Given that the survivor has a natural life sentence of nightmares and flashbacks,and that the average perv commits loads of crimes before he even gets caught once,surely a natural life sentence is appropriate?
2007-04-03 20:46:39 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Rebel your talking out of your ar*s, if you touched a women's breasts without permission, then the chances are you'd just get a good hiding. However stealing kids or dragging women off the streets and raping them is a totally different ball game, and I'd go one further than the poster an execute the bas*ards.
To answer your question however, the government won't be tough on these people because (a) The PM's wife is a human rights lawyer and won't let him try and pass a tougher bill, and (b) there is not enough of a public outcry, and the government knows that it'll all blow over for everyone else (obviously not the victims/families), and therefore doesn't need to worry about a legal backlash from Brussels, now that our glorious leaders have signed away or rights to govern ourselves
2007-04-03 22:59:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there is a maximum amount of time they can serve for the individual crime, the system has little choice but to release them. However, due to the fact that more sex offenders commit sex crimes again after release, they are required to register. This allows the system some measure of control at tracking the ones that do register. Some states have laws that allow for a sex offender to be committed to a mental hospital after their prison term is complete. However it is a very controversial move, and very costly to the taxpayer. Personally I think if they just castrated them (physically, not chemically) it would be cheaper and they would not be able to reoffend upon their release.
2016-05-17 04:08:18 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes absolutely. It is a given that most sex offenders have compulsions that cannot be mastered. The only hope for them and society is to remove them from the gene pool in the kindest way.
2007-04-03 21:10:08 · answer #3 · answered by Christine H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because of the Human Rights Act!!!
2007-04-03 21:06:57 · answer #4 · answered by Charlene 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because fraud and deception gets longer terms - law values assets more than lives. And is an ***!
2007-04-03 20:50:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
because people like rebel...the fourth answerer from the top..."what is a sex offender,if i grabbed your breast,should i be given life? "
2007-04-03 21:04:28 · answer #6 · answered by turntable 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This country is run by left-wing bed wetters and Guardian readers.
2007-04-03 20:58:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
i agree with you 100%
2007-04-03 20:51:58 · answer #8 · answered by S Csparky 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what is a sex offender,if i grabbed your breast,should i be given life?
2007-04-03 20:52:27 · answer #9 · answered by rebel 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you see the Labour goverment is screwed up The home office can eat their ****
2007-04-03 20:49:52 · answer #10 · answered by legolas g/Frederich 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋