[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

and the only way to test if he's reformed or not is to send him back into society and hope that he doesn't abuse or kill another child.

Well there is evidence that rehabilitation can be successful, and if we ever want to let any prisoners out of jail and have them integrate back into society then the process is essential, we cant keep everyone in jail if it goes against strong evidence of rehabilitation in fear of recidivism.

Pyramid - I'm off out now so I'll try and reply to your post later

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Well there is evidence that rehabilitation can be successful, and if we ever want to let any prisoners out of jail and have them integrate back into society then the process is essential, we cant keep everyone in jail if it goes against strong evidence of rehabilitation in fear of recidivism.

Pyramid - I'm off out now so I'll try and reply to your post later

cheers for now.. have a nice night... catch up later at some point. Enjoy!

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Well there is evidence that rehabilitation can be successful, and if we ever want to let any prisoners out of jail and have them integrate back into society then the process is essential, we cant keep everyone in jail if it goes against strong evidence of rehabilitation in fear of recidivism.

Pyramid - I'm off out now so I'll try and reply to your post later

For fear of recidivism?? You make the abuse, torture and murder of a baby sound so trivial. I'm all for rehabilitating thieves etc but child abusers and murders?? I'm sorry but no innocent child is worth taking that risk imo.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

how can the parole board, the powers that be, or the public be assured that he is a reformed character? If he is so 'reformed' and there is absolute proof of this: he should not require any new identity.

Do you honestly feel that 'reformed character or not' - that a person who has inflicted such horror and torture upon a young child, should benefit from the taxpayer paying for his new ID, house, job and all other manner of things that that would entail.

Do you truly feel that the strained public purse and it's very restricted finances should be used for such a new ID - rather than say, for example, being used towards treating sick children / or treating children who have suffered emotionally and physically at the hands of such people. ?

If there was a choice between the monies being spent on the New ID or what I have posed above: what would your preference be?

Do you think that if there were absolute proof of rehabilitation then that would stop some of the vigilante idiots from still pursuing their misguided concept of justice and trying to form a lynch mob? Working on the presumption that he has indeed been rehabilitated then I wouldnt be opposed to him having a new identity if there was sufficient evidence that his life was under threat.

And that's not really an answerable question because it presumes that the money can either be spent on one thing or the other. I'd rather taxpayers money wasnt being spent in the billions on unjust wars in Afghanistan, Iraq & now Libya, or that so much was spent on Trident etc. but it does, it's a straw man to say that because I wouldnt mind him having a new identity I, by extension, want to see sick children not be treated.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Do you think that if there were absolute proof of rehabilitation then that would stop some of the vigilante idiots from still pursuing their misguided concept of justice and trying to form a lynch mob? Working on the presumption that he has indeed been rehabilitated then I wouldnt be opposed to him having a new identity if there was sufficient evidence that his life was under threat.

And that's not really an answerable question because it presumes that the money can either be spent on one thing or the other. I'd rather taxpayers money wasnt being spent in the billions on unjust wars in Afghanistan, Iraq & now Libya, or that so much was spent on Trident etc. but it does, it's a straw man to say that because I wouldnt mind him having a new identity I, by extension, want to see sick children not be treated.

Given that the thread is nothing to do with wars etc, your 2nd paragraph is a completely moot point.

Re your first paragraph: if I am very honest: I really don't care. Owens didn't give a damn, why should I be concerned for his welfare. I'm not, and I don't pretend to be either.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Given that the thread is nothing to do with wars etc, your 2nd paragraph is a completely moot point.

Re your first paragraph: if I am very honest: I really don't care. Owens didn't give a damn, why should I be concerned for his welfare. I'm not, and I don't pretend to be either.

What the hell, of course it's relevant, this thread isnt specifically about sick children either but you brought that up and that's fine because public expenditure is relevant to the thread and wars are obviously a part of that

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

What the hell, of course it's relevant, this thread isnt specifically about sick children either but you brought that up and that's fine because public expenditure is relevant to the thread and wars are obviously a part of that

you will find you are taking my comment out of context......if you care to read the rest of what I wrote on that same paragraph - ie:

Do you truly feel that the strained public purse and it's very restricted finances should be used for such a new ID - rather than say, for example, being used towards treating sick children / or treating children who have suffered emotionally and physically at the hands of such people. ?

The word 'sick' meant in regards to their mentail health due to such abuse and torture.

The thread is NOT about where public monies should be spent. Wars or not.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

you will find you are taking my comment out of context......if you care to read the rest of what I wrote on that same paragraph - ie: The word 'sick' meant in regards to their mentail health due to such abuse and torture.

The thread is NOT about where public monies should be spent. Wars or not.

I disagree, considering the thread is about how innapropiate you feel it is that this is what taxpayers money is being spent on then surely it's relevant to make other points in regards to how taxes are spent, is it not?

Anyway this is going off topic, I dont care much for an argument over the relevance of an argument so I'll leave it there