Obviously not... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6299727.stm
Would like to hear your point of answer.
2007-01-25 09:27:16 · 9 answers · asked by slıɐuǝoʇ 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I don't think children are truly safe in any country that values the "rights" of the offender over the rights of victims and potential victims.
I can't comprehend why a judge, someone impartial, decides the fate of offenders. It makes far more sense to me for the closest relative or relatives of a victim (or the victim themself if still alive) to not hear evidence or a plea but simply metre out punishment.
If there are no living relatives, then someone from the government or legal system should be appointed to metre out punishment.
There should be no plea bargains, and if a judgement day was simply that: a relative (say a daughter) said to the man who killed her father "Can you bring him back to me? No? Then your sentence is death, death by the same way you killed my father."
Or "You raped my daughter, the DNA evidence is there, and I sentence you to 100 years in jail, no parole."
Offenders would be stuck and I believe people would think long and hard before committing a crime.
2007-01-25 09:37:23 · answer #1 · answered by sen 2 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Are any of us safe under a Labour government. Armed robbery is up. Drug taking is up. It goes on and on. All we get is lies and more lies. If the only protection we have is John Reid who has told judges to free people what hope have we. You now know if you commit a crime you ain't going to jail. Paedophile in North Wales should have been in jail or at least in hiding not bragging about it on tV.
2007-01-25 17:34:30 · answer #2 · answered by deadly 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The vast majority of paedophile abuse is between family members. The chance of anyone getting attacked by a stranger in that way is miniscule. You just have fun shouting about it.
Anyway, sending people who look at dirty pictures of kids to prison is just dumb because it makes it more likely that when they're out they'll attack someone. They need treatment, monitoring and counselling to make sure the interest in the porn doesn't translate to real life. Bang 'em up in prison and print their names in the paper and they'll just become antisocial weirdos who think about nothing other than what ruined their life. I wouldn't fancy that guy hanging round the park.
2007-01-25 19:17:06 · answer #3 · answered by Joe 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Punishment is no deterrent to these sickos, if you rely on government policy to protect your children, they'll always be at risk. You are the best safety-net, the best defense against this type of vermin . Just on a personnel note I believe in the death sentence for convicted pedophiles, may not be a deterrent, but at least you don't get many re-offenders
2007-01-25 17:46:06 · answer #4 · answered by ? 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the article it it also said that, "On Thursday, Mr Reid said the government was in talks to buy two prison ships and use an RAF camp to ease jail overcrowding."
A 250 year step backwards. And no, you can't send them to Australia this time. You will have to keep your own paedophiles
2007-01-25 17:41:52 · answer #5 · answered by Ferret 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
is your child safe from paedophiles under any government? get real your child is safe by your protection and yours only what you do is more important than any authority i would hate to see anything happen to any child
2007-01-25 17:50:27 · answer #6 · answered by Ken M 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Judges seriously have to wear those wigs? Wow! No child is ever safe, and obviously those sheep you are shaving to get those wigs aren't safe either!
2007-01-25 17:34:56 · answer #7 · answered by Whiskey Tango Foxtrot 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
NO CHILD IS EVER SAFE !!!
2007-01-25 17:31:43 · answer #8 · answered by David The Visionary 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
wtf is goin on
2007-01-25 17:32:19 · answer #9 · answered by ¥ºu® ∑ø®§† N¡gh†må®e 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋