I think it's disgusting, this is someone that's represented our nation so if respect was due it was due to him, not the twonk with the gun! It makes me wonder what on earth passes as thoughts for some of these people, if they want 'respect' for being a schister with a gun then they're pretty insecure if you ask me. He want's to smoke then fine......get a few hundred cigarettes, lace them around a bonfire and tie him to a stake on it, then we'll see how desperate he is to smoke.
The cynic in my says a wrap on the wrist and some communitty service. However hopefully with the unproved nature and level of violence of the incident those working for her magesty detain him for quite some time.
I'm not sure anyone is suggesting they only get community service for their crime but the way that law courts treat criminals these days they are likely to get a slap on the bottom and a shake of the head and told not to do it again.
Obviously this thread contains an extremely emotive subject and we’ve already had a couple of misunderstandings between members. Let’s try to read things more carefully and then read them again before responding.
I don't see the point of removing a persons civil liberties just to have the tax payers pay for these criminals existence for the rest of their life. There are much more useful uses for such scum, organ harvesting, scientific experimentation, etc. I think if you take a life, you give up your human rights and the right to live. Also, I'm pretty sure this would be a good deterrent as well, no point being soft, China has the right idea.
Yes we know murder carries a life sentence but you see it more often than not, someone gets sent to prison for murder, sentenced to life and they're released within a few years for good behaviour. Apparently, the average life sentence before a parole hearing is about 15 years, but often it is sooner than that.
15 years or less for taking someone's life! That's not nearly long enough.
If a life sentence is deemed suitable punishment then personally I feel that this should be for the rest of your natural life.
Fifteen years is still a long time - hardly a 'slap on the wrist'! Although whether or not it is long enough would depend on the exact circumstances. The victim's family would always want longer I suppose, but the law has to be applicable across the board.
So you think that every life sentence should be a full-life tariff? That doesn't give the courts any room for manoeuvre!
I think sentencing has to be able to distinguish between (for example) a killing during the course of a fight where both parties are at fault, and the premeditated killing of a child. They might both be 'murder' but there is a big difference, and sentencing guidelines should reflect this.
The proposal to introduce different 'degrees' of murder, like they have in the USA, sounds like a good idea to me.
Exactly! However, if someone murdered a member of my family and was out in under 15 years I will definitely see it as him/her getting a mere slap on the wrist.
I originally wrote and then took out 'depending on the circumstances' thinking that it would detract from the topic at hand and lead off in the direction we've headed down anyway. Let's just say it's a given that the specific details of a case should determine punishment and get back to the main subject.
Do we know how he is doing? I was really surprised not to see anything on the news last night.
Life for me personally should mean Life or at the very minimum 30 years, i am not sure if people have noticed but judges seem to be making sure people spend more time behind bars now, by sentencing people to life and saying that they have to server a minimum 24 years before they can be considered for parole, it seems to me that the judges are having to make that stipulation so they aren't allowed out early.
that's the complete travesty which is the UK justice system.