Fair enough. I don't think most people would retort in the same way though.

I'm not getting into the rest of your post though. That's would take the thread on a different tangent, and it's not a view I necessarily agree with, but we all have our different opinions, and it's good to discuss them sometimes.

I would say they both appal me in equal measure, especially when there is more than one person present. One deviant is hard to comprehend, but when they are mulitplied its frightening.

Agree with you yet again Joey,that video upset me, that woman clearly is a liability around children and the children should be protected from that sort of scum.

Wow, you lot are certainly creating some threads that are more than likely going to rile me up (this and that smacking thread).

Anyway...no I don't agree with forced sterilisation of women. It's inhumane and not the kind of way we should be going about things. Human rights are a fundamental element of a civilised society, and they should never, ever, under any circumstances whatsoever, be compromised for any reason (I am of course referring to the serious ones). They should be set in stone and nobody should be above them, and we should count ourselves very lucky that we have them and that we live in a society where on the whole, people's human rights are abided by in the eyes of the law and justice.

If we lived in a society where we could freely tamper with human rights and compromise with certain cases willy nilly, we'd be leaving ourselves open to all kinds of abuse. Sounds just like a fascist government policy to me, not the kind of place I want to be living. As disgusting as this video was (from the parts I watched), and as infuriated as I get at certain crimes, at the very basic level we should always ensure that the human rights of all involved are upheld.

Capital punishment, torture etc are all disgusting concepts that need to be abolished as soon as possible, and we really don't need to start going down this kind of road. We want to try and aim to get to a stage where there is practically no violence or inhumane treatment whatsoever (especially coming from those in control of the law), and things like this would only promote such behaviour if you ask me. Almost hypocritical in fact.

Including those of any future children of convicted abusers?...

I disagree with forced sterilisation because like others have mentioned its open to abuse and similarly to capital punishment what if they have a false positive? Its irreversible and somebodys life could potentially be ruined.

These sort of people that some would deem "deservable" of it should be locked up for a very long time that they wont have chance to get pregnant anyway.

Also what in the cases of these offenders that are already pregnant? Would that deem them deservable of a forced abortion?

Its just not something I think should be explored because all sorts of ethical issues are flung about.

I don't think they're suggesting any child from them should be killed but they should be prevented from conceiving full stop.

i think it's okay to sterilize people, but i think their eggs or sperm should be taken and frozen so that in the future they could stil have possibility of using them.

Actually i'd like to see a world in the future where all people were sterilized, and the government then could say who could procreate or not. I think after we are born sperm and eggs should be taken from all boys and girls, and then we are all sterilized, and then we should have to apply for some sort of permit to actually use them.

The idea that any idiot with a dick or vagina can make babies now is a huge problem. i don't think that procreation is a human right.

wow

elaborate.

Oh my. I'm just not getting into that one..

I was thinking this.:joker:

I can understand Niall and MTVN's views but if they don't want there human rights taken away when concieving children then they shouldn't have abused the children they've already got imo.

:shocked:

Are you ****ing serious?

Sounds like some fascist dictatorship which is attempting to engineer some sort of 'super race'. Having flashbacks to the 1940's here.

Yes but the Nazi's were at War with the World.

Criminals
can have some human rights stopped
thats fair

That will never Happen, though

I also agree with Vicky.
on that.

You do realise what you're saying right?

What if a case was misjudged and a person was sterilised because it appeared that they were guilty of an assault on a minor, but it wasn't actually true? A whole bodily function and ability to carry on their family would've been snatched away. They'd never be able to have a child of their own and thats all through a failing of the legal system. How would you help them? How could you even begin to consider how to compensate them for such a thing? Its just wrong to my mind..

Its an absolutely terrible thing to consider in my opinion and the fact that it was openly used by the Nazis against the disabled for example on serves to highlight that.

I dont think its fair to say everyone 'convicted' of anything. Some paedophiles get convicted on only the words of the victims.

Thats why I said earlier on only if it can be actually proven beyond all reasonable doubt...and that it would be very much on a case by case basis.

Yes but having such a authoritarian and dictatorial punishment in todays society is backwards and quite barbaric.

And even though such sentences aren't given out that much nowadays, life imprisonment can be far more punishing.

I've got to say, after lostalex kicking up a fuss about parents "beating up" their children and then to come out with that, I think he just says whatever is most likely to get a reaction.

I agree with this totally. Unfortunately our 'justice' system is absolutely ridiculous and allows people such as the chinese woman who beat her baby to do a years worth of time...and then says her debt to society is paid...and she can go back to her normal life, have more kids to abuse...maybe get another year somewhere down the line...its just not right at all.

I would be all for life meaning life. And all serious crimes against kids getting life. But its just never going to happen. I know the sterilisation thing will never happen either though. But something really has got to be done about stuff like this. I mean, the guy who made a racist tweet...is likely to be in prison for longer than that woman is. How the **** is that fair?!

I honestly think that our justice system being too damn soft and inconsistent is the main reason so many offend in the first place. You can murder someone and be out in 5 years or so.

:worship:

Yeah it is quite disgusting how lenient it's become. I mean if we could imprison people for life, and life meaning life in prison (not 25 years or some sh!t), then that would be ideal. There just isn't the space for it I suppose..

About the racist tweet thing: I think that was way over the top too. It could have been to set an example to others though not to be offensive like that online? I don't know really. It was ridiculous though. That was the one who was really offensive about the footballer, right?

But if we did imprison people for life...Im pretty sure there wouldnt be so many offenders in the first place. So the overcrowding would solve itself really...as less people would be committing serious crimes.

But yeah, there isnt the space to even try it...because of how **** the system has been so far :laugh:


I didnt read the tweets myself, but yeah. It might have been to set an example...but even so. Someone purposely torturing a child, should get way harsher punishment than some idiot keyboard warrior thinking he was clever :S I dont personally think his sentence was too harsh really...but there should be some consistency. And I think in anyones eyes what this woman did is way worse than what that man did. And this should be reflected in the punishment.

I never thought of it that way before. :shocked: I suppose that makes sense. But like you said, the prisons are already fit to burst so we can't try it now. :laugh:

Hmm I think its quite worrying really. Jailing someone for being verbally offensive? He was exercising his right to free speech I think. I would've just fined him.

Is there really gonna be that significant a difference between the effectiveness of the deterrent for a prison sentence that lasts 25 years and one that lasts 50 (assuming after the time they're probably pretty close to death)? And if the death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent why would other tougher punishments be any more of one?

I think if someone is in the frame of mind to kill another person, than whether the punishment is 25 years, 50 years, or death, it won't have that big an impact on their decision

Well a 25 year sentence would generally result in someone being out in like 12. Say you killed someone at 20 year old, you would be out just in time to enjoy the prime of your life. Even doing the full sentence you would be out by 45....likely under a new identity and everything too (as only really high profile cases get sentences like that). Life meaning life would mean you never saw the real world again...I would imagine thats a pretty big deterrant...for younger people at least.

I would personally say that spending my life locked up is worse than the death penalty.

Again I agree with you.

Oh and I dont think that everyone who murders is gone in the head. I think a lot of them seriously plan what they are going to do, how to get away with it and everything. Then just try to plead insanity at court because a lot of people seem to think only insane people would even consider murdering someone.

Maybe it's just me but I think that someone that plans a murder has something seriously wrong with them, they're definitely not right in the head.

No sane person does that.

EDIT: Bit like that teenager a few weeks back that killed his mum with a hammer, and had plotted it for months and months in the form of little stories. There's clearly some kind of issue there if you ask me, even more so than those who just murder at the heat of the moment.

Even in cases when they only get out after 12 years or so (and I'm not sure how frequent it actually is that prisoners only serve half their sentence), I wouldn't say they're in a position to "enjoy the prime of their life". It's forever known that they were a murderer, that will place huge limitations on everything they do and they have to try and accustom themselves back to the real world and (if they do feel this way) always have to live with what they've done. I'm not saying this to try and make you feel sorry for them, or make out they deserve any sympathy because they don't and those are the consequences of what they've done, but I just don't think it's the case that murderers get a really easy ride in life after being released

And I'm not sure I agree that being killed is better than spending your life in prison, but either way I still thinks it's the case that however much you try and toughen the punishment it probably won't stop someone killing another man if they were already going to do it. I don't think it's a coincidence that the countries with the most brutal justice system often have the most crime, and those with the most liberal have the least

Yes I agree..the horrific case that's been on the news all day today of Shane Jenkins who gouged his ex's eyes out..apparantly he'd watched a dvd of eye gouging fgs...there was no 'spur of the moment' thing going on there..that man is seriously disturbed...
..he's been sentenced to life imprisonment..but I don't know how these things work..will they just leave him disturbed or will he ever get any help to fully realise what he's done..because I'm presuming someone who is capable of doing that can't possibly fully grasp it

Wrong because what about over here?:joker:

They do but they just don't care.

I don't think our justice system is particularly liberal, no more so than most Western countries. I think Norway is a very good example of a successful liberal justice system, their reaction to the atrocities committed there last year have been a testament to this

As much as I am as shocked as anyone about certain crimes I would worry about these type of punishments....
..if it was that say someone committed a murder and they got the death penalty..a life for a life..or a paedophile say castrated..someone who was deemed to be disturbed..maybe lobotomised..and the forced castration on anyone that it is deemed shouldn't have anymore children.....
...that sounds like a completely violent and barbaric world to live in..like something out of a horror movie..almost completely lawless..and would there ever be any extenuating circumstances and how would they be decided..it seems to be playing around with people's lives as much as the people who commit these crimes in the first place....
..it would be better if the sentences were longer in some cases or that they served their full term..but when they're doing that..these people need help also

Im standing by what I suggested, it is being trialled for peadophiles ...Voluntary chemical castration. It would be discrimination if the same soloution was not offered to women?...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...tish-jail.html

You think it's that easy do you Scott? They just get over it?

what about young children who recall the memories, the pain, the hurt, the fear: and have to live with that every single day for the rest of the lives - many who have been phsyically damaged to the point that they cannot have children anymore: or are unable to have a normal sex life.

If only child abuse was as simple to get over as you appear to think it is.