Compensation? Seriously?
So some scumbag DECIDES to take heroin (a dangerous and addictive drug and anyone with half a brain cell knows this) and then DECIDES to committ a crime, but sadly gets caught and locked up and has to go cold turkey.
Boo-bloody-hoo!
No they should not get compensation. Not unless the old lady they mugged or the person whose house they broke into and ransacked or the woman they raped will get compensation too. Sadly I doubt they will.
2006-11-13 07:14:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that this is a joke on justice. I, also, believe that the only way anyone could ever come off drugs is "cold turkey" Anyone that says you can come off drugs with other drugs is just substituting 1 drug for another I would like to see our resources used to help the victims of the crimes these junkies hurt. All of the junkieshad a choice of whether or not to take drugs, therefore, they should have to face the conquences of their actions. However, I believe that they should have been in a prision hospital while they are going "cold turkey"
2006-11-13 05:08:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by bettyswestbrook 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its a complete disgrace that criminals should be compensated by the tax payer...lets not forget were the money comes from in the first place.This country has gone so far down this crazy path that no one will do anything about this madness.Does anyone remember when people could challenge these ridiculous decisions and it actually resulted in someone saying hang on a minute you cant do that its wrong and we will not go ahead with it!!! I think that the politicians have all taken a cowardice pill and forgotten how to do the decent thing.
Taking illegal drugs is illegal and committing crime to fund your drug habit will sometimes(usually you will get let off to do it again)get you sent to prison so not being able to get your illegal drugs in prison is not an infringement on human rights ..to add insult to injury the tax payer has to fund the legal aid to get the compensation they so rightly do not deserve.
Complete and utter madness!
2006-11-13 05:36:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I can see both sides of the argument:
For- the government is prepared to fund the problem of heroin addiction outside of prison so why does it change inside prison?
Against: The government doesn't actually classify the treatment of addiction as treatment of a disease, it is classified seperately under the Misuse of Drugs Act (therefore the rights to healthcare may not exist in their entirety). Plus we all know that heroin is illegal and wrong, so I feel if this litigation is successful then what is to stop paedophiles from suing the government for not providing them with child pornography?
Although by all accounts I always thought prisons were full of heroin anyway.
2006-11-13 05:25:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Miss Emily 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
don't be ridiculous. Whilst there is too little attention paid to the victims of crime, paying less to the purpetrators would do more harm than good. Our re-offending rate in the UK is 2/3: one of the highest in the world. And this is precisely because the mainstream (tabloid) media seem hell-bent on hanging anyone who ever commits a crime, rather than actually trying to understand and deal with the problem. The issue of compensation here is irrelevant: see another question in this section about Human Rights Legislation.
Response to Windle:
(and the negative ratings)
I am not surprised by this response - it is the mainstream policy these days to 'Punish' and ther have even been ridiculous proposals to involve the Victim in the sentancing. This all makes very nice healdines and sound bytes, but to be honest i don't care what the 'majority' think. The majority are not experts. We do not have a legal system based on stoning and public hangings - it is (should be) based upon evidence-based decision ,makin in relaiton to reducing re-offending. Who cares what the majority think if the re-offending rate is reduced.
Prison isnt there to please the public - its there to rehabilitate (a recent principle, actually - its principles of rehab have been largely ignored at that is why prison hasn't worked). AND - all the evidence which is available shows that Rehab and working with people prevents reoffending - and that Punishment and the 'Threat' of prison do not.
Majority rule is always bad. Particularly with such an uneducated, populist, tabloid-reading, pop-culture-obsessed majority we have in this country
2006-11-13 05:00:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Richard B 2
·
0⤊
3⤋
Richard B does not understand the mood of the majority.
Most people do not want criminals to be treated softly. They want harsh penalties and harsh conditions for criminals because 50 years of soft sentencing and trying to rehabilitate and understand the criminals has not worked.
hanging and flogging may be too far but what we have now is ( as per the question ) a joke. Although nobody appears to be laughing
2006-11-13 05:13:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Another example of Britain and its 'political correctness.' No doubt they will get compensation. If you take drugs and are a criminal so what if you go cold turkey- do these scumbags ever think about their victims human rights? Funny me I thought drugs were illegal so why should they have access to them.
2006-11-13 05:01:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by travelgirl 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
You know as well as I know that they are having a laugh at us. I can see them now, "skinning up" a joint in their prison cell, feeling proud that they made the news headlines.
The next logical step is for an alcoholic to sue over human rights, if they cant get their fix in prison.
This is not Justice - it is a joke, that is not even funny to most right-thinking people. We have gone too far into this Europe thing to reject it all now - that is the scary part of it because much worse things are to come.
2006-11-13 05:12:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
ARE YOU SERIOUS??? what is this world coming to if we are going to pay for criminals because they can't get drugs???? i don't think anything should be paid to someone that choses to commit crimes and become addicted to drugs, those are choices they chose to make, a victim didn't chose to become a victim.....so yes i agree with you 100%!!!!!!!!
2006-11-13 05:01:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by polarbaby 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
i totally agree, nobody forced them to take the drug in the first place, why should they be rewared for doing something bad! give the money to the victims of crime
2006-11-13 06:05:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by button moon 5
·
0⤊
0⤋