Jon Venables back in prison

[Glen Quagmire]

I'd bet that if you took every one who commits a murder, a higher proportion of them would have previously committed a minor offence than the proportion which would have committed murder. So executing/locking up for life anyone who commits a minor offence is a much more effective way to cut the number of murders.

What?

 

Again, how many drivers caught for speeding have ended up convicted for murder at a later point in their lives? Maybe you should check to see if any of your family or friends who have penalty points on their driving licence - if they do, call the police and tell them that you know someone who's going to commit murder.

 

Murderers that have been released don't often commit murder again but most of them still get involved in crime because while rehabilitation of offenders for some minor or blue-collar crimes have good success rates (in that they won't commit another offence that could see them end up in jail again), rehabilitation of criminals for certain crimes, especially those for who have been in prison multiple times, is more often than not a waste of time. Quite clearly here the rehabilitation of Venables, and the money spent on him doing this and giving him a new identity, has been a clear waste of time and if he is ever released again, the state should not spend one penny more on him and lift any legal matters concerning his identity.

[JNLister]

You clearly said that Venables allegedly reoffending justifies your argument that he should have been hung, aged 10.

 

By the same logic, anyone committing a murder having previously committed a minor offence would justify an argument that anyone committing a minor offence should be hung. In fact, it justifies it even more as in that situation it would have prevented a murder rather than whatever Venables has been accused of.

[Mandingo's Donger]

For me the death penalty needs to be reintroduced into the UK as murder rates have shot up since its abolishment and that's how it needs to be.

 

 

 

There is no hypocrisy to my stance on law & order in this country. The execution of Venables and Thompson would not be regarded as murder. Was Guy Fawkes "murdered"? Was Timothy McVeigh "murdered"?

 

Yes they were. Because i believe all pre-mdeditated acts where a human being is killed are murder. I'm not arguing for the very thing i'm against.

 

You are, hence the hypocrisy you refuse to admit. I'm against the killing of 10 year old children, and all other human beings. You are for the killing of 10 year old children as you've admitted.

 

Do you think that if the death penalty was in force 1993 Venables and Thompson wouldn't of killed James Bulger then?

 

You say the murder rate has increased in this country since its abolishment as if its the reason why and the only thing which can reverse that trend. There's plenty of US states with the death penalty which have higher murder rates than those without it.

 

The death penalty never has and never will work as a deterrent, it will solely serve to work as a form of revenge by people too short sighted to look at the whole picture.

[Glen Quagmire]

(Double Post)

Edited March 7, 2010 by Glen Quagmire

[Glen Quagmire]

You clearly said that Venables allegedly reoffending justifies your argument that he should have been hung, aged 10.

 

By the same logic, anyone committing a murder having previously committed a minor offence would justify an argument that anyone committing a minor offence should be hung. In fact, it justifies it even more as in that situation it would have prevented a murder rather than whatever Venables has been accused of.

 

You're trying to twist my opinions into making an absurd justification which to any decent thinking person falls flat on its arse unless that person feels that someone who steals a loaf of bread should be put to death.

 

So since you have all the answers JNLister, should someone who steals a loaf of bread be given the death penalty?

[patiirc]

... should someone who steals a loaf of bread be given the death penalty?

 

 

Just to clarify that was law until the punishment of Death act c.1832 when the crime was downgradeddto Transportation to Australia, which was as good as death in those days

[neil]

We need women to have more abortions.

[Glen Quagmire]

Yes they were. Because i believe all pre-mdeditated acts where a human being is killed are murder. I'm not arguing for the very thing i'm against.

 

Well I'm sure in your peace-loving hippie lets-all-hug-everyone world you would see it that way, but like most idealistic nonsense it doesn't stand up so let's go back into the real world. You don't happen to be a vegetarian or a vegan by any chance?

 

You are, hence the hypocrisy you refuse to admit.

Since this idea that I'm a hypocrite only exists in your mind, there is little point debating this matter of point any further with you.

 

Do you think that if the death penalty was in force 1993 Venables and Thompson wouldn't of killed James Bulger then?

I obviously cannot answer that. If the Hillsborough disaster didn't happen, would Liverpool have won the Football League in 1989 since the players were not subject to a lot of emotional anguish regarding their club and the extension of the league season?

 

The death penalty never has and never will work as a deterrent, it will solely serve to work as a form of revenge by people too short sighted to look at the whole picture.

Works very well in Japan, a country with one of the lowest crime rates in the world and it has also worked well in SE Asia in the fight against illegal drug trafficking there. Some of the problems with the death penalty in America stem from the huge societal problems that exist there like that fact that in some communities with large Afro-American populations, a man on death row is likely to live longer than if he tries to lead a law-abiding life in his own neighbourhood. In that case, would you rather struggle with your short existence or face an eventual termination of your life with some reasonable comforts on death row for a few years?

Edited March 7, 2010 by Glen Quagmire

[Glen Quagmire]

... should someone who steals a loaf of bread be given the death penalty?

 

 

Just to clarify that was law until the punishment of Death act c.1832 when the crime was downgradeddto Transportation to Australia, which was as good as death in those days

 

I knew that, that's why I asked the question directed to JNLister. IMO being put to death for stealing a loaf of bread is completely over the top in terms of punishment, whereas the death penalty for murder is more equal.

[JNLister]

You clearly said that Venables allegedly reoffending justifies your argument that he should have been hung, aged 10.

 

By the same logic, anyone committing a murder having previously committed a minor offence would justify an argument that anyone committing a minor offence should be hung. In fact, it justifies it even more as in that situation it would have prevented a murder rather than whatever Venables has been accused of.

 

You're trying to twist my opinions into making an absurd justification which to any decent thinking person falls flat on its arse unless that person feels that someone who steals a loaf of bread should be put to death.

 

So since you have all the answers JNLister, should someone who steals a loaf of bread be given the death penalty?

 

No, but then I'm against the death penalty full stop.

 

I'm not doing anything to your opinions. I'm just showing up your logic.

 

If Venables allegedly re-offending proves it would have been justified to hang him, then anyone who steals a loaf of bread and later goes on to murder proves it would have been justified to hang them for the theft.

[Mandingo's Donger]

Yes they were. Because i believe all pre-mdeditated acts where a human being is killed are murder. I'm not arguing for the very thing i'm against.

 

Well I'm sure in your peace-loving hippie lets-all-hug-everyone world you would see it that way, but like most idealistic nonsense it doesn't stand up so let's go back into the real world. You don't happen to be a vegetarian or a vegan by any chance?

 

So you've gone from avoiding the question to attacking me. Really helps your argument that.

 

You are, hence the hypocrisy you refuse to admit.

Since this idea that I'm a hypocrite only exists in your mind, there is little point debating this matter of point any further with you.

 

I'm not the only person in this thread to call your stance hypocritical

 

Do you think that if the death penalty was in force 1993 Venables and Thompson wouldn't of killed James Bulger then?

I obviously cannot answer that. If the Hillsborough disaster didn't happen, would Liverpool have won the Football League in 1989 since the players were not subject to a lot of emotional anguish regarding their club and the extension of the league season?

 

Of course you can answer it. To help you out i'll answer it from my pov then you can do the same: No i don't believe that to be true, i think that Venables and Thompson still would of killed James Bulger regardless of whther the death penalty was in practise at that point in time.

See, its easy, now you give it a try.

 

The death penalty never has and never will work as a deterrent, it will solely serve to work as a form of revenge by people too short sighted to look at the whole picture.

Works very well in Japan, a country with one of the lowest crime rates in the world and it has also worked well in SE Asia in the fight against illegal drug trafficking there. Some of the problems with the death penalty in America stem from the huge societal problems that exist there like that fact that in some communities with large Afro-American populations, a man on death row is likely to live longer than if he tries to lead a law-abiding life in his own neighbourhood. In that case, would you rather struggle with your short existence or face an eventual termination of your life with some reasonable comforts on death row for a few years?

 

So you reckon the low crime rates in Japan are down to its use of the death penalty then?

[InvertedSmiley]

Child Porn? Sexual Assault?

 

If either of these turn out to be true then I will be vindicated by what I said earlier about Venables and Thompson being executed.

 

No you wont.

 

Were both murderers now to be rotting six feet under, Venables wouldn't be in a position to possibly commit sexual assault or download child porn.

 

So you honestly, truly believe that the answer to the horrific murder of one child is to kill another two? I must admit that I struggle to understand the morally superior standpoint of a person who is so sickened by the murder of a toddler that they would wish to inflict something equally as vile on the offender. But maybe that's just me.

 

To me, killing two youngsters who commited such an incredible crime would be absolutely senseless. It gives us as a society no opportunity to understand why it happened, what motivated the boys to do what they did and to learn how we can prevent similar events occurring in the future. Rather than dismissing the killers as being full of evilness and relegating the crime to the history books until the next time it happens, I would look at the perpetrators and try to change thins to avoid a repeat.

 

Ignoring the reasons for the actions in the first place by simplifying everything down to the amount of evil in everybody is short sighted, IMO.

 

And, with regard to your original point, if these allegations against Jon Venables are in fact true and he is found guilty of a crime, it would not vindicate executing he and Robert Thompson. While there are all these stories and rumours and speculation regarding Venables, there has been little or nothing (from what I have seen anyway) said about Robert Thompson. For all we know his rehabilitation has been much more successful than Venables's appears to have been.

[The Icon]

Wow, whatever you do, don't post a rational statement on facebook like 'If we tell everyone who he is, his lawyers will claim an unfair trail and he'll get away with it'.

 

Apparently, all my friends now think I'm a Child Murderer-Lover.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Family Guy PMSL

[PowerButchi]

Yeah, I've learned to keep away from hot potatoes like that on Facebook, or when you go out for a pint. No good will come of it. And you might even get punched.

[TheLostScot]

It doesn't matter what age they were. At the least, they should have been locked up and never to be released again. If they were that fecked up in the head when they were 10, how fecked up are they going to be now?

 

All this bullshit, "they were only children!" FUCK THAT, pathetic. Evil little bastards.