Under Labour, the average time spent in prison by murderers and rapists is 6 years. This is down from 14 years before Labour came to power.
These are people that should be killed, let alone free after 6 years. People get their Doctorates in about as much time and sacrifice. Actually, half of them probably do degrees while inside. Probably a cheap way to get your school done.
Kill em all I say.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Not good. But I dont know what has caused this reduction and I dont believe that Labour sat down at the start of their time in office and formulated a plan to let rapists do less time inside!
I agree - kill em.
But unfortunately, as you were arguing in another post, although the majority opinion is the same as mine...the minority rules on this issue.
A highly incompetent way of dealing with crime. Another is not to build more prisons when we need them. Another is releasing people early without proper supervision. Another is not vetting workers before they are allowed to work with children. The list is endless. I question why after 10 years have they still not looked at all this? Perhaps because a certain war has distracted the government somewhat? Perhaps politicians are just people who never tell the truth and would never be able to get a normal job. I say kill them all - politicians, starting with Blair!
Nonsense!
Its very easy to sit preaching armchair advice at politicians when you know virtually nothing about the real day-to-day issues of being a politician. Imagine someone who had never done your job telling you what an idiot you were when your results were disappointing!
It's just too easy to sit back and hope, expect, even demand that politicians just wave a magic wand and make us a perfect country!
Pimpin aint easy...neither is running a country!
Ohh poppy cock! Do we really need a fucking £3m enquiry into Iraq to tell us the current situation is fucked? No, why because a lot of this is common sense and if it's not common sense it's down to trial and error. The issue is not how easy it is to run a country the issue is crucifying the government when they fuck up and they have - royally. Most policy decicions are made by think tanks and only when they have been through 100 focus groups to understand how the people will react NOT if the fucking policy will actually work.
Unlike you, I don't feel the need to defend them. Education, crime, transport, energy, all key areas of failure. WIth many of these things there are forward and backward moves but on the whole you have to think overall. Eductaion is in some ways better, more teachers, getting paid, improved results from key failing sectors like young men etc. This has to be belanced against pheaodophiles in schools because standard checks weren't made. School academys which make vain rich bastards more money while teaching creationist bollocks, less applications to university because of high tuition fees.
I could go on but I won't. Bottom line is no government is perfect but is there anything wrong with striving for it and falling a few lengths short????
Sure we should strive for better but we should bear in mind that it ain't easy...
When in our history have we had it better?
Not that you need any further fuel for disenchantment my friends, but politicians CERTAINLY DO make the decisions - decisions are made before any briefs are event sent to think tanks and focus groups - don't you know these things are all a complete sham?
Chairman, do you really want to live in a country that is run according to the "common sense" of the great British unwashed...? Sounds like the perfect nightmare to me - give me competent, if sometimes wrong, career politicians any day.
hear hear!
chairmaonofthebored - you habitual tendancy to blame everything on the government and Mr Blair is becoming predictable and quite boring.
If you think voting in a bunch of tweed wearing, horse riding, fox hunting tories will change anything or address any of the issues that concern you, which seems mainly to be iraq, then you are delusional. Labour, Tory, gordon brown, dave cameron or whoever, both would have been up Bush's arse.
Reality check. Your voice counts for nothing. Be grateful for what you have, look at people who are a lot less fortunate than you - practically 4/5ths of the planet, and be at peace.
Now, lets get back to the point. rapists and paedophiles. until we find the gene that predisposes them to this behaviour, and I dont care what anyone says, it is a gene, kill them. Any living relatives should be sterilised and then monitored. After one generation, our children will be safer.
I hear you fullenglish but dont agree with your 'all living relatives steralised' - come on mate you know thats just silly.
One kind of crucial point you're missing about capital punishment is our laughably inept legal system. Ultimately I beleive in an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, but I don't trust the courts to make safe convictions... James Hanratty anyone?
As for the tangent argument, are there really still people who have any faith in anyone who gets into power? For the price of one of those fucking nucleur subs they could clothe, feed and house every person in need on this planet. What's more important buying a weapon that'll kill everything alive or helping people to live... it's not a trick question.
They're so immersed in the business of re-election they'd even go against there own policies to stay in. Half the current cabinet we're in CND for fuck's sake! And that goes for all of them, don't let's pretend there's any difference between red and blue. There may be a few honest politicians toiling away with our best interests at heart but they'll never be more than back-bench irritants. And we pay them to treat us like idiots... more sand in the vaseline Tony?
Amen!
I agree with the sentiments expressed.
I think convictions should come with reliability rates: absolutely undeniable (confession, 100 witnesses, CCTV coverage, DNA splash) in which case fry them.
Anything less than 99% but still more than the 50% that would be necessary to gain a conviction would be life in prison, but with time line factors. So a 60% conviction would deserve extra courts of appeal, an 80% would have only one court of appeal, and 5 years for evidence to surface before again: fried.
Given that the state itself is the worst bugger of the lot, I agree this is all pipe smoke, but one can dream....
Post a Comment