British justice, yeah right..

[sjek]

The charter is of fundamental rights is not the same as the European Convention on Human Rights. The charter is, essentially, not legally binding on the UK. It was incorporated into the proposed European Constitution and also the Lisbon Treaty, both of which failed referendi.

(also, if incorporated into a legally binding document (upon the UK), there would be no provisions in times of war - Article 2, Right to Life cannot be derrogated from, at any time)

Also, I'm sorry if I appeared callous re; the case in question. The discussion was quickly moving toward the death penalty and it was that which I addressed.

While this case seems fairly clear in terms of guilt, remorse and intent, many are not. There have been appalling miscarriges of justice (albeit less since PACE). These are fundamental, if not insurmountable, obstacles facing proponents of the death penalty.

In terms of justice, I cannot see that it is served by corporal punishment. The risk of miscarriges of justice are too great. It fulfills only a retributive element and that in itself has a certain inescapable futility to it. 'He killed so he must die' - and what then? We tell the families to take some consolence in a killing?

Nonetheless, if we are addressing this case, then perhaps 11years is too little. Again, I haven't seen pre-sentencing reports and MoJ guidelines are a little vague. There is an opportunity for the CPS/DPP to appeal on grounds of leniancy.

In saying that, what would satisfy you? Can you put a price on a life? A young boy is dead? Does 25 years cover it? Was he worth 50 years? 100?

Will only blood suffice?

It's not an easy question. I just don't think death is the answer.

Charter of fundamental human rights (EU) clearly states;

No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Though there may be a provision for times of war.

You cant debate the death penalty, because its been written into EU law that you cant execute people, and EU law is beyond the power of any one government. So why debate it? Any result is meaningless.

So you may aswell try and gather water in a sieve.

Also, I or anyone else here doesnt need to know specifics of the case, they can read what the judge in the case say happened, and go from there. And beyond this, on a real fundamental level, it's unacceptable to take another life in this unprovoked way, it was over an XBox game/console , how on earth can you say "you know nothing about the case", what I know is a young kid is dead because of sociopathic murderer who's happy to stab people and shout out about it, all over a ****ty games console.

Go sit with the family of Conor and tell them how perfect and balanced the British / EU system of "justice" is. In 10 years when we have long long forgotten this, they'll still be remembering.

 

[sjek]

The charter is of fundamental rights is not the same as the European Convention on Human Rights. The charter is, essentially, not legally binding on the UK. It was incorporated into the proposed European Constitution and also the Lisbon Treaty, both of which failed referendi.

(also, if incorporated into a legally binding document (upon the UK), there would be no provisions in times of war - Article 2, Right to Life cannot be derrogated from, at any time)

Also, I'm sorry if I appeared callous re; the case in question. The discussion was quickly moving toward the death penalty and it was that which I addressed.

While this case seems fairly clear in terms of guilt, remorse and intent, many are not. There have been appalling miscarriges of justice (albeit less since PACE). These are fundamental, if not insurmountable, obstacles facing proponents of the death penalty.

In terms of justice, I cannot see that it is served by corporal punishment. The risk of miscarriges of justice are too great. It fulfills only a retributive element and that in itself has a certain inescapable futility to it. 'He killed so he must die' - and what then? We tell the families to take some consolence in a killing?

Nonetheless, if we are addressing this case, then perhaps 11years is too little. Again, I haven't seen pre-sentencing reports and MoJ guidelines are a little vague. There is an opportunity for the CPS/DPP to appeal on grounds of leniancy.

In saying that, what would satisfy you? Can you put a price on a life? A young boy is dead? Does 25 years cover it? Was he worth 50 years? 100?

Will only blood suffice?

It's not an easy question. I just don't think death is the answer.

Charter of fundamental human rights (EU) clearly states;

No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Though there may be a provision for times of war.

You cant debate the death penalty, because its been written into EU law that you cant execute people, and EU law is beyond the power of any one government. So why debate it? Any result is meaningless.

So you may aswell try and gather water in a sieve.

Also, I or anyone else here doesnt need to know specifics of the case, they can read what the judge in the case say happened, and go from there. And beyond this, on a real fundamental level, it's unacceptable to take another life in this unprovoked way, it was over an XBox game/console , how on earth can you say "you know nothing about the case", what I know is a young kid is dead because of sociopathic murderer who's happy to stab people and shout out about it, all over a ****ty games console.

Go sit with the family of Conor and tell them how perfect and balanced the British / EU system of "justice" is. In 10 years when we have long long forgotten this, they'll still be remembering.

 

[sjek]

The charter is of fundamental rights is not the same as the European Convention on Human Rights. The charter is, essentially, not legally binding on the UK. It was incorporated into the proposed European Constitution and also the Lisbon Treaty, both of which failed referendi.

(also, if incorporated into a legally binding document (upon the UK), there would be no provisions in times of war - Article 2, Right to Life cannot be derrogated from, at any time)

Also, I'm sorry if I appeared callous re; the case in question. The discussion was quickly moving toward the death penalty and it was that which I addressed.

While this case seems fairly clear in terms of guilt, remorse and intent, many are not. There have been appalling miscarriges of justice (albeit less since PACE). These are fundamental, if not insurmountable, obstacles facing proponents of the death penalty.

In terms of justice, I cannot see that it is served by corporal punishment. The risk of miscarriges of justice are too great. It fulfills only a retributive element and that in itself has a certain inescapable futility to it. 'He killed so he must die' - and what then? We tell the families to take some consolence in a killing?

Nonetheless, if we are addressing this case, then perhaps 11years is too little. Again, I haven't seen pre-sentencing reports and MoJ guidelines are a little vague. There is an opportunity for the CPS/DPP to appeal on grounds of leniancy.

In saying that, what would satisfy you? Can you put a price on a life? A young boy is dead? Does 25 years cover it? Was he worth 50 years? 100?

Will only blood suffice?

It's not an easy question. I just don't think death is the answer.

Charter of fundamental human rights (EU) clearly states;

No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Though there may be a provision for times of war.

You cant debate the death penalty, because its been written into EU law that you cant execute people, and EU law is beyond the power of any one government. So why debate it? Any result is meaningless.

So you may aswell try and gather water in a sieve.

Also, I or anyone else here doesnt need to know specifics of the case, they can read what the judge in the case say happened, and go from there. And beyond this, on a real fundamental level, it's unacceptable to take another life in this unprovoked way, it was over an XBox game/console , how on earth can you say "you know nothing about the case", what I know is a young kid is dead because of sociopathic murderer who's happy to stab people and shout out about it, all over a ****ty games console.

Go sit with the family of Conor and tell them how perfect and balanced the British / EU system of "justice" is. In 10 years when we have long long forgotten this, they'll still be remembering.

 

[Rastalovich]

Now that my friend is genuine bs right there.

Were your parents responsible for everything you did until you were 18 or did you think that, as a self-contained human being, you had some freedom of choice?

The best you can do as a parent is teach them proper values, ethics and morals, then hope they apply them as best as they can. If they then decide that what they really want to do is drink and drive, or hide smarties in a raincoat, or stab someone because they looked at them wierdly, that's not really the parents fault.

1 thing to throw back at u - responsibility. It's about freakin time people took responsibility for the mongrols they raise. Just as they deserve equal praise for the mongrols they don't.

The moral/ethic/values argument that u feel u install into ur children is exactly the same moral that has them decide right from wrong. i.e. do I stab this person ? Do I have something to stab them with in the first place ? Does the thought even enter my mind ?

As a value - do u settle an arguement by killing some1 or just take it as an argument that the majority have every day ?

Guess we should blame Gordon Brown instead.

My personal choice, that no1 will agree with, is execute the killer and sterilize the parents.

 

[TopSecret]

I strongly disagree with you there. are you suggesting that every teenager who has broken the law done so because of bad upbringing? If so you will find you are wrong. You cannot blame the parents every time a kid goes bad. Every child takes their own path in life when growing up, and parents can only do whatever they can to keep them on the right one. If they stray from the right path, does this mean the parents have failed? You are saying that people should accept responsibility, well that works with kids too! A teenager knows right from wrong, regardless to what their parents have taught them and they should be held accountable for their actions regardless of what their parents have or have not done.

Sure there are some kids who haven't been taught right from wrong by their parents, but there are just as many who have and STILL end up going off the rails in one way or another. Maybe if children were forced to face up to their mistakes instead of people automatically making judgements on their parents, we wouldn't have half the problems we do now.

 

[Rastalovich]

Kids are guided, they need boundaries. They are raised. When u squat one out, they are an empty pallet of which u instill a design.

Just as much as whether or not ur child grows up to appreciate whether or not they can freely use bad language, and whether or not their parents "know" or give a damn where they are meant to be - do they check ? Whether they should be in at a certain time, whether it matters that when u wash their clothes they have traces of spray paint on them, whether they're buying things with money u have no idea where they got it from. As a parent do u know and accept the morality of the top 10 of their friends, do u know their parents, do u allow them to have a full mobile phone, have the internet in their bedrooms, do u turn a blind eye to a persistent cough or a smell.

Or want the rest of the world to accept the responsibility for something u brought into the world as long as u can watch EastEnders in peace and carry on with ur career regardless.

Teenagers and kids in general push boundaries, it's in their nature, depending on how they are raised they will continue to push until they're given guidance. If the guidance isn't there, they'll continue to push further until something happens, the longer this goes on, generally, the more fatal the consequences can be.

Ur kid acts up and is reprimanded in school, perhaps kept behind - do u go to the school to complain cos the action disturbs u going out for the evening ? do u goto the school to find out what can be done about it ? or do u just slap the kid about and go out anyway ? All decisions similar to this are choices that reflect on the kids future of more boundary pushing. Most alarming is if u find out from the school cos u didn't see ur kid til 12.00 that evening.

I do accept that the majority of the parents would rather blame society and the govt for the state of affairs.

 

[TopSecret]

I do everything I possibily can to bring my children up the right way. I also accept that there is a chance they could get into trouble in later life. So what would be your reasons then if they did? Would I have not done a good enough job? Should I have done something different? You arguments don't stand up!

I was brought up the right way as a kid, my dad was a soldier and he was a massive believer of personal discipline and respect. We were also taught that we would be responsible for our own actions, and as such, we had to take whatever consequences these actions brought. Now that still didn't stop me from getting into trouble for brawling when I was a kid. I was lucky enough to grow out of it before it escalated into something more serious. My parents done everything you mentioned, and more to keep us out of trouble and bring us up the right way. Even so, I still ended up have a few brushes with the law. By your reasoning, my parents were responsible for this and that is rubbish! I knew what I was doing was wrong at the time, I knew my parents would be devesatated, but I still chose to do what I did. Perhaps you can rationally explain to me how my parents were in some way at fault?

You are saying that people are looking for someone else to blame. Well, guess what, teenagers do this too! I don't know if you have kids yourself, but god help you if they ever do get into trouble! A parent has to accept responsibility for their children, but they also should not be automatically blamed when something does go wrong! The only sure fire way a parent can guarantee their child will do no wrong in life is to lock them up until they are 18, is this what you would like?

 

[Rastalovich]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't believe in any of the luck of growing up in life. U make choices, kids make choices, dependent on what they feel the outcome will be. Upsetting ur parents is not a consequence kids think about. Letting people down is no consequence to an action, the fact that ur actually contemplating the action and weighing it up has alot more to do with it.

The day we allow teenagers to take the blame, fully, for their actions, is the day we should bring the 16/18/21 age limits for things down to 13 for everything.

Myself, I blame the teenager as a failed experiment and the parents for the experiment they oversaw. And harping back to my original point, I don't want to pay for this experiment should it fail.

We aint gonna agree.

Similarly we probably wouldn't agree with cutting off all benefits, and full sterilization of people who have children without a means of support. Your not gonna agree with that, neither would society - well maybe some would.

Equally the execution of people who persistently offend. Myself I see them as a waste of space and resources with nothing positive to show for their existence.

I believe in having a "U Suck!" shop for all those claiming unemployment over a certain period. They wouldn't be given money, just a card with "U Suck!" points on it that can be used at the shop to buy goods that are labeled with the "U Suck!" brand. Or maybe "I Suck!" brand if claiming over a longer period.

I also would like all long term prisons to consist of bread/water in an empty cube cell and daily forceful sodomizations permitted, even encouraged.

World's too pc for me.

 

[TopSecret]

One simple question:

Did you never do anything that your parents told you not to when you were a kid? If you did, then your parents must have failed too then by what you are saying.

As for a 13yr old being held accountable for breaking the law, are you seriously telling me that a 13yr doesn't know whats right from wrong and they should be excused because they are a child or because their parents done a bad job? That's where half the youth problems have sprung from these days, everyone wants to blame someone else before the culprit. How about getting the kids to face up to their mistakes for a change?!

 

[Rastalovich]

One simple question:

Did you never do anything that your parents told you not to when you were a kid? If you did, then your parents must have failed too then by what you are saying.

That's nothing like what I'm saying, what I'm saying is that kids push boundaries, the extent that they'll push these boundaries b4 being snapped back is down to parenting.

Do I have a brawl or do I stab the person ? I knew as a kid that fighting amongst kids is something that just happened. Those who would instigate are often those who have been failed, those who defend themselves is another thing. Those who think as an option to stab some1 is entirely different.

As for a 13yr old being held accountable for breaking the law, are you seriously telling me that a 13yr doesn't know whats right from wrong and they should be excused because they are a child or because their parents done a bad job? That's where half the youth problems have sprung from these days, everyone wants to blame someone else before the culprit. How about getting the kids to face up to their mistakes for a change?!

I've never said the 13 year old breaking the law should be excused. I'm for that 13 year old being punished alongside the parents.

The youth problems today are down to the parenting, a "pc" society, a breakdown of marriage and family values. Culminating in the fact that no1 wants to take responsibility for anything.

 

[TopSecret]

That's nothing like what I'm saying, what I'm saying is that kids push boundaries, the extent that they'll push these boundaries b4 being snapped back is down to parenting.

Thats absolute rubbish and as a parent I know that no matter what I do or say, there are going to be times when my children do things I don't want them to. As I said, short of locking them up or beating them senseless every time I sense trouble, I have no real way of stopping this. Some kids end up in a spiral and getting more and more into trouble, regardless of what their parents do. If you are so naive that you cant see this then I feel for you. any parent who says that their kid would never do something wrong is normally the one who finds out different!

Do I have a brawl or do I stab the person ? I knew as a kid that fighting amongst kids is something that just happened. Those who would instigate are often those who have been failed, those who defend themselves is another thing. Those who think as an option to stab some1 is entirely different.

Not every kid who has commited an offence has gone out and planned it. Sometimes kids are caught up in difficult circumstances and they end up making the wrong choices at the wrong time. I done so quite a few times. I never ever went out with the intention of finding trouble, but when presented with it I didn't back away. Now this shouldn't and didn't reflect my parents parenting skills, as I knew I was doing wrong at that time! I also knew that I could end up in trouble but it didn't stop me.

I've never said the 13 year old breaking the law should be excused. I'm for that 13 year old being punished alongside the parents.

The youth problems today are down to the parenting, a "pc" society, a breakdown of marriage and family values. Culminating in the fact that no1 wants to take responsibility for anything.

I am not suggesting that parents shouldn't take some responsibility for their childrens actions, but we all know that everyone automatically blames the parents nowadays, before actually finding out if this is right or not! I agree with your suggestion that bad parenting does cause problems within society, but you are trying to make out that this is the sole reason. That is wrong. We also need to make the kids aware that they are doing wrong, and we need to make sure they know that the choice was solely theirs and they will suffer the consequences. By putting the blame squarely on the parents as you have, you are identifying onlyu half of the problem!

It seems we have gotten ourselves into the old 'Nature/Nuture' debate here Rasta.

 

[Rastalovich]

Yeah we aint gonna agree on this.

 

[Pseudonym]

The youth problems today are down to the parenting, a "pc" society, a breakdown of marriage and family values. Culminating in the fact that no1 wants to take responsibility for anything.

The youth problems of today are caused by the media, knee jerk reactions by the govt over said media and the curiously English past time of forgetting what it's like to be young.

Violence and anti social behaviour is not a new thing. Think football violence, punk anarchists, or mods and rockers. This is just another moral panic that's been jumped on as the end of civilised culture.

 

[Rastalovich]

I'll go scour the newsy sites for any1 that was stabbed to death over an Atari2600 game or Pong for the 70s and check Amiga/Atari sites for the 80s. Think I heard something about a PS1 thing in the late 90s. And ofc there's loads of things to blame the software companies for in the 00s, whole school masacres apparently.

Youth problems today are down to nobody giving an eff.

Youth problems in the past were down to nobody giving an eff.

I'm still looking at parenting, or lack of.

 

[TopSecret]

I got into trouble, as I said, as a kid. So are you saying that my parents were bad parents? Honestly Rasta, I really hope your kids never get into trouble, because you will learn a hard lesson if they do - sometimes a kid will do bad regardless of how their parents brought them up!

I'll go scour the newsy sites for any1 that was stabbed to death over an Atari2600 game or Pong for the 70s and check Amiga/Atari sites for the 80s. Think I heard something about a PS1 thing in the late 90s. And ofc there's loads of things to blame the software companies for in the 00s, whole school masacres apparently.

And how many recent stabbings have you heard about that have happened over consoles? The way you are talking, you seem to think there is a trend happening or something. What the argument was about is irrelevent. The issue is a teenager willing and able to take anothers life.

 

[Rastalovich]

Society is prepared to blame software houses for all kinds of evils of the world today rather than facing up to responsibilities.

I'm not going to debate it with u. U have a different lean on things than I do, and we're not going to meet anywhere in the middle.

I believe in what I know to be true and so do u.

The fact that we aren't prepared to do anything about it means that the problems will just continue.

Right now I can predict atleast 2 stabbings over a console game next year.

 

[TopSecret]

And in the 60's I could have predicted 2 stabbings over hair styles, clothes and music tastes. Same problems, different arguments! As for not doing anything about it, well I can't do any more than to try and ensure that my kids don't get caught up in any situations, that they know the dangers of life and to try and show them the right way to live their lives. What I can't do is to live their lives for them, and they will make decisions and mistakes in their lives that I don't agree with. But that's part and parcel of being a parent.

I think you have an extremely pessimistic view of all parents. I know there are bad parents out there, but I believe that they are in the minority. You seem to have focused on just one of the issues facing modern society and seem to be ignoring the bigger picture.

 

[nathan]

i disagree with the parents thing to an extent. Ofcourse up bringing has something to do with how a person turns out. But that person can has a mind of there own.

Not sure how you come to the conclusion that a breakdown in marriage has any effect on this what so ever. My parents split when i was 3 and i can you i've never thought of stabbing someone.

So when do these kids start to make responsible decisions of their own? as soon as they hit 18?

If i did something wrong today, could i blame my parents. Could they then blame there parents. Who would then blame there parents, i mean where does it stop? Do i say, hold on a minute. It was my decision to do this. I know right from wrong but i decided on the wrong.

I've never believed in passing the blame on to someone else for my decision in life.

 

[Rastalovich]

Minority is all well and good, and I'm happy with that, for the minority of fatal incidents. The next demographic fits in with the next degree of incidents. Ending up with the next happy minority that have a peaceful existance.

There aren't going to be perfect parents anywhere. There are always parents that will be perceived as being perfect.

Those 60s incidents will be added to the 70s, to the 80s, to the 90s... 00 and inturn the 10s. It'll just go on and on and on cos no1 will take responsibility for anything.

So when do these kids start to make responsible decisions of their own? as soon as they hit 18?

21 for everything for me.

 

[TopSecret]

I took responsibility for my actions when I was younger, and I certainly didn't blame anyone. That's how I was brought up, to face my errors and to make amends for them. That's how my children are being brought up now. You are saying that no-one takes responsibility for their actions, but in another breath you are saying blame the parents. How is that supposed to teach the kids anything other than passing the buck?

Humanity has and always will have it's problems, and that's part of being human. The only way we could eradicate these problems would to make us all into robots. With our gift of cognitive thought also comes the ability to make life changing and far reaching decisions. Not everyone makes good decisions throughout their lives and some people do things without thinking them through properly. This isn't something new. In every age of civilisation, there has been crime. Whether we are a more violent and crime ridden society now is another debate with different questions.

We are facing new problems as time goes by, and they need new solutions. But to focus solely on one aspect of the problems isn't going to solve anything. Yes parenting does have a big influence on how a kid turns out, but good parenting doesn't guarantee that a kid won't get into trouble. Not by a long stretch!