Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod <bodron57@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:40:14 +0100
Ste wrote:
On 9 Sep, 09:07, "Ret." <x...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:>bod wrote:Ret. wrote:I've been arguing for that for many many years.bod wrote:Then maybe it should be expanded to cover thieving and violentPaul Hyett wrote:Its used in drink/driving offences isn't it?On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 at 11:01:17, bod <bodro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote5th offence : shoot em.
in uk.legal :
Yes, hence my suggestion of giving a heavy sentence after theHow about this then - introduce a sentence multiplier for repeat
second offence. The first being a more lenient repremand,
depending on the circumstances.
Most of the public want heavier sentences, but it seems to fall on
deaf ears.
offenders.
1st offence : standard sentence (for whatever crime they're
committed) 2nd offence : 1.5*standard sentence "
3rd offence : 2.0*standard sentence "
4th offence : 2.5*standard sentence "
etc...
Seriously. Not a bad idea. Anything must be better than what we've
got.
offences etc.
Arguing against it, I hope. The evidence shows that manipulating
sentences in a formulaic way, and especially increasing sentences with
each repeat conviction, has little if any effect in the long term on
deterrence or reoffending. Even the unarguable effect of
incapacitation that comes with longer sentences, is rarely cost-
effective for society as a whole.
>
Kev's mainly targetting the repeat offenders, who, as soon as they are released, they go straight out and nick a car etc again and again.
He means the types of scrotes that account for the vast majority of thieving in a particular area.
The ones that are responsible for three quarters of the offences.
When they are locked up, all of a sudden, drivers can sleep at night again knowing that their cars and houses will be safe while the scrotes are inside.
Sometimes it is only the few who commit most of the crimes.
Bod
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- References:
- Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Theodore
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Richard Miller
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: ian field
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Mike P
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Paul Hyett
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: bod
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ret.
- Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- From: Ste
- Darwin's law strikes again...
- Prev by Date: Vandalism
- Next by Date: Re: US church defiant despite condemnation of Koran burning
- Previous by thread: Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- Next by thread: Re: Darwin's law strikes again...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|