life. next day lawyers say they can appeal to court of human rights because 'life means life' is not fair to the guy convicted. it infringes his human rights. .
is british law an ***, or is this the way justice will go in the future? it's time the law lords did something about the rights of the criminal apparently coming before justice or the rights of the person attacked/robbed/murdered.
make me supreme chancellor of europe and i will rule with an iron fist :-)
2006-08-06 11:12:06 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
xeson1. dumb name. my question was thus.........is british law an ***, or is this the way justice will go in the future?
2006-08-07 05:43:45 · update #1
Its aload of crap the law nowadays,all convicted murderers and peados want shooting!!
2006-08-06 11:19:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This government is better than some, although Tony Blair doesn't have his head screwed on right and the laws are what keep this country from being so corrupted. They always let people slip through the system to make spaces in the overcrowded prisons (another "quick-fix" method).
I'm sure you'd do better than Labour - just rule ONE country at a time.
It's a bit like bullies at school. My brother was bullied at school so he stopped going, and court hung over our heads, while the bullies are "special needs" with behavioural problems so they just get away with it when they just need a SLAP. It's a bit like that with criminals. Another labour technique. Good luck with that Chancellor thing.
2006-08-06 11:26:50 · answer #2 · answered by jeffner1990 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe in an eye for an eye! If you can't do the time, then don't do the crime. If you brutally kill someone and show no disregard for the law, then the law needs to be changed to deal with people like this. Justice should also stand up for the dead as well as the living. Its just wrong to let scum like this walk the face of this earth alive, when the victim suffered in vain.
2006-08-06 11:19:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem is that the courts can only operate under the law. Under British law there is no "life meaning life" sentence. The judge should have known that and therefore, shouldn't have awarded that sentence. By saying, "life is life" he is not allowing this person a chance of rehabilitation and that is why he can appeal.
You need to focus your anger on who creates the laws and keeps them updated, not who enforces it.
2006-08-06 19:15:21 · answer #4 · answered by Dave T 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Human Rights legislation is beyond parody, but then look who got us involved with it. The law in Britain used to allow you to do anything save that which the law specifically forbade. Everybody understood it, because it is the logical way to frame law. Now that we have adopted the European model, which means that you can't do anything unless it is specifically stated in the law as permissable, we are confused, because the law has to be drawn up in such general terms that too much power is handed to the judges who have to try and interpret it.
You get the impression that the 'Liberal' establishment is trying to get rid of the concept of crime altogether. It certainly dovetails nicely with the compensation culture that we now live in, ie. nobody is resposible for their own actions.
The trouble with Human Rights legislation is that it is not anchored in any code of natural justice that we understand. It is, therefore, loosing its way as it was always going to.
2006-08-09 01:39:58 · answer #5 · answered by Veritas 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I do think the murderers ought to be killed, or worse! But the judge knew very well that he couldn't promise a life sentence. That's the byproduct of any decent justice system; a million little rules.
2006-08-06 11:24:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely, life should mean life. The problem is that the prisons are too overcrowded, which results in the system not having the capacity to contain them for their life.
If prisons were not made to be so comfortable then the petty criminals will stop doing the crimes for an easy life and will result in those criminals sentenced to life, having their life in prison
2006-08-06 11:20:33 · answer #7 · answered by nb19 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally believe that torturing someone and then killing them should not be a life sentence... the person convicted of this (and it has to be without a doubt) should have the same thing done to them. Might make people think twice before doing such awful things if they knew they would have to endure it too.
2006-08-06 11:17:11 · answer #8 · answered by WenckeBrat 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wankers, the f u c k i n g lot of em are wankers! There are too many do gooders around to jump to the defence of worthless bits of **** like that bastard. The human rights of a convicted criminal should not be of paramount importance as it seems to be, a short sharp shock like topping a few of these people will bring a lot of likeminded arseholes to their senses & make them think before committing such vile crimes ......Ooooooh dont get me started !
2006-08-06 11:24:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
British judicial system and law is a fukin joke!! The human rights bullshit is sending this country to the dogs. No wonder everyone is leaving
2006-08-07 02:40:50 · answer #10 · answered by intelligensio 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bring back hanging...i just found out today that my cousin was murdered saturday night/sunday morning.
(its on bbc news bradford and west yorkshire) the net news version is not as family say happened. i hope the murderer gets 'life' (meaning til dead)(which, really in this country, is only, i believe approx. 25 years, 12 1/2 after parole for good behaviour no doubt). ridiculous. an eye for an eye! (as the saying goes)
2006-08-07 01:31:16 · answer #11 · answered by ali1ukbradford 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋