Jon Venables back in prison
Discussion
TameRacingDriver said:
Jaguar steve said:
The entire thread has been dominated by individual champions of the people who relish the thought of Venables being ripped limb from limb in the street and that viewpoint makes them no better than him.
Really? 
I agree with the rest of your post, but come on man!
Consider this. Venables killed because he lacked sufficient respect for another life to prevent him from doing so. Anybody killing Venables would be demonstrating exactly the same lack of respect for another life as he did.
You could very reasonably argue that because Venables killed when a child he was unable to fully comprehend the dreadful enormity of what he was doing, but you absolutely can't apply the same lack of comprehension argument to any sane fully responsible adult who may kill Venables. So in actual fact anybody killing him could well be considered even worse because they will be fully aware of exactly what they are doing and the devastating consequences of taking another life whereas Venables as as a 10 year old boy wouldn't have been anywhere as as responsible or aware.
Worth saying again I'm not defending his actions or making excuses for him at all. I'm simply revolted by the sight and sound of the mouth breathing lynch mob and the tabloid media wallowing in holier than thou self righteousness and braying for blood like rabid pack animals.
That tabloid vigilante fkuck the law I'll do whatever I think is right mindset I believe is a much bigger problem facing society than Venables himself.
otolith said:
Could you execute a child?
I could execute a killer if it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the crime was committed. In this case, would capital punishment not have been the more sensible option, especially given recent events? I’m less moved by the fact you mentioned ‘child’ as these ‘children’ exhibited behaviour beyond disgusting. There’s a line. Whether child or adult you understand this? It’s what stops you in middle school, if you are involved in a fight and the opponent cowers away, from stamping on their head. For some, this just comes from aggressive tendencies, they lose it. These individuals are not better than dogs in the most basic terms. The trouble is, society doesn’t deal with that and our instincts as parents and humans is played upon. The facts are two little b
ds slaughtered an innocent toddler. One is definitely a waste of oxygen and the other, well, i’d sign the paperwork to cross him off the state payroll. Sorry if that offends.
King Herald said:
Ascayman said:
La Liga said:
Venables has a lifelong anonymity order and KH thought it was a good idea to post 'him' on PH...
Not exactly very bright is it. t if the world knows his identity! I'm sure you'd maintain the internet bravado of 'I don't give a s
t', if you were taken to the High Court, since you probably have breached the injunction: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ban-on-images-o...Judgement said:
On Friday 26 April 2013 two men, Dean Liddle and Neil Harkins appeared in the High Court and admitted to breaching an injunction preventing the media or individuals publishing images which claim to be Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.
Before Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were released from custody, a court ruled that their identities should remain secret. The court granted an injunction which prevents the media or individuals from publishing images which claim to be of Venables and Thompson (whether or not it is them). The injunction is worldwide and applies equally to the internet, social media and mainstream media.
A breach carries a sentence of up to two years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. The High Court Judges said the men knew what they were doing was wrong and it was no excuse that others were doing it.
Reflecting on the “gravity” of their offence, President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Sir John Thomas said they would be given nine months imprisonment but because of mitigating circumstances it would be suspended.
However, he warned the court:
As for the future, if there is publication on the internet or through social media after the date of this hearing, then there will be little prospect of escape from a significant custodial sentence without a prospect of suspension.
Before Jon Venables and Robert Thompson were released from custody, a court ruled that their identities should remain secret. The court granted an injunction which prevents the media or individuals from publishing images which claim to be of Venables and Thompson (whether or not it is them). The injunction is worldwide and applies equally to the internet, social media and mainstream media.
A breach carries a sentence of up to two years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. The High Court Judges said the men knew what they were doing was wrong and it was no excuse that others were doing it.
Reflecting on the “gravity” of their offence, President of the Queen’s Bench Division, Sir John Thomas said they would be given nine months imprisonment but because of mitigating circumstances it would be suspended.
However, he warned the court:
As for the future, if there is publication on the internet or through social media after the date of this hearing, then there will be little prospect of escape from a significant custodial sentence without a prospect of suspension.
Jaguar steve said:
No, I think that's reasonable.
Consider this. Venables killed because he lacked sufficient respect for another life to prevent him from doing so. Anybody killing Venables would be demonstrating exactly the same lack of respect for another life as he did.
You could very reasonably argue that because Venables killed when a child he was unable to fully comprehend the dreadful enormity of what he was doing, but you absolutely can't apply the same lack of comprehension argument to any sane fully responsible adult who may kill Venables. So in actual fact anybody killing him could well be considered even worse because they will be fully aware of exactly what they are doing and the devastating consequences of taking another life whereas Venables as as a 10 year old boy wouldn't have been anywhere as as responsible or aware.
Worth saying again I'm not defending his actions or making excuses for him at all. I'm simply revolted by the sight and sound of the mouth breathing lynch mob and the tabloid media wallowing in holier than thou self righteousness and braying for blood like rabid pack animals.
That tabloid vigilante fkuck the law I'll do whatever I think is right mindset I believe is a much bigger problem facing society than Venables himself.
Good post, imagine the heart attack you would have if that photo posted just happened to look like yourself. I remember about 10 years ago much hilarity at work as someone found an article in the Evening news about some guy who'd been sentenced for assault. Even I had to admit the guy looked like my long lost twin. It was quite scary, as somebody said at the time we all have a double. Consider this. Venables killed because he lacked sufficient respect for another life to prevent him from doing so. Anybody killing Venables would be demonstrating exactly the same lack of respect for another life as he did.
You could very reasonably argue that because Venables killed when a child he was unable to fully comprehend the dreadful enormity of what he was doing, but you absolutely can't apply the same lack of comprehension argument to any sane fully responsible adult who may kill Venables. So in actual fact anybody killing him could well be considered even worse because they will be fully aware of exactly what they are doing and the devastating consequences of taking another life whereas Venables as as a 10 year old boy wouldn't have been anywhere as as responsible or aware.
Worth saying again I'm not defending his actions or making excuses for him at all. I'm simply revolted by the sight and sound of the mouth breathing lynch mob and the tabloid media wallowing in holier than thou self righteousness and braying for blood like rabid pack animals.
That tabloid vigilante fkuck the law I'll do whatever I think is right mindset I believe is a much bigger problem facing society than Venables himself.
Jaguar steve said:
Consider this. Venables killed because he lacked sufficient respect for another life to prevent him from doing so. Anybody killing Venables would be demonstrating exactly the same lack of respect for another life as he did.
Yes this is the clichéd anti-death penalty argument, very dull and uninspiring. However not all lives are deserving of the same level of respect. For instance the life of someone who murdered a two year old (or indeed anyone) is deserving of zero respect.Jaguar steve said:
If you read a little more carefully you'll find the "Snowflakes" posting on here aren't defending Venables' actions at all. What they are defending is the right of any citizen, no matter who they are or what they've done not to be set upon by a vacuous mob of vigilante morons whipped into a mindless frenzy by sentimental, self-righteous populist garbage spewed out by the media.
The entire thread has been dominated by individual champions of the people who relish the thought of Venables being ripped limb from limb in the street and that viewpoint makes them no better than him. An eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth knee-jerk reaction belongs in the Bible or infant school playground and has absolutely no place in grown-up world.
What do you think might happen if that vigilante mindset persists and a blurry picture of Venables appears on social media and then somebody who is dressed and looks vaguely similar walks past a hard of thinking bunch of idiots who've been in the pub all day?
If you don't like the law or the way it works then petition for change. Instead of just beating the st out of somebody if anybody feels strongly enough to take action the intelligent solution is to put together a reasoned case for change and get audience for it.
Vigilantism is a gateway crime to buying a private number plate.The entire thread has been dominated by individual champions of the people who relish the thought of Venables being ripped limb from limb in the street and that viewpoint makes them no better than him. An eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth knee-jerk reaction belongs in the Bible or infant school playground and has absolutely no place in grown-up world.
What do you think might happen if that vigilante mindset persists and a blurry picture of Venables appears on social media and then somebody who is dressed and looks vaguely similar walks past a hard of thinking bunch of idiots who've been in the pub all day?
If you don't like the law or the way it works then petition for change. Instead of just beating the s
t out of somebody if anybody feels strongly enough to take action the intelligent solution is to put together a reasoned case for change and get audience for it. It's a slippery slope.
Dromedary66 said:
Yes this is the clichéd anti-death penalty argument, very dull and uninspiring. However not all lives are deserving of the same level of respect. For instance the life of someone who murdered a two year old (or indeed anyone) is deserving of zero respect.
Draw up a draft capitol offense law then and let's see it.ape x said:
Why would you even want them to have a peaceful death though? Death penalty is pointless...Fred West took his life instead of facing up to his life in prison, the death penalty simply lets them off the hook IMO...
Death penalty is cheaper & more efficient than life in prison.ape x said:
I'd far rather JV and RT spent the rest of their lives in prison and hopefully one day they wake up and realize how disgusting a thing they did then spend the rest of their days in utter metal torture.....has to be better than peacefully passing due to a painless and pretty quick injection...
I'm not fussed about making them suffer- just quietly remove them so they can do no more harm.andy_s said:
Draw up a draft capitol offense law then and let's see it.
I would lift America's legislature and tailor it accordingly. Since Thompson and Venables plead guilty and were under-age they wouldn't get the death penalty, life in prison without parole would be the next best thing. Someone like Ian Huntley who plead not-guilty would.yonex said:
otolith said:
Could you execute a child?
I could execute a killer if it was proven beyond reasonable doubt that the crime was committed. In this case, would capital punishment not have been the more sensible option, especially given recent events? I’m less moved by the fact you mentioned ‘child’ as these ‘children’ exhibited behaviour beyond disgusting. There’s a line. Whether child or adult you understand this? Dromedary66 said:
andy_s said:
Draw up a draft capitol offense law then and let's see it.
I would lift America's legislature and tailor it accordingly. Since Thompson and Venables plead guilty and were under-age they wouldn't get the death penalty, life in prison without parole would be the next best thing. Someone like Ian Huntley who plead not-guilty would.It's true that it has a major dissuasive effect though, almost no murders in the US...
[The pleas were made against current circumstances, against a capitol offence they would obviously be gamed differently don't you think?]
Rovinghawk said:
I think in JV's case he's done plenty to justify the definition.
I think he shouldn't have been released; if he hadn't we wouldn't be having this conversation and people would be more or less happy with the situation. I cannot really see why they both aren't still behind bars. JV didn't seem a reformed character to me...Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff