[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 01/04/14 19:04, Martijn Grooten wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 06:33:23PM +0100, Julian Hall wrote:However, a greater penalty would - OK should - make people think twice before driving in a manner which is more likely to cause a death, than legally, e.g. speeding in a built-up area or drunk-driving. At the moment the worst case scenario for most offences is a hefty fine and a driving ban, if however the worst case scenario was a hefty jail sentence people /would/ think twice.I don't think so. We're not talking about the difference between a hefty fine and a driving ban and a hefty jail sentence, which is obviously big. We're talking about the difference between a hefty fine, a driving ban AND killing someone and a hefty jail sentence AND killing someone. The reason people don't think twice is not because the punishment isn't severe enough. It's because people don't think they are going to kill someone.At the end of the day they've caused a death, and company directors have been charged with manslaughter negligence for deaths they had no personal involvement in at all. I'm just saying drivers deserve the same penalty.Perhaps it would help if those drivers making the same mistake (speeding, drunk-driving) but who through circumstances didn't kill or injure anyone were given the same sentence as those who do. That's more likely to make people think twice. But actually, I'm not for tougher sentencing at all. I'm a liberal sissy who happens to think that way too many people are sent to prison for too long a time and it tends not to help in most cases. (Apologies for continuing this obviously off-topic thread.) Martijn.
I am guessing it is a bit like knife crime, according to the law carrying a knife gets you 5 years in Jail and yet, people have gone to jail for just over that for stabbing someone, so clearly lets say for sake of argument that person gets 7 years, that works out at 5 years for carrying a knife and 2 years for stabbing someone.
Before you respond imagine it was a close family member who was the victim,One of the parents at the rugby club said that the prospect of the cane didn't necessarily deter her at school, what did was the prospect of her father with the belt when he found out about something she was involved with. The argument here is NOT about corporal punishment, but i think its like has been mentioned before deterring people in the first place.
I am not suggesting we flog people for bad driving but perhaps if someone decided to beat your face to a pulp for your phone then maybe a good hiding with a birch would be somewhat proportionate, after all if you think you are big and tough to beat some one up you are man enough to take the punishment as my teacher said at school if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
ASBOs seem to be considered as a badge of honour, would a few lashes of the birch be seen a badge of honour or actually deter people from re-offending. Maybe rather than jail if you are caught speeding then you simply gets points off your license, and no come back on your employer if you are sacked, however that doesn't really help you or the taxpayer as you end up unemployed, so cost taxpayers more money.
This conversation is a little like the child protection one, there is NO right answer, but i think the word education comes in to both debates.
Either way I think what we need to do is BE CONSISTENT with punishment, so drink, drive, mount the kerb and mow someone down, WILL get you a set period in jail. and the same period regardless of which judge you are in front of.
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq