Knife Crime

[transam]

It already is, and has been for a hundred years. It hasn't stopped people doing it.

What do you think is the maximum penalty for smoking (applied to 50% of offenders)?

Some have paid the maximum. Penalty for sking

 

[JP_]

No you've missed the point. Answer the question then how do you deal with this person, come on.

Obviously you prosecute them, what else?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

I’d say that’s a bloody good deterrent of why you shouldn’t drive dangerously or launder money. What would you have for them - cushy bed? Three square meals? Sky TV? Internet?

Can’t do the time? Don’t do the crime!

Your heart is in the right place but you are seriously wrong if you think that the punishment in prisons should be meted out by other prisoners; that is not law and order.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

They are potential outcomes, not legally imposed sentences. You may as well ask "what is the maximum penalty for living a healthy life ?"

What is wrong with John D? Is he a real person or not? Sometimes it seems like he is an "artificial intelligence" that has a few software bugs.

 

[Ihavenojob]

What is wrong with John D? Is he a real person or not? Sometimes it seems like he is an "artificial intelligence" that has a few software bugs.

 

[Notch7]

If the penalty for drink driving was death, would you risk drink driving ?

No equivalence, so not relevant.

How do you come to the conclusion that harsher sentences are no deterrent ?

I have reached that conclusion because evidence shows it to be true.

You are welcone to believe a different conclusion if you prefer blind faith.

 

[Ihavenojob]

No equivalence, so not relevant.

DD is a crime, so a harsher sentence could deter people from committing it. People still commit the crime, so current sentences inadequate.

I have reached that conclusion because evidence shows it to be true.

As above, if people commit crimes now, the sentences are inadequate and need to be harsher.

 

[Notch7]

As above, if people commit crimes now, the sentences are inadequate and need to be harsher

I have already said the evidence proves that is untrue.

You are welcome to continue believing something which has been proven incorrect.
I suppose that means you arent able to learn
Hey ho.

 

[fillyboy]

I have already said the evidence proves that is untrue.

You are welcome to continue believing something which has been proven incorrect.
I suppose that means you arent able to learn
Hey ho.

Have you ever 'done porridge' Notch?

 

[Ihavenojob]

I have already said the evidence proves that is untrue.

What evidence? Again, you're clueless.

 

[Notch7]

What evidence? Again, you're clueless.

Ive already quoted it, in this thread.

I guess you arent capable of doing your own research.

 

[Notch7]

Have you ever 'done porridge' Notch?

Why?

 

[Ihavenojob]

I guess you arent capable of doing your own research.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jul/07/longer-prison-sentences-cut-crime

 

[Vinty]

Stands to reason, if someone is inside they can't be committing crime on the outside.
How many convicted murderers commit another murder once they are released.
With the death penalty the chances of the convicted killer committing another offence are zero.

 

[Ihavenojob]

Stands to reason, if someone is inside they can't be committing crime on the outside.
How many convicted murderers commit another murder once they are released.
With the death penalty the chances of the convicted killer committing another offence are zero.

Quite agree, but the problem is the ones on the outside still committing crime, knowing that in the unlikely case they get caught, the courts will do little more than make them stand in the naughty corner. If, on the other hand, they faced 15 years minimum for burglary, 20 years for assault, life for rape or murder, then they may think twice about committing a crime. Giving them an anklet with a silly name just doesn't cut the mustard.