Another classic case of double standards
Discussion
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s reply?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
dunc_sx said:
Good post Kawasicki
On the subject of suspended sentences, I've always struggled to understand how they compare to time in jail. For example for a hypothetical crime of x severity, would a 2 year suspended sentence be equal to ? months in jail?
So if someone committed a crime which was judged to be worth 6 months of jail time but they were deemed unsuitable for jail time what would the deferred sentence time be? 3 years?
Dunc.
6 months custody is the same whether it is suspended or not. That's what seems to be being disregarded by those who need this to be unfair.On the subject of suspended sentences, I've always struggled to understand how they compare to time in jail. For example for a hypothetical crime of x severity, would a 2 year suspended sentence be equal to ? months in jail?
So if someone committed a crime which was judged to be worth 6 months of jail time but they were deemed unsuitable for jail time what would the deferred sentence time be? 3 years?
Dunc.
The flowchart is how serious is the offence and where does it sit on the sentencing guidelines.? Does it meet the custody threshold? Take into account aggravating and mitigating factors - what is the minimum jail term that must be passed. That's the sentence.
Then if it is under 2 years it should it be suspended? If suspended what additional conditions should be imposed.
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
Nothing wrong with that.
"...prompting Judge Simon Berkson to interject saying: “They were playing a game that I’m afraid teenagers have been playing in this country [for decades"."
I think there was probably a good deal more menace involved than the Judge has considered. Possibly read Enid Blyton or Tom Brown during his childhood, didn't grow up on an estate near Chester. Two positives out of this though - the woman will think twice before using her car as a dangerous weapon, and the lad and his mates might be deterred from making life miserable for people who live near them.
I think there was probably a good deal more menace involved than the Judge has considered. Possibly read Enid Blyton or Tom Brown during his childhood, didn't grow up on an estate near Chester. Two positives out of this though - the woman will think twice before using her car as a dangerous weapon, and the lad and his mates might be deterred from making life miserable for people who live near them.
Greendubber said:
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
Nothing wrong with that.
popeyewhite said:
"...prompting Judge Simon Berkson to interject saying: “They were playing a game that I’m afraid teenagers have been playing in this country [for decades"."
I think there was probably a good deal more menace involved than the Judge has considered. Possibly read Enid Blyton or Tom Brown during his childhood, didn't grow up on an estate near Chester. Two positives out of this though - the woman will think twice before using her car as a dangerous weapon, and the lad and his mates might be deterred from making life miserable for people who live near them.
I think the nativity is on your part if you think a criminal crown court judge isn’t well aware of how people commit crimes behave and think. I think there was probably a good deal more menace involved than the Judge has considered. Possibly read Enid Blyton or Tom Brown during his childhood, didn't grow up on an estate near Chester. Two positives out of this though - the woman will think twice before using her car as a dangerous weapon, and the lad and his mates might be deterred from making life miserable for people who live near them.
Graveworm said:
6 months custody is the same whether it is suspended or not. That's what seems to be being disregarded by those who need this to be unfair.
That doesn't seem quite right though does it? If someone asked me whether I wanted to be put in jail for 6 months or stay at home with famliy/friends etc then (obviously) I'd take the latter. As would anyone else, that's why the two punishments are not like for like. In fact if I were offered 2 years suspended or 6 months in jail I'd pick the 2 years suspended in a blink of an eye.Dunc.
dunc_sx said:
Graveworm said:
6 months custody is the same whether it is suspended or not. That's what seems to be being disregarded by those who need this to be unfair.
That doesn't seem quite right though does it? If someone asked me whether I wanted to be put in jail for 6 months or stay at home with famliy/friends etc then (obviously) I'd take the latter. As would anyone else, that's why the two punishments are not like for like. In fact if I were offered 2 years suspended or 6 months in jail I'd pick the 2 years suspended in a blink of an eye.Dunc.
Suspension is either available or not. The criteria are either met or not. In order to suggest there are some double standards the individual circumstances of cases would need to be assessed to see if there are differing outcomes based on the criteria presented by males and females.
I'm having to fill in the blanks as expecting the OP to present anything half-intelligent or reasonably cohesive is clearly too-high-an-expectation.
The debate has evolved into a severity comparison between the respective offences and sentencing, but that's not a double standards argument.
yonex said:
Breadvan72 said:
Those of you who clamour for jail sentences in motoring cases and various other cases that do not involve things such as rape and other violence - what do you think jail sentences achieve?
The thread title has, BTW, been pretty comprehensively debunked above. No double standards at all. I wonder will the OP be along to say "Oops, sorry ,my sexist codswallop thread is sexist codswallop"?
You’re not the brightest so I’ll try and help. The thread title has, BTW, been pretty comprehensively debunked above. No double standards at all. I wonder will the OP be along to say "Oops, sorry ,my sexist codswallop thread is sexist codswallop"?
I've seen some crazy st in my 57 years on the planet, but Yonex telling BV he's not the brightest is right up there. Will only be surpassed when I hear Anne Widdicombe tell Liz Hurley that she's not much to look at.
Breadvan72 said:
They will never take the hook out of their mouths - it's embedded. It must be weird to go through life being fed on a diet of synthetic outrage, always convinced that there's some sort of establishment conspiracy to favour [insert group that you hate the most - for PH that is usually women]. Meanwhile, you don't notice all the genuinely terrible things being done by the same sort of people as those who are feeding you the diet. You really can fool quite a lot of the people all of the time.
I don’t have a reason to believe there is double standards based on sex.I do find it incredible that somebody that someone who drives dangerously could be given the same punishment as somebody that intentionally drives at and strikes people.
yonex said:
Breadvan72 said:
Those of you who clamour for jail sentences in motoring cases and various other cases that do not involve things such as rape and other violence - what do you think jail sentences achieve?
The thread title has, BTW, been pretty comprehensively debunked above. No double standards at all. I wonder will the OP be along to say "Oops, sorry ,my sexist codswallop thread is sexist codswallop"?
You’re not the brightest so I’ll try and help. The thread title has, BTW, been pretty comprehensively debunked above. No double standards at all. I wonder will the OP be along to say "Oops, sorry ,my sexist codswallop thread is sexist codswallop"?
It’s not been debunked at all. Bikers jailed for 153mph yet this bint tries to kill a couple of kids and gets let off?
What are you struggling with, apart from everything?
Kawasicki said:
I don’t have a reason to believe there is double standards based on sex.
I do find it incredible that somebody that someone who drives dangerously could be given the same punishment as somebody that intentionally drives at and strikes people.
It would be incredible but it's not the case she was given 2-5 times the punishment of the bikers.I do find it incredible that somebody that someone who drives dangerously could be given the same punishment as somebody that intentionally drives at and strikes people.
I think the key issue on this back and forth is that many of us see little value or real punishment in any suspended sentence. I'd suggest she needed proper punishment for actually driving over a kid purposefully - not a 'do it again and you are in real trouble'. Even just 5 days in prison would cause major upheaval and actually punish.
But they know they get away with it... Look at this clip - its excellent and the police get their man, only for nothing much to happen about the reckless and dangerous riding afterwards. Proper punishment suspended. People are far more likely to go to prison for a VAT fiddle...
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/watch-we-...
But they know they get away with it... Look at this clip - its excellent and the police get their man, only for nothing much to happen about the reckless and dangerous riding afterwards. Proper punishment suspended. People are far more likely to go to prison for a VAT fiddle...
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/watch-we-...
JimSuperSix said:
Greendubber said:
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
Nothing wrong with that.
Also, sometimes when you clearly aren't getting through to someone, you may as well leave it.
But heaven forbid, this is PH.
Postcount matters.
xjay1337 said:
JimSuperSix said:
Greendubber said:
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
Nothing wrong with that.
Also, sometimes when you clearly aren't getting through to someone, you may as well leave it.
But heaven forbid, this is PH.
Postcount matters.
xjay1337 said:
JimSuperSix said:
Greendubber said:
xjay1337 said:
La Liga said:
Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?
Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.
Grow up all of you FFS.
Nothing wrong with that.
Also, sometimes when you clearly aren't getting through to someone, you may as well leave it.
But heaven forbid, this is PH.
Postcount matters.
So if anyone being a bh, it's the OP. I take your point about leaving it though as it appears it doesn't matter how many times something is explained to someone you just cant understand it for them.
The irony of having a jab at post count whilst having a higher post / time ratio than most along with two posts in the topic that add nothing.
OP appears to have cut his losses which is surprisingly smart for him.
In terms of suspended sentences. They do help to reduce prison numbers (we run nearly fill all the time) and, without looking it up, I expect the reoffending rates are less than a short immediate sentence.
OP appears to have cut his losses which is surprisingly smart for him.
In terms of suspended sentences. They do help to reduce prison numbers (we run nearly fill all the time) and, without looking it up, I expect the reoffending rates are less than a short immediate sentence.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff