Saintandy666 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 How can you possibly measure if it has made people think twice or not? Because I honestly do not think punishment level has a big deterrent effect in most cases. Those that end up committing crimes do it regardless(and there are theories for that)... hence why people do the same stuff over and over and over again despite many demonstrations of deterrent. Don't misunderstand me here. They did wrong, and they should be punished for that. I just don't think it will have the great deterrent effect you hope for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony13579 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 When you compare it with this case http://www.cotwa.info/2013/02/woman-jailed-after-11-false-rape-claims.html First offence Vs 11th offence.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Because I honestly do not think punishment level has a big deterrent effect in most cases. Those that end up committing crimes do it regardless(and there are theories for that)... hence why people do the same stuff over and over and over again despite many demonstrations of deterrent. Don't misunderstand me here. They did wrong, and they should be punished for that. I just don't think it will have the great deterrent effect you hope for. They deserve to go to prison because the usual sentance for that crime is a custodial one. That's how it is young Andy and no amount of wailiing about if it stops other people doing it or not is going to change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 They deserve to go to prison because the usual sentance for that crime is a custodial one. That's how it is young Andy and no amount of wailiing about if it stops other people doing it or not is going to change that. Of course they deserve to get the normal punishment. That wasn't really my argument at all. I was arguing against those who claimed they should go to prison because it acts as a deterrent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Do you have stats to back up that claim young Andy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Do you have stats to back up that claim young Andy? Demanding stats, the old SW backup! I would point to the fact firstly that crime happens everywhere regardless of system harshness. There is absolutely no country in the world which is crime free. However, there are obviously differences. Looking at recorded cases of crimes per 100,000 people of selected countries - US - 5.0 England and Wales - 1.1 Norway 0.6. Now, if you want to look at which of those systems concentrate on harsher sentences as opposed to rehab, the correlation is there. However, I would personally say that the real conclusion is that there is little direct correlation between crime and penal system. I would probably criticise my figures though in that obviously what is and isn't a crime is entirely subjective to the state that rules present in that given country at the moment. I think the main thing I am trying to say here is that the idea that people won't commit 'crime' because of a longer jail sentence is rubbish. If you look at the figures there is a much stronger correlation between poverty, unemployment and blocked goals than with sentence length. Though that of course has little to do with this specific case, but we'd do well to remember that within the grand scheme of crime this is just one case and not necessarily the indicator of any trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Of course they deserve to get the normal punishment. That wasn't really my argument at all. I was arguing against those who claimed they should go to prison because it acts as a deterrent. You said he shouldn't go to prison because he'd suffered enough and it was a waste of money. You are wrong, they should get the sentance that fits the crime, which is a custodial one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Of course they deserve to get the normal punishment. That wasn't really my argument at all. I was arguing against those who claimed they should go to prison because it acts as a deterrent. Usually I agree with you, some of the sentences handed out for the riots were obscene, as are some given to football fans for doing things like shaking a fence. But in cases like this where the people involved are loaded a fine wouldn't be a real punishment. And because it is so high profile an example had to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Usually I agree with you, some of the sentences handed out for the riots were obscene, as are some given to football fans for doing things like shaking a fence. But in cases like this where the people involved are loaded a fine wouldn't be a real punishment. And because it is so high profile an example had to be made. The fine point is a good one. I guess their family and professional life have been trashed more by personal and media forces than state forces. However, I wouldn't want to get to a point whereby poor people get fines because it is a punishment, and rich people don't. Especially if there is a big correlation between poverty, unemployment and so on and crime as the figures appear to show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 11 March, 2013 Author Share Posted 11 March, 2013 Glad he got jailed, and his slag of an ex-wife. I have less respect for her than I do him for such a petty act of revenge. I'm glad he got bird, but not so sure about his ex missus getting the same treatment. Usually, during marital breakups, the woman ends up being the more vulnerable party, and given the nature of that horrifying phone conversation that was aired it strikes me that she had a very strong case of marital coercion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 11 March, 2013 Share Posted 11 March, 2013 I'm glad he got bird, but not so sure about his ex missus getting the same treatment. Usually, during marital breakups, the woman ends up being the more vulnerable party, and given the nature of that horrifying phone conversation that was aired it strikes me that she had a very strong case of marital coercion. I don't know. She seems a quite strong character, and the way she tried and used this(many years down the line) to implicate Huhne, but not herself was very coy and manipulative. I don't think it is the actions of a weak-willed person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 12 March, 2013 Share Posted 12 March, 2013 Went for a few pints with my mate who works for a press agency last night. He reckons the Tory press are desperately looking for lib/dems that knew all about it, but kept quiet and made out they were "shocked" that he lied to them. Cable is the one they want, but are struggling to find enough to print. Mate reckons they've been tipped the wink that its worth following up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 12 March, 2013 Share Posted 12 March, 2013 Went for a few pints with my mate who works for a press agency last night. He reckons the Tory press are desperately looking for lib/dems that knew all about it, but kept quiet and made out they were "shocked" that he lied to them. Cable is the one they want, but are struggling to find enough to print. Mate reckons they've been tipped the wink that its worth following up. Is this the end of the start of the end of the ConDemolition? Are we going to see it fail, sooner rather than later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 12 March, 2013 Share Posted 12 March, 2013 Might be the end of cable. He is a royal pain in the Tory fundament. He was on 5 live denying it yesterday, so if he is found out, he is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 12 March, 2013 Share Posted 12 March, 2013 Cable is a grade "A" prat. Everytime I see his ridiculous gurning face on TV the words that come out of his mouth impress me less and less. If he really is so highly regarded in LibTw*t circles, it speaks volume about the quality of the rest of them. Tim Farron was spot-on over the weekend. A crackpot protest party, utterly clueless in the realities of governing, power hungry and utterly immoral in its conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 12 March, 2013 Share Posted 12 March, 2013 Cable hasn't got a clue. Loony toons on acid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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