[Angus]

Originally Posted by PaulyJ

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.

Firstly, you quote only the first part of my original post - I go on to say:Instead of Human Rights legisation we should have a Bill of Rights that gives protection and privileges to the law abiding people of this country, that can only be invoked so long as people adhere to their responsibilities to be good citizens"
My point is that the situation at present is all about RIGHTS with no corresponding RESPONSIBILITIES.

I also said:" I agree there should be a sliding scale depending on the severity of the crime, and most importantly, the human rights of the VICTIM should always take precedence over human rights of the criminal."

The ability to appeal a conviction has been part of the English Justice System
for hundreds of years, what I object to is the additional rights afforded in Human Rights legislation that often fly in the face of commonsense and logic.
Certain categories of crime are beyond redemption and the suggestion that rehabilitation is possible is laughable.

I don't see where I have said anywhere that all criminals should be treated inhumanely. What I am suggesting is that prison should offer basic sustenance, shelter and medical care, with no other luxuries and amenities. Feed them, water them, shelter them and treat them if ill and that's IT.
Your experience of prison was not nice - well it's not meant to be, is it?

Your statement that an entire nation is responsible for the evil actions of their rulers/government etc, is ridiculous- MOST German people were unaware of what Hitler's regime was doing to the Jews, Gays, Disabled etc, and were under the jackboot of the nazis who ruled by fear and intimidation. I, for example, am no more responsible for the evil actions of this government for taking us into an illegal war in Iraq than you are. If you think we are not already living under a form of dictatorship you are deluding yourself. What you appear to be suggesting is that if it was suddenly legal in this country, for example, to pick on and intimidate a particular ethnic minority, everybody would be doing it. Again, you are presupposing that human beings are mindless automatons incapable of acting morally or ethically unless there is legislation in place telling them what is right or wrong. I submit the majority
of human beings are perfectly aware of what is moral and ethical behaviour, and those that choose to step outside the boundaries of that behaviour cannot then complain about the consequences.

The ordinary citizen in this country has had Human Rights legislation imposed upon them which is unworkable in practice since to invoke one's individual rights often infringes upon and offends someone else's, so whose takes precedence?