Guest Dark Sotonic Mills Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/8308946.stm 18 months? Not enough. It's physical abuse, he should have got at least 5 years IMO.
benjii Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 Plenty IMO. In fact, I'm surprised he got that long.
bungle Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 What's the point of sending him to jail? Yes, he's clearly a bit of an idiot, and what he did was wrong, but I can't see how a jail sentence is proportionate, or will actually help anyone. One assumes he had no history of crime before this, so we are now putting him into what is basically a school for criminals. Worrying.
thesaint sfc Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 Think our prisons are slightly too full for idiots like him. Perhaps dropping him in the middle of the ocean and seeing if he manages to swim home would be a better punishment.
Hatch Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 What's the point of sending him to jail? Yes, he's clearly a bit of an idiot, and what he did was wrong, but I can't see how a jail sentence is proportionate, or will actually help anyone. One assumes he had no history of crime before this, so we are now putting him into what is basically a school for criminals. Worrying. I agree, if everyone who was an idiot was sent to prison , I would soon become a very lonely person. Presumably this punishment would also apply to anyone that might have let their kids have a little sip of their pint. Guilty M'lud.
Doctoroncall Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 It used to cost society about £40k a year per prisoner a few years ago, so it would have been better for him to be picking up litter for 18 months, especially the cigarette packets and buts that are left around.
RonManager Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 It used to cost society about £40k a year per prisoner a few years ago, so it would have been better for him to be picking up litter for 18 months, especially the cigarette packets and buts that are left around. And then being made to eat them (recycling).
benjii Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 It is shocking that someone would think it funny to do this but 18 months in prison is ridiculous. It is extremely unlikley that three cigarettes will cause this child any harm at all and there is no suggestion that she is now addicted to cigarettes. The guy is clearly a complete plank who deserves a public dressing down and the derision of us all but 18 months!! 18 MONTHS? You could go out and head-butt a complete stranger in the face causing a broken nose, scarring, mental anguish etc and you would only get about 6-12 months. You could burgle a house and you would probably just get a community order if it was your first offence and you had a decent enough sob-story. 18 months for giving a kid a cigarette is ridiculous. This is precisely the sort of crime for which a community order is appropriate.
warsash saint Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 (edited) It is shocking that someone would think it funny to do this but 18 months in prison is ridiculous. It is extremely unlikley that three cigarettes will cause this child any harm at all and there is no suggestion that she is now addicted to cigarettes. The suggestion that the kid is addicted is perhaps there.....the person that found the kid smoking commented that when she finished one fag, she asked for another. When the **** refused, she burst out crying ! I agree with DSM, 18 months is not long enough - you would expect longer if he has physically hit the kid, just cause the kid was being damaged inside, whats the difference ? Edited 15 October, 2009 by warsash saint
benjii Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 The suggestion that the kid is addicted is perhaps there.....the person that found the kid smoking commented that when she finished one fag, she asked for another. When the **** refused, she burst out crying ! I agree with DSM, 18 months is not long enough - you would expect longer if he has physically hit the kid, just cause the kid was being damaged inside, whats the difference ? Er, well no, you wouldn't. That's the point! 18 months for a minor physical assault is unheard of.
Scummer Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 The suggestion that the kid is addicted is perhaps there.....the person that found the kid smoking commented that when she finished one fag, she asked for another. When the **** refused, she burst out crying ! That's what kids of that age do. Nothing to do with cigarettes.
Made in Southampton Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 I'm amazed at some of the views on here. I have a 3 year old little girl and to even imagine her taking one puff fills me in horror. I dont even want her to grow up knowing about cigarettes. This ****ing retard deserves every second of the 18 months he gets IMO.
aintforever Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 Deserves 18 months IMO, he is obviously complete sc*m. I expect he wont even serve half that, some pussy do-gooder will let him out after 4.
unionhotel Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 In this day and age when smokers are being vilified and demonised it's so easy for anti-smokers to jump on the band-wagon and say, "Gotcha you b a s t a r d". It hasn't always been like that and for the majority of the population we have grown up with smoking and can remember when it was deemed acceptable and normal to smoke. The Nanny State has turned so many people into mindless apparachiks that common sense has gone out of the window and big sticks are being used to punish people for what is, after all, a minor misdemeanour by a patently stupid bloke. Forget the sentimentality. He didn't hit her or sexually abuse her. He gave her a fag. Big Deal. As someone else has pointed out, how many times have we let our kids have a sip of our alcoholic drinks? What next? Jail Time for mothers who give their kids junk food?
benjii Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 I'm amazed at some of the views on here. I have a 3 year old little girl and to even imagine her taking one puff fills me in horror. I dont even want her to grow up knowing about cigarettes. This ****ing retard deserves every second of the 18 months he gets IMO. WHat on earth will you do if she ever watches the news by mistake? By the way, I would advise against sending her to school as some people will do naughty stuff.
Redbul Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 Ladies, ladies, please.....less bickering. Basically it breaks down like this. The ***** encouraged a very small child to smoke a very addictive drug. If the child demanded cigarettes thereafter and was given them she would be doing untold damage to her body which in my opinion constitutes physical abuse. Eighteen months should be the minimum the ****tard does. Just because cigarettes (and therefore nicotine) are legal doesn't excuse the stupidity of this ****s actions. What's he going to try next? Hawking heroin or cocaine outside the school gates? ******. Nail him up, nail some sense into him.
Rattlehead Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 What's the point of sending him to jail? Well, if he doesn't like being repeatedly f*cked up the *rse, he won't do it again will he?
bungle Posted 15 October, 2009 Posted 15 October, 2009 Well, if he doesn't like being repeatedly f*cked up the *rse, he won't do it again will he? Considering that sending people to jail actually leads to people reoffending, you are just plain wrong. It's absolutely stupid to send this guy to prison, it would do anything productive. Yes, he should be punished, but not by a custodial sentence.
Big John Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 Is there a world of difference between what this chap has done and what millions of others do to their kids every day through passive smoking? Maybe a lesser crime, but still criminal in my opinion is the fact that kids are being poisoned by their parents as they sit and watch the Simpsons or do their homework.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 I'm amazed at some of the views on here. I have a 3 year old little girl and to even imagine her taking one puff fills me in horror. I dont even want her to grow up knowing about cigarettes. This ****ing retard deserves every second of the 18 months he gets IMO. What he deserves is one thing, but when you realise how much it will cost to keep him in prison, and when prisons are already bursting at the seams, I would suggest that another type of punishment would have been better. That's not to say that the crime isn't odious.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 In this day and age when smokers are being vilified and demonised it's so easy for anti-smokers to jump on the band-wagon and say, "Gotcha you b a s t a r d". It hasn't always been like that and for the majority of the population we have grown up with smoking and can remember when it was deemed acceptable and normal to smoke. The Nanny State has turned so many people into mindless apparachiks that common sense has gone out of the window and big sticks are being used to punish people for what is, after all, a minor misdemeanour by a patently stupid bloke. Forget the sentimentality. He didn't hit her or sexually abuse her. He gave her a fag. Big Deal. As someone else has pointed out, how many times have we let our kids have a sip of our alcoholic drinks? What next? Jail Time for mothers who give their kids junk food? That's a ridiculous comparison.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 His comparison about junk food isn't though... Excessive junk food certainly mothers should be disciplined and if they refuse to comply then it should be treated as abuse and their children should be taken into care (and this has happened in the past). Jail is silly and unproductive for both these cases though.
unionhotel Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 That's a ridiculous comparison. Why is it ridiculous? Alcohol can be just as dangerous.
warsash saint Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 Why is it ridiculous? Alcohol can be just as dangerous. There's a difference between a sip & 3 whole fags.
Made in Southampton Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 What he deserves is one thing, but when you realise how much it will cost to keep him in prison, and when prisons are already bursting at the seams, I would suggest that another type of punishment would have been better. That's not to say that the crime isn't odious. To be honest I dont care how much it cost to keep him in prison. The moment you start talking about keeping people out of jail because it costs too much is the time that we might as well all give up.
Thedelldays Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 Considering that sending people to jail actually leads to people reoffending, you are just plain wrong. It's absolutely stupid to send this guy to prison, it would do anything productive. Yes, he should be punished, but not by a custodial sentence. we should have the chain gang type of jails that they have in the USofA for more minor crimes... tthe guy here in question would spen say....1 year in jail, doing manual labour for the public wearing a pink outfit (like a certain jail in the US) the effect of that jail in the US on the local community was that it stopped the re-offending rate by something like 70%.... I bet this guy would not give another 3 year old a ciggy every again...
benjii Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 There's a difference between a sip & 3 whole fags. TBH, there isn't really.
benjii Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 I think any right minded person who thinks about this properly will conclude that a custodial sentence is just bizarre.
aintforever Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 I think any right minded person who thinks about this properly will conclude that a custodial sentence is just bizarre. Not really, it takes a special sort of w@nker to feed a 3 year old cigarettes, it's one of those cases where a judge made an example as a deterent - for very good reason. I have more respect for muggers and burglers than the ****er who got a 3 year old hooked on fags.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 There's a difference between a sip & 3 whole fags. Exactly. I would have thought that most people would have been able to work that out...
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 To be honest I dont care how much it cost to keep him in prison. The moment you start talking about keeping people out of jail because it costs too much is the time that we might as well all give up. What is putting him in prison achieving? He should be made to contribute to society and atone for his actions rather than becoming a drain.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 TBH, there isn't really. Erm yeah there is.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 we should have the chain gang type of jails that they have in the USofA for more minor crimes... tthe guy here in question would spen say....1 year in jail, doing manual labour for the public wearing a pink outfit (like a certain jail in the US) the effect of that jail in the US on the local community was that it stopped the re-offending rate by something like 70%.... I bet this guy would not give another 3 year old a ciggy every again... Totally agree. He should work for his crimes, not get to sit around in jail.
aintforever Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 What is putting him in prison achieving? He should be made to contribute to society and atone for his actions rather than becoming a drain. I think 18 months of getting buggered by leeroy will teach him a lesson.
hypochondriac Posted 16 October, 2009 Posted 16 October, 2009 I think 18 months of getting buggered by leeroy will teach him a lesson. At the taxpayer's expense. Fab.
benjii Posted 17 October, 2009 Posted 17 October, 2009 Erm yeah there is. What is it? As far as I can see both are completely inconsequential acts.
Made in Southampton Posted 18 October, 2009 Posted 18 October, 2009 At the taxpayer's expense. Fab. WTF is this big hang up about this 'Tax Payers Expense' all about? Why have we seemed to have started to try and balance the books around custodial sentances? WTF is wrong with society when people start to argue the justification of keeping someone out of jail cos of cost ??? The bloke knowingly gave a 3yr old cigarettes. I'm thinking that someone that has this sort of mentality doesn't really contribute much to the national GDP in fact by putting him away we might just be saving money of the C*nts benefits.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now