Human Rights concern over rioters

[Quedos]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pair-incited-riots-facebook-jailed-185441906.html
:rant: discuss, rant, rave and opinions please. There is no right or wrong answer and please respect others opinions BEFORE lambasting them.:rolleyes:

Me I think it the whole Act should be torn up Victims get zero, criminals get everything.

[dizzyblonde]

I don't care who you are, or what you are, you go burn, pillage and destroy hard working peoples lives.....you get what you get.
Example to all, its not tolerable. You reap what you sow.
Fair enough its not exactly in line with a lot of other punishments for crimes, but I really don't care. I'll keep saying it, we've bred a nanny state, now it has to be dealt with.
Too many younger people with a voice they've never actually earned the right to use. A voice that blatantly disregards respect for their equals and any that have a far more worthy life. Give em ten years til they grow up a bit!

[timwilky]

As you say there is no right or wrong answer.

They were guilty of crimes that could have ended up in tragedy. You do have to wonder where the thin line lines between free speech and incitement in the case of the facebook warriors etc lies. Whilst normally I am on the side of hang them high. I do think some sentences have been excessive. Especially for early guilty pleas etc.

[Specialone]

Personally I have no sympathy at all, this was a pre meditated act to incite a riot, this wasn't a spur of the moment thing, this was planned so they knew it was a serious thing and against the law.

Harsher penalties will have a effect on a lot of normal people who may get attracted to something like this in future.

By harsher I don't necessarily mean longer prison terms, long community service would be a better answer IMO as it would help communities that get affected by such things.

Taking a harsh line to less serious crimes has worked in the America in some states.

[dizzyblonde]

sorry.....am I the only one to look at the pair of them, and see a right pair of no hopers in front of me?

I was watching the One Show last night, and was quite interested in a scenario Dom was doing on wearing Hoodies. They had a middle aged fella walk up to people in a tshirt and ask for the time, and every person gave it. They then had the same fella in a hoodie do the same, and every person he asked gave him a wide berth.
First impressions do last. If they actually sat with a little more posture than looking like they've been hung from a coathanger terribly, someone looking in may not have a bad impression of them.


Its ok, when they come out they will be proficient in drug dealing, and hooked for life.

[SoulKiss]

When they behave like humans then they deserve the rights that brings.

[gruntygiggles]

I heard someone this morning say, "but they hadn't actually done anything had they, so why should they still go to prison?"

My response to this was...not all drink drivers actually end up mounting a kerb and killing someone or having a head on collision, BUT...they make a choice when getting behind the wheel drunk to have a blatant disregard for the safety of others and no-one bats an eye when they are given harsh sentences.

This is the same, they may not have actually caused harm in the end, but they were attempting to create a situation that would have a blatant disregard for others and so no...I don't care that they've been given harsh sentences.

For the justice system, it's damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Yes, human rights have to come into it somewhere, like perhaps making sure that prisoners get access to food and water, clean facilities and exercise. While they are getting TV's, games rooms, days out and more money spent on them than is spent on a law abiding citizen that's paid tax for 40+ years and is now struggling to keep warm in the winter I'm afraid I have little to no sympathy with any law breaker.

We need to redress the balance in this country.

[Dicky Ticker]

"Human rights for rioters"----what about the rights of the people and businesses they have looted, plundered, burned and in some cases killed.

Within the realms of tolerance ,yes the punishment should be as harsh as the courts can apply otherwise this will be the thin end of the wedge.
High time the justice system stopped pussy footing about for violent crime.

[Owenski]

When they behave like humans then they deserve the rights that brings.

Says it all really.

[gruntygiggles]

They could have been given 10 years...they were only given 4, so anyone shouting human rights needs to be grateful that the judge took into consideration the guilty pleas and the lack of previous conviction. These boys should be grateful!

[kellyjo]

They should be out in the streets clearing up the carnage the created, showing the next generation what will happen if they choose to go down the same path.

[Quedos]

They should be out in the streets clearing up the carnage the created, showing the next generation what will happen if they choose to go down the same path.

with dustpans and brushes. Just so they don't prove they can do a better job than the person already in that job :rolleyes:

[Milky Bar Kid]

We need to redress the balance in this country.

Yes, we do. Whilst I have no sympathy whatsoever for these guys, nor care a jot about their sentence breaching their human rights, I do feel that in the scheme of other sentences getting handed out every day at the countries courts that this is a bit disproportionate.

I have seen men in my area get 180 hours community service each for almost beating a guy to death. His head injury was so severe he was in an induced coma for a week. Oh, and these guys had previous for similar.

So yes, we need to redress the balance in more ways than one. This is a typical knee jerk reaction and it won't solve anything because once the hype dies down, our legal system will go back to handing out pathetic sentences once more.

[Ch00]

I think a lot of these jail sentences are just grand posturing from the courts; they want to look tough like they have a grasp on the events and they are dealing with it seriously. This part does make a welcome change.

However I can’t see them really serving any major part of that sentence. The prisons are full they will not house someone for a minor public order offence for 21 weeks if they need to house a murderer instead.

[tinpants]

with dustpans and brushes. Just so they don't prove they can do a better job than the person already in that job :rolleyes:
hmm. I can't help but think you've completely missed the point here. It matters not whether they can do a better job than the person already in that job, but rather that they shouldn't have made the mess in the first place.

IMHO, anyone convicted of a criminal offence loses all rights to state benefits and/or human rights. They clearly have so little regard for other peoples human rights that they should have theirs revoked.



*lights touch paper and runs*

[Quedos]

hmm. I can't help but think you've completely missed the point here. It matters not whether they can do a better job than the person already in that job, but rather that they shouldn't have made the mess in the first place.

IMHO, anyone convicted of a criminal offence loses all rights to state benefits and/or human rights. They clearly have so little regard for other peoples human rights that they should have theirs revoked.



*lights touch paper and runs*

It my union head thats on -
I want those people to go out and clean up the mess they made and I believe that community service should be used more often BUT
if you have these guys out doing jobs within the community and do a great job council/LA realise that they can get it done for nothing and sack the person that was doing that job originally ( as has happened in one the english councils)

As for the touch paper - I agree with you TS for those convicted!

[Bri w]

Yes, we do. Whilst I have no sympathy whatsoever for these guys, nor care a jot about their sentence breaching their human rights, I do feel that in the scheme of other sentences getting handed out every day at the countries courts that this is a bit disproportionate.

I have seen men in my area get 180 hours community service each for almost beating a guy to death. His head injury was so severe he was in an induced coma for a week. Oh, and these guys had previous for similar.

So yes, we need to redress the balance in more ways than one. This is a typical knee jerk reaction and it won't solve anything because once the hype dies down, our legal system will go back to handing out pathetic sentences once more.

Something occured ot me when hearing the disproportionate sentences. Is it not the other sentences, e.g. the 180 hrs you use as an example, that are disproportionate?

We are also hearing about how people should be more considered rather than wanting huge sentences. Its the people's society and that's what the people are asking for. For years "we" have being asking for stronger sentencing and more protection for the good in society. I hope we see a lot more like this rather than the years of "pathetic sentencing" we have had.

[Dicky Ticker]

Judges live a cosseted existence as do many of the higher echelons of politics and civil service which protects them from the everyday incidence of life. Perhaps if they had to live in the common man/woman's world they would see things differently.

[Sid Squid]

There is precisely no currency in claiming that this pair of fools had their human rights in some way compromised.

During a brief time that saw many commit crimes with the slightest provocation, the convicted were openly inciting violence, theft and criminal damage. Theirs was deliberate and calculated act, and at a moment that their words would be most dangerous and likely to fall upon receptive ears.

Written at any other time their words would be irresponsible in the extreme, written at the time they were, their words are criminal.

Four years? About right I say.

[Milky Bar Kid]

Something occured ot me when hearing the disproportionate sentences. Is it not the other sentences, e.g. the 180 hrs you use as an example, that are disproportionate?

We are also hearing about how people should be more considered rather than wanting huge sentences. Its the people's society and that's what the people are asking for. For years "we" have being asking for stronger sentencing and more protection for the good in society. I hope we see a lot more like this rather than the years of "pathetic sentencing" we have had.

That was kinda the point I was trying to make by saying that we need to redress the balance. And by further stating that this is only a knee jerk reaction by our justice system whilst there is intense media interest....

[Biker Biggles]

I think a lot of these jail sentences are just grand posturing from the courts; they want to look tough like they have a grasp on the events and they are dealing with it seriously. This part does make a welcome change.

However I can’t see them really serving any major part of that sentence. The prisons are full they will not house someone for a minor public order offence for 21 weeks if they need to house a murderer instead.
Posturing indeed.
Whatever we think about the sentences being disproportionate or not one thing is clear.The judiciary has been heavily influenced by something over the last week or two.And knee jerk judicial reactions are always likely to be bad in the longer term.If they are being influenced by the government that is dangerous for democracy,which requires separation of powers.

[Bri w]

Posturing indeed.
Whatever we think about the sentences being disproportionate or not one thing is clear.The judiciary has been heavily influenced by something over the last week or two.And knee jerk judicial reactions are always likely to be bad in the longer term.If they are being influenced by the government that is dangerous for democracy,which requires separation of powers.

If the govt represent the people why shouldn't the govt influence the judiciary? Surely the judiciary should respond to the wishes of the people. I'm not suggesting they respond to the extremes of some but they should reflect what society wants.

[Biker Biggles]

The government makes the laws in conjunction with the elected parliament and the judiciary imposes those laws,but none of those are meant to interfere with the day to day running of the other.Thats how you get a separation of power which is essential.