"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

[Derek]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...eal-again.html

Originally Posted by Daily Mail

A prolific bag snatcher was paid £3,000 by the Government to leave Britain - only to return the very next day and continue his one-man crimewave, a court heard yesterday.

Cracking idea by the government. Instead of just removing them from the country we have to pay them to leave and there isn't anything to stop them getting on the first Eurostar back.

Oh and also today I've found out someone can be jailed for 9 months for a crime committed in February 2008 and be back on the streets in the middle of May.
Prison time now seems to be a 1/3 of the sentence so if anyone feels like a spot of thievery, drug dealing or murder now is the time to do it.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Derek S

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...eal-again.html



Cracking idea by the government. Instead of just removing them from the country we have to pay them to leave and there isn't anything to stop them getting on the first Eurostar back.

Oh and also today I've found out someone can be jailed for 9 months for a crime committed in February 2008 and be back on the streets in the middle of May.
Prison time now seems to be a 1/3 of the sentence so if anyone feels like a spot of thievery, drug dealing or murder now is the time to do it.

Derek you know you're just creating a fuss about nothing! You realise our resident expert on tabloids will be here in a minute to confirm it's all lies..... plain lies...... yawn.........

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Osem

Derek you know you're just creating a fuss about nothing! You realise our resident expert on tabloids will be here in a minute to confirm it's all lies..... plain lies...... yawn.........

Well it is the Daily Mail, and he is an illegal immigrant, all we need now is a link to Diana and they'll be happy.

I wonder if I could get the government to give me £3k to persuade me to continue not breaking the law.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Osem

Derek you know you're just creating a fuss about nothing! You realise our resident expert on tabloids will be here in a minute to confirm it's all lies..... plain lies...... yawn.........

He's taken longer than i would have expected

[Derek]

In the interests of balance sometimes the knife (and sword) carriers get whats coming to them.

A man who was caught carrying a lethal Samurai sword in a busy Paisley street has been locked up for three years.
...
Donnelly had stubbornly protested his innocence and claimed he had been entitled to have the sword – which had a fearsome blade measuring two-and-a-half feet – in his possession as his mother and brother had just been attacked.

And his lawyer goes for the classic defence of it's OK as he was out to avenge his family being attacked.

Still the streets are safe for 3 years... actually 1 1/2 years... actually about a year once good behaviour, time on remand, home detention etc. are all taken off.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Derek S

In the interests of balance sometimes the knife (and sword) carriers get whats coming to them.



And his lawyer goes for the classic defence of it's OK as he was out to avenge his family being attacked.

Still the streets are safe for 3 years... actually 1 1/2 years... actually about a year once good behaviour, time on remand, home detention etc. are all taken off.

Sentencing like this sums Bliar and his cronies up... All about presentation little to do with being tough on anything, oh, unless you're a victim that is!...

[Osem]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wear/7459058.stm

Another fine example......

[Derek]

13 years for murder... especially kicking and stamping a disabled man to death. Utter ****.

I know its a minimum term but does anyone actually think he'll spend considerably longer inside.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Derek S

13 years for murder... especially kicking and stamping a disabled man to death. Utter ****.

I know its a minimum term but does anyone actually think he'll spend considerably longer inside.

What sort of message does this send out to the victims ? These **** deserve NO concessions, they picked on a vulnerable person and killed him for no reason other than the fact that he was disabled. There was no provocation and no prospect of this poor man even fighting back. As far as I'm concerned these callous, cowardly murderers should be locked away forever. They've forfeited their human rights by depriving an entirely innocent man of the most basic right of all - the right to life!

The judge in his 'wisdom' said: "There is no doubt at all that the behaviour of these appellants was quite appalling."

He described it as a: "very bad case of gratuitous gang violence directed at a vulnerable victim".

and then he proceeded to lessen the punishment they'd originally been given!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The mind boggles it really does.........

[Osem]

Here we go again.............

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7466812.stm

[Osem]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/7506505.stm

So the guy defending his property and relative is taken to court???...

It's so reassuring that the authorities have the right priorities.....

Worst thing to be in the UK as i have said before is law abiding the system is setup for the **** in society and they have so many loopholes and people campaigning for thier rights while victims are an inconvinience. We need a government that has the guts to be tough and stick to it we need judges that will hand out minimum sentences that are the maximum for the crime commited and we need as many prison's built as it takes to house them.

If they want to save money on those prison's make them as basic as can be and let the **** stroll around in their own filth if needed. We have to start getting things back to the way they should be where those that obey the law and are not a problem to society are treated and held in the highest regard and those that do otherwise are treated like the **** they are.

[Osem]

It's great to know that people like this are being severely dealt with by the courts:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7564267.stm

Such a worthy cause too ................

[BBKing]

OK, let's recap, so you want:

a) fewer people to be prosecuted for fare evasion
b) tough enforcement action against people who break the rules

Can you really not spot the contradiction in this position? TfL really can't win here, throughout the Mayoral election campaign (and since) people have been hammering home the message that goes roughly 'oh, Ken's useless, look at all the fraud on bendy buses, I've never seen anyone touch in on those, they should bring back conductors and put policemen on them to enforce the law', then when they do*, they get attacked for persecuting Joe Public. Are certain people immune from the rules? Why is deterring people from freeloading on public transport (which is associated with anti-social behaviour, by the way) not a worthy cause? Are you coming down on the side of the criminal, Osem? Feeling a bit hypocritical yet?

* it's not enough to have the money on your bloody Oyster, you have to touch in *to actually pay for the journey*. It's not rocket science, the signs are plastered all over the buses and it's part of the deal known as 'using money'. Otherwise you'd put a quid on it and ride free all day, if you knew you'd get off when challenged. Likewise, I wouldn't expect to be able to stick sixty grand in my skyrocket, stroll down to the BMW garage and drive off in a nice new M5, then when the police pulled me over say 'it's OK, I could have paid for it, look, I just didn't know how to pay'.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by BBKing

OK, let's recap, so you want:

a) fewer people to be prosecuted for fare evasion
b) tough enforcement action against people who break the rules

Can you really not spot the contradiction in this position? TfL really can't win here, throughout the Mayoral election campaign (and since) people have been hammering home the message that goes roughly 'oh, Ken's useless, look at all the fraud on bendy buses, I've never seen anyone touch in on those, they should bring back conductors and put policemen on them to enforce the law', then when they do*, they get attacked for persecuting Joe Public. Are certain people immune from the rules? Why is deterring people from freeloading on public transport (which is associated with anti-social behaviour, by the way) not a worthy cause? Are you coming down on the side of the criminal, Osem? Feeling a bit hypocritical yet?
* it's not enough to have the money on your bloody Oyster, you have to touch in *to actually pay for the journey*. It's not rocket science, the signs are plastered all over the buses and it's part of the deal known as 'using money'. Otherwise you'd put a quid on it and ride free all day, if you knew you'd get off when challenged. Likewise, I wouldn't expect to be able to stick sixty grand in my skyrocket, stroll down to the BMW garage and drive off in a nice new M5, then when the police pulled me over say 'it's OK, I could have paid for it, look, I just didn't know how to pay'.

Did I state 'my' position on this, or are you just making another of your tedious and verbose assumptions? Just to clarify, I'd prefer the weight of the law to be brought to bear on 'real' criminals, not people supposedly evading fares who are then subsequently cleared by the courts. Perhaps that's too simple for you to grasp or is the concept of prosecuting someone who's innocent your answer to all our problems? I reckon you should stop reading all those tabloids...