Mother of Stabbing victim calls for tougher Penalt
Discussion
The Mother of a 15 year old boy stabbed to death as he was robbed of his baseball cap has called on the government to increase the minimum jail sentance for those caught carrying knives.
She has called for a miniumum 5 year jail term.
I think this practice could be stamped out quite quickly with a change of the law and proper enforcement.
As she says a 5 year jail term sounds about right. Then none of this crap about police filling in forms every time they stop and search someone. They should go in hard in the areas where these gangs carry knives.
Search them over and over again-until they stop carrying knives or are sent down for some serious jail time.
Oh and none of this cr*p about it being discriminatory against blacks- If you are not carrying a knife you have nothing to worry about.
She has called for a miniumum 5 year jail term.
I think this practice could be stamped out quite quickly with a change of the law and proper enforcement.
As she says a 5 year jail term sounds about right. Then none of this crap about police filling in forms every time they stop and search someone. They should go in hard in the areas where these gangs carry knives.
Search them over and over again-until they stop carrying knives or are sent down for some serious jail time.
Oh and none of this cr*p about it being discriminatory against blacks- If you are not carrying a knife you have nothing to worry about.
Good! It can't come soon enough IMO.
A very good mate was out the other weekend and was robbed (in Birmingham) on his way home. Tragically, the lad he was walking home with was stabbed and killed - AFTER he handed his wallet over. Why can't these scum just get f**king jobs and work for a living like everyone else.
A very good mate was out the other weekend and was robbed (in Birmingham) on his way home. Tragically, the lad he was walking home with was stabbed and killed - AFTER he handed his wallet over. Why can't these scum just get f**king jobs and work for a living like everyone else.
In Glasgow in the fifties and sixties a huge culture of carrying "chibbs" spang up. In those days they were mainly cut-throat razors but also flick knives.
It really did get out of hand and was only ever controlled when the judges in the city made it clear that they would apply the max sentence every time.
It took a couple of years but did it work, in the end it is all young kids carrying these and they need to understand there will be a real and hard penalty if they get caught.
It really did get out of hand and was only ever controlled when the judges in the city made it clear that they would apply the max sentence every time.
It took a couple of years but did it work, in the end it is all young kids carrying these and they need to understand there will be a real and hard penalty if they get caught.
The trouble, as I perceive it, is that people who do this know that they are very unlikely to be caught. National detection rates are one-sixth of the crime levels, and in inner-cities this rate is much, much lower.
The people who commit these crimes know how to disguise their identity (hoodies, anyone?) and this means that they cannot be convicted from CCTV evidence (the weapon against crime beloved by our current administration.) Couple this with reducing police numbers and you are on a losing streak.
I maintain that the way to fight crime is not to imcrease punishments, the answer is to massively reduce the chances of the perpertrator getting away with it. If you knew, as a fact, that if you committed a crime, you would be punished, I think alot of people would be deterred. If the person knows that they can commit the crime and they are highly unlikely to face punishment, they will not be deterred.
Oli.
The people who commit these crimes know how to disguise their identity (hoodies, anyone?) and this means that they cannot be convicted from CCTV evidence (the weapon against crime beloved by our current administration.) Couple this with reducing police numbers and you are on a losing streak.
I maintain that the way to fight crime is not to imcrease punishments, the answer is to massively reduce the chances of the perpertrator getting away with it. If you knew, as a fact, that if you committed a crime, you would be punished, I think alot of people would be deterred. If the person knows that they can commit the crime and they are highly unlikely to face punishment, they will not be deterred.
Oli.
zcacogp said:
I maintain that the way to fight crime is not to imcrease punishments, the answer is to massively reduce the chances of the perpertrator getting away with it. If you knew, as a fact, that if you committed a crime, you would be punished, I think alot of people would be deterred. If the person knows that they can commit the crime and they are highly unlikely to face punishment, they will not be deterred.
Oli.
Someone in prison is no longer a threat to the wider community.
But I would agree with you that the chances of such low level criminals being caught needs to be increased.
JagLover said:
Someone in prison is no longer a threat to the wider community.
Quite agree - very true. But if they don't commit the crime in the first place, there isn't a problem. And keeping people in jail is very expensive.
If all crime was detectable, and punished by the death penalty, the cost of law and order in this country would plummett ... (but don't suggest this as they will start shooting people for speeding offences!)
Oli.
zcacogp said:
Someone in prison is no longer a threat to the wider community.
Quite agree - very true. But if they don't commit the crime in the first place, there isn't a problem. And keeping people in jail is very expensive.
If all crime was detectable, and punished by the death penalty, the cost of law and order in this country would plummett ... (but don't suggest this as they will start shooting people for speeding offences!)
Oli.
There is the propaganda put out by Left wingers that criome cannot be defeated, it is a product of poverty and must simply be endured.
My own perosonal view is that there are a few hundred thousand scum bags commiting most of the crime.
We have a problem in that our prison capacity is only around 80,000-Solution build more prisons and lock repeat offenders up for longer.
Big expense it is true, but lower crime and so insurance premiums, payments to replace property etc will outweigh it.
Our prison population is higher than most of western Europe-but in relation to the level of crime here-it is fairly low.
Solution, concealled carry of firearms, chances of it happening none. Reason, scum bags will rob and rape, police can't be everywhere. Funny where CC is rife, muggings, rapes and other violenty crimes go down, ain't so funny robbing some one at knife point if there armed.
Opposition will state criminals will just arm themselves, well to late folks they already have and are already killing people.
Opposition will state criminals will just arm themselves, well to late folks they already have and are already killing people.
medicineman said:
Solution, concealled carry of firearms, chances of it happening none. Reason, scum bags will rob and rape, police can't be everywhere. Funny where CC is rife, muggings, rapes and other violenty crimes go down, ain't so funny robbing some one at knife point if there armed.
Opposition will state criminals will just arm themselves, well to late folks they already have and are already killing people.
That seems a little extreme to me-If the criminal justice sytem is working there should be no need for everyone to go around armed to the teeth.
I could perhaps agree with you that guns kept in a secure place in peoples homes should be allowed-but not out on the street.
>> Edited by JagLover on Thursday 17th March 08:27
So lets say you have a keen fisherman who one day puts his coat on, forgetting that he left his nice pointy knife in one pocket. Then he gets arrested, and the police don't believe his tale.
Fair? Not really.
Mandatory sentences are utter bollox. Let the judiciary decide what is appropriate, not politicians.
Fair? Not really.
Mandatory sentences are utter bollox. Let the judiciary decide what is appropriate, not politicians.
maxf said:
But surely he could prove he was a fisherman and there would be reasonable doubt so not guilty.
Each case on its own merits to get to court, but once found guilty a strict minimum sentence should be given.
Agreed!!!-and it is precisely because the judiciary are so soft that mandatory sentances are needed.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff