Dundee teenagers locked up for Facebook riot threats
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-16144640

The sentence seems harsh considering that they'd pleaded guilty to a crime in which no damage was done - what if the "riot" had taken place - would they have got life sentences ?

:conf:

I remember some other guys getting the same sentance a few months ago for the same reason
Bit over the top yeah they should just get fined or something

They'll be out in a year, since they already will have served sometime and will probably be out on good behavior.

I suppose they need to come down hard on things like this, It so easy for people to organize **** like this on facebook so they need to be discouraged from doing it by harsh sentencing.

I'm glad they're doing this, if only they implemented such a 'no tolerance' kind of scheme across the board of crimes then things may start to move forward in the right direction with regards to crime levels.

It's ridiculous, and quite scary really that you can be locked up for years for creating a Facebook page. They did the same to a couple of guys who also made a Facebook event for a riot which never even took place, and that nobody showed up to, I'm not sure if anything actually happened here? Either way it's quite draconian IMO, and judges often hand out a lot more lenient sentences than they did here and for much worse crimes than making an event page on Facebook

Good enough for them and glad it wasn't some pathetic community service and a rap on the knuckles.

Quite a few other Judges could take a leaf out of this sentencing Judge's book.

If anyone thinks it's too harsh: go have a look at the Manchester riots, those hurt and the millions of pounds worth of damaged caused - not just to buildings, but for some: their livliehoods were destroyed.

They didn't get locked up for creating a Facebook page or making an event.

They got locked up for creating a facebook page which was designed only for one purpose: to trying to incite riots, to smash up buildings, loot shops and attack police officers . Not quite as innocent sounding when you put it into context.

That's such a bad basis for a justice system. It's like giving someone 10 years just for speeding because somebody else who was speeding crashed their car and killed somebody

Harsh?

Its about setting a Example like we did

Take them out to the moors and shoot them.

Yes Great Point

Not saying things should ever go that far, but you know if that ever were to happen at least we might be living in a far safer world than we are now. People might actually learn to stop speeding then instead of us all being guilty of doing it, just trying to avoid being caught for it.

But the Dundee two caused NO DAMAGE .....

No it's not at all. The intent here was to actually start a riot. A person speeding doesn't go out with the intent to kill someone.

It is nothing of the sort, and I suspect you know that all too well.

It's spot on, given that it was when the riots were spreading and starting up in other parts of the UK.

I'll let you read my further comment a few posts back for further details.

But you still going out knowing the potential consequences of speeding and that it's going to be dangerous.. I see your point but I still don't think it's right to give someone a sentence like this on the basis of what could have happened, at the end of the day they were two idiots just being stupid on Facebook, they say it was only as a joke and considering there was stuff like "let's show the English how it's done" it wouldn't surprise me if it was. Nothing even happened as a result of this, and 3 years? That's the kind of sentence that drug dealers get, that rapists sometimes get, it's the kind of sentence that is given for assault or a knife attack, crimes that do actually have serious consequences

And? If someone came up to me in the street and threatened to stab my heart out I'd want them imprisoned for my own personal safety, the same thing applies here except instead of protecting an individual, the idea is to protect an entire area. Why leave things under the pretense that 'oh, it hasn't happened yet so we won't bother', for it then to possibly happen and for it to be too late? Why not prevent those chances of anything happening early?

Well, tbh I think that those crimes you've listed, especially the violent ones, should have even higher sentences, but that's for another day!

As for the what could have happened bit, I don't really see it as that, what I see it as is people actively trying to organize another mob of vandals and robbers, during a time when it was rampant across Britain.

But would you expect them to get the same sentence as someone who did actually stab you in the heart?

The lines are being blurred here between potential crimes, and actual crimes, they're not the same thing, you can't create some kind of equivalency between creating a facebook page for a riot and actually causing one, actually causing serious damage, actually causing arson, actually causing theft etc. etc.

Really? You think so?

I'll put you in touch at least 2 drug dealers who got 18 years here in Scotland....... perhaps the English justice system is simply too soft.

so in your mind, if someone started a FB page for no other reason than to incite (for example) let's select fanatical types who loathe the western way, to go burn down chapels, churches, bomb bars and pubs, to attack the Police Officers who help uphold our Laws and put their lives at risk to protect us, you think that that's okay to do, and it's not a problem, nor is it likely to be one?

Fair enough, maybe I'm just too liberal :p

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-2339699.html

This is comparing some of the sentences given to rioters to sentences given to non rioters, I know it's 4 years but others who commited the same crime as these did get 4

There's a huge drug dealing operation right there that only got 4 years

And like I said in my reply to Jack, I think it's blurring the lines between potential crimes and actual crimes

No, but as Niamh touched on the sentences for those that do commit those sorts of crimes are already too short, so they should be extended and those threatening these sorts of crimes should be given these sort of sentences.

I wouldn't expect them [or want them, for that matter], to be given the same sentence as someone who did commit that particular crime, however I would want them to be given a lengthy sentence not only for my personal safety, but also to teach them that even making threats regarding things like that won't be tolerated, just as it shouldn't be.

Perhaps the English judicial system might want to look to the Scottish side: seeing as they do seem to give out very lenient sentences in comparison.

I think the point you may be missing is: it is less to do with 'nothing actually happened' but more to do with putting over the message, "Don't even think about doing this, or you'll pay dearly for it".