrator.

I am so sick and tired of bleeding hearts sticking up for these scum. Do the crime, do the time. No second chance as far as I am concerned. I am a big proponent of 'an eye for an eye', but I am a law abiding citizen that expects the courts to punish the offender accordingly. Unfortunately I now have little faith in the legal system as I believe it is out of touch with community expectations. The pendulum has now swung too far towards upholding the rights? of perpetrators as against society as a whole.

Am I emotional/bitter? Too right I am.

Pete

Originally Posted by ExPoh75

I'll tell you what justice isn't Sidney....the 10 years jail served of a life sentence by the 16 year old low life who shot my father in the back of the head, killing him. It affected my whole life, but it seems that shouldn't matter. Instead we should think of the perpetrator's well being and rights above those of the victim and family. I wish I had been able to get up in court and express how this mongrel's actions had affected my family's lives.

"Do we now have to sentence people according to how the victims feels appropriate? Is that sort of emotional decision making how we should run a justice system?"

Why not? Lawyers constantly appeal to the emotions of judges and juries. How many times do we have to hear of lawyers trying to mitigate the perpetrator's crime by stating 'the offender had an unfortunate upbringing, was socially and economically deprived, used alcohol/illicit substances etc. etc. ad nauseam. I believe the courts really are doing a disservice to the victim, family and society if not taking into account how it affects them when sentencing the perpetrator.

I am so sick and tired of bleeding hearts sticking up for these scum. Do the crime, do the time. No second chance as far as I am concerned. I am a big proponent of 'an eye for an eye', but I am a law abiding citizen that expects the courts to punish the offender accordingly. Unfortunately I now have little faith in the legal system as I believe it is out of touch with community expectations. The pendulum has now swung too far towards upholding the rights? of perpetrators as against society as a whole.

Am I emotional/bitter? Too right I am.

Pete

Pete...

You are correct, sentencing isn't justice. You could say that sentencing is the execution of justice and it is a component of the system of justice.

I don't minimise the way your lives have been affected in any way. But how would the way that you feel, and the way that you are affected by the loss of your father, actually change if the kid had got 20 years or the rest of his life, or even been hung by his neck?

I am not sticking up for anybody, accountability is the issue, but justice is simply being held accountable. The sentence may be more or less equitable/fair in your opinion, but you are only considering it from your perspective. Being a judge requires balancing perspectives, the victims, societal and the offender... whether you understand that or not this place is a better place because of it.

There are plenty of other places in the world to live that don't balance those perspectives, but you and most of us would not want to live there.

What you are talking about is how that balance is prioritised or weighted. That is always up for debate, but in spite of your understanding there is significant legal opinion that considers that our justice system has become too weighted towards the victim, and this distorts the application of the law.

I am always interested in the "rights of the criminal/perpetrator" comment. People don't seem to connect that these are actually the same rights that apply to ordinary citizens, until guilt is established. To reduce the "rights of the perpetrator prior to conviction" is to also reduce the rights of everybody else. I'm certainly not comfortable with that, nor should anybody else be.

Originally Posted by Sidney

Pete...

You are correct, sentencing isn't justice. You could say that sentencing is the execution of justice and it is a component of the system of justice.

I don't minimise the way your lives have been affected in any way. But how would the way that you feel, and the way that you are affected by the loss of your father, actually change if the kid had got 20 years or the rest of his life, or even been hung by his neck?

I am not sticking up for anybody, accountability is the issue, but justice is simply being held accountable. The sentence may be more or less equitable/fair in your opinion, but you are only considering it from your perspective. Being a judge requires balancing perspectives, the victims, societal and the offender... whether you understand that or not this place is a better place because of it.

There are plenty of other places in the world to live that don't balance those perspectives, but you and most of us would not want to live there.

What you are talking about is how that balance is prioritised or weighted. That is always up for debate, but in spite of your understanding there is significant legal opinion that considers that our justice system has become too weighted towards the victim, and this distorts the application of the law.

I am always interested in the "rights of the criminal/perpetrator" comment. People don't seem to connect that these are actually the same rights that apply to ordinary citizens, until guilt is established. To reduce the "rights of the perpetrator prior to conviction" is to also reduce the rights of everybody else. I'm certainly not comfortable with that, nor should anybody else be.

Fair enough comment Sydney. I apologise if you think my comments were a direct attack on you personally, that was not my intention.

I was trying to give an example of where, in my opinion, the legal system let not only my family but also society down.

Anyway we seem to have drifted away from the main thrust of the original post so I'll leave it that.