InsaneApache
08-21-2008, 10:47
I've been following this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7573812.stm) story for the last few days. I have mixed feelings about it. This morning I read comment in the Times....
If we accept that it is a crime, however, then it is something which the perpetrator can control. He may choose to offend or not, and if he chooses what is unacceptable, again we should respond as such. We catch the bastard, try him, lock him up by way of penalty and then - this is the crucial bit - once he has served his sentence we restore his liberty.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4575628.ece
On one hand, I'm on the 'lock the bastard' up and chuck away the key brigade. Then I get thinking, well the guys done his time so live and let live.
One thing I don't like is this knee-jerk reaction from the home secretary. It reeks of not just punishing the culprit twice but ad infinitum.
What do you guys think?
If we accept that it is a crime, however, then it is something which the perpetrator can control. He may choose to offend or not, and if he chooses what is unacceptable, again we should respond as such. We catch the bastard, try him, lock him up by way of penalty and then - this is the crucial bit - once he has served his sentence we restore his liberty.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4575628.ece
On one hand, I'm on the 'lock the bastard' up and chuck away the key brigade. Then I get thinking, well the guys done his time so live and let live.
One thing I don't like is this knee-jerk reaction from the home secretary. It reeks of not just punishing the culprit twice but ad infinitum.
What do you guys think?