Rapist offered role in childs life

[Doppleganger]

The issue that the individual has to overcome, is not about prisoners having the right to vote, its specific to their rights in Article 6. If we are to remove rights for convicted criminals, no matter how well justified we ought to be clear about why and how as well as why not.

But you have no problem with taking away prisoners rights?
Where would you draw the line?

I am curious as to why a person would join a DIY discussion forum and in 50+ posts, not actually post anything related to DIY?

Completely off-topic but as you asked nicely:
Do you not learn anything by reading other people's queries?
When you have a question of your own do you not search the forum to see if a similar question has been asked before?
When I think I have the answer to someone else's query I refrain from offering that solution because I am only a DIYer.
However most of the comments in the discussion forum, I think I have a sensible response, and in some cases I might be a qualified expert.

Is it a requirement that only those that post in the DIY forums can participate in the discussion form?

 

[Notch7]

Because it is the return of Himmy

He has obviously been detained at her majesty's pleasure. It explains why he is so concerned about prisoners rights

 

[sodthisforfun]

However most of the comments in the discussion forum, I think I have a sensible response, and in some cases I might be a qualified expert.

Throwing your toys out the pram, not for the first time, about MODS. Yeah, right sensible.

May I ask, what is it you think you're a qualified expert in?

 

[motorbiking]

But you have no problem with taking away prisoners rights?
Where would you draw the line?

That is the very point i’m making. It’s not an easy thing to define. As an example via some charity work - Ive assisted victims get non-mol orders against prisoners who’ve had legal aid and had the tables very much stacked against them. The prisoner then uses the order to continue their harassment via their solicitor, who insists on only communicating to another solicitor who charges £25 each time they forward a letter and £50 to reply. Meanwhile matey has reasonably unlimited legal funds. can you deny these rights without impacting genuine cases of need?

What about those wrongly convicted?

 

[Doppleganger]

That is the very point i’m making. ... can you deny these rights without impacting genuine cases of need?

What about those wrongly convicted?

But you were the one that suggested it's OK to remove prisoners' rights.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

I am sure you have contacted your MP to make such comment?

Laws and rights won't get changed on here.

You take being a prick to a whole new level. Congrats.