Quote:
Originally Posted by angus58
Am not following your logic - "Human Rights" are commensurate with "Human Responsibilities" they do not exist in a vacuum. Human Rights legislation is deeply FLAWED because it does not take account of the simple and irrefutable fact that one person exercising his/her "human rights" can infringe another person's "human rights" because rather than having a universal code of behaviour, rights and responsibilities, it has been interpreted to mean an "INDIVIDUAL'S" rights.
You are also being disingenuous by suggesting that I have advocated the same severity of treatment to all convicted criminals, common sense would dictate that the seriousness of the crime and the danger posed to the public must be taken into account, not only when handing down sentences, but also in denying criminals such as murderers, rapists, terrorists, paeodphiles the right to cynically use the legal system they have blithely abused in order to evade their punishment. Such criminals have deprived people of their LIVES, and have relinquished their claims to be treated as normal members of society. They have given up their right to be treated as anything other than what they are. To paraphrase what you say "THEY have RESIGNED from the human race".
In this day and age, where we have sophisticated means of establishing guilt, such as DNA evidence, CCTV etc, there is far less likelihood of miscarriages of justice, and the minority that do occur should not be used as a reason not to protect the law abiding members of society from its most dangerous members.
You use the example of a drug addict shoplifting - well I can assure you that such minor criminals are usually treated well in prison, offered drug counselling and support to come of drugs etc., but there is only so much others can do, and it is more than likely that once released a drug addict will probably re-offend.
You have admitted you were jailed for non payment of council tax and did not enjoy the experience - Well if you did indeed NOT pay your council tax like the rest of us have to, then the powers that be are entitled to follow the proscribed punishment - incarceration, and it is not meant to be a holiday camp or a recreational break. It is meant to also be a deterrent from further offending.
Finally, what the hell are you waffling about regarding the holocaust, Rwanda, Serbia etc. Your argument is ridiculous. You are talking about genocide which is a crime against humanity perpetrated by evil and immoral dictatorships. Please get YOUR facts straight. NOBODY who is remotely sane would ever condone the mass extermination of innocent people. As for Guantanamo Bay, that was a situation where prisoners were being abused in contravention of international law (in existence long before the present Human Rights legislation).
|
Refering back to your original post you said
"As far as I'm concerned all criminals should forfeit any recourse to Human Rights or any other Rights enshrined in Law."
My logic was to say that your suggestion would lead to ALL criminals being treated like animals. Thus in a strive to cut cost's Prisons, no longer forced by law to treat the criminal humanely would treat them in-humanely, or would you trust common sense to ensure only the rapist's end up in overcrowded cells, bearing in mind the way some American troops treated the Guantanimo bay P.O.W's it is not a safe assumption. They we're all treated in-humanely even though they had been convicted of Nothing. This is the way in a lawless environment, individuals with power abuse it depending on their own subjective views.
Fair point about Murderers resigning from the human race, Regardless of what the murderer deserves, or does not deserve, if you treat that Murderer in-humanely BY LAW then the Law is saying it cannot make a mistake (flying in the face of common sense), else it is saying the mistakes we will inevitably make will be a price worth paying. Your suggesting taking all Murderers right to appeal away, clearly it would not help the innocent man in jail, but how would it help keep murderers off the street, presumably the facts of the case would not change with the passage of time unless a mistake HAS been made.
In which case the only thing achieved is to prevent miscarriages coming to light.
The point i was making regarding my incarceration which you seem to of percieved as a suggestion that i did not deserve it somehow, (how you did that without your tongue firmly fixed in the side of your mouth i don't know) was that people believe criminals get off lightly because of the relaxed conditions inside. This is rubish spread by the press and anyone that has spent time in prison knows it is not easy.
Regarding my last point
The Holocaust was indeed perpetrated by Evil dictatorship and it is only Laws such as the Human Rights Law which stops another Evil Dictatorship forming. The dictatorship was the authority for the inhumane treatment but, most German people went along with it, informed on the whereabouts of Jew's, and captured Jew's this was because the Law said it was ok, and my point is if you say the Law should say remove human rights from prisoners then you are on a slippery road to a dictatorship.