Jump to content

Recommended Posts

At the end of the day Keef as much as I'm advocating it over the death penalty prison on the terms I wish isn't humane either, it's essentially barbaric. Prison, execution and all other punishments handed by the courts no matter how severe or soft are a very blatant form of revenge. What is revenge. Revenge is a harmful reaction against a person or group as a response to a real or perceived wrong doing. Harmful not only in the sense that those on the receiving end will suffer physical distress but in that they'll be separated from so much such as family, friends but most importantly their normal environment. It's simply impartial revenge carried out by the state on behalf of the victim.


I do however support that those who commit crime because they're suffering a severe mental disorder should be treated for their illness rather than chucked in with a load of cut throats.

bigbadwolf Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm personally against the death sentence because

> it's the easy way out. However, I think, when the

> economy is back on it's feet the Home office

> should follow the American example of the Supermax

> prison. ADX Florence in Colorado would be a good

> template. When I say the death penalty is the easy

> way out I mean that if I was given the choice to

> spend the rest of my life in a cell for 23 hours a

> day with no human contact for those 23 hours or

> take the rope I know what my answer would be. This

> style of prison is only reserved for America's

> most dangerous criminals and are on a federal

> mandate.

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence



But surely this is drain on public funds. If as in this case there is overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that the pair are guilty, then stoot or hang the evil descipable bastards, it's quick and cheap. I'm tired of hearing about the rights of the criminal, whatever happened to rights of the victims and their families fer fecks sake!!! And don't get me started on care in the community!!!

Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> bigbadwolf Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I'm personally against the death sentence

> because

> > it's the easy way out. However, I think, when

> the

> > economy is back on it's feet the Home office

> > should follow the American example of the

> Supermax

> > prison. ADX Florence in Colorado would be a

> good

> > template. When I say the death penalty is the

> easy

> > way out I mean that if I was given the choice

> to

> > spend the rest of my life in a cell for 23 hours

> a

> > day with no human contact for those 23 hours or

> > take the rope I know what my answer would be.

> This

> > style of prison is only reserved for America's

> > most dangerous criminals and are on a federal

> > mandate.

> >

> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence

>

>

> But surely this is drain on public funds. If as in

> this case there is overwhelming and irrefutable

> evidence that the pair are guilty, then stoot or

> hang the evil descipable bastards, it's quick and

> cheap. I'm tired of hearing about the rights of

> the criminal, whatever happened to rights of the

> victims and their families fer fecks sake!!! And

> don't get me started on care in the community!!!


3/10


you didnt manager to get "its PC gorn mad" or "aqnother Stealth tax on motorists" into your comment


must try harder

You may see it as a waste of tax payers money but the methods I've laid out will be a much nastier and brutal way of punishing violent and murderous criminals such as the two who stabbed those two students. The methods I've laid out that are used by the U.S authorities for the most dangerous of offenders are put in place to crush their soul. A psychological torture that will only end once they die. I don't know about you but I'd rather loose my life than my mind.

The US 'justice' system is a travesty of justice. (For example, the three strikes system in some states, where you can go to jail for life for minor offences such as shoplifting.)

The UK system seems to imprison far more, as a proportion of the population, than many of its European neighbours. And many of those neighbours have lower crime rates and/or lower rates of recidivism. I would like to know what they are doing right, and what we are doing wrong. One thing we are doing very wrong is not addressing the massive drugs and illiteracy/numeracy problems in our prisons. If prisoners cannot read or write or count, and they have little or no training, and they are still on drugs whilst in prison, and when they leave prison they just get dumped into their former environments, it is hardly surprising that they continue to do what they did before.

I agree Lou. My argument is only aimed at criminals who are a serious risk to the public and show a repeat pattern of re-offending. I agree that rehabilitation works and should be rigorously pursued in cases where they've only started petty offending.

blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bigbadwolf Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > I'm personally against the death sentence

> > because

> > > it's the easy way out. However, I think, when

> > the

> > > economy is back on it's feet the Home office

> > > should follow the American example of the

> > Supermax

> > > prison. ADX Florence in Colorado would be a

> > good

> > > template. When I say the death penalty is the

> > easy

> > > way out I mean that if I was given the choice

> > to

> > > spend the rest of my life in a cell for 23

> hours

> > a

> > > day with no human contact for those 23 hours

> or

> > > take the rope I know what my answer would be.

> > This

> > > style of prison is only reserved for

> America's

> > > most dangerous criminals and are on a federal

> > > mandate.

> > >

> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence

> >

> >

> > But surely this is drain on public funds. If as

> in

> > this case there is overwhelming and irrefutable

> > evidence that the pair are guilty, then stoot

> or

> > hang the evil descipable bastards, it's quick

> and

> > cheap. I'm tired of hearing about the rights of

> > the criminal, whatever happened to rights of

> the

> > victims and their families fer fecks sake!!!

> And

> > don't get me started on care in the

> community!!!

>

> 3/10

>

> you didnt manager to get "its PC gorn mad" or

> "aqnother Stealth tax on motorists" into your

> comment

>

> must try harder



So you would slap them on the wrist and tell not to be such naughty boys ever again. F**k off

Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> blah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Atila Reincarnate Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > bigbadwolf Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > I'm personally against the death sentence

> > > because

> > > > it's the easy way out. However, I think,

> when

> > > the

> > > > economy is back on it's feet the Home

> office

> > > > should follow the American example of the

> > > Supermax

> > > > prison. ADX Florence in Colorado would be a

> > > good

> > > > template. When I say the death penalty is

> the

> > > easy

> > > > way out I mean that if I was given the

> choice

> > > to

> > > > spend the rest of my life in a cell for 23

> > hours

> > > a

> > > > day with no human contact for those 23

> hours

> > or

> > > > take the rope I know what my answer would

> be.

> > > This

> > > > style of prison is only reserved for

> > America's

> > > > most dangerous criminals and are on a

> federal

> > > > mandate.

> > > >

> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADX_Florence

> > >

> > >

> > > But surely this is drain on public funds. If

> as

> > in

> > > this case there is overwhelming and

> irrefutable

> > > evidence that the pair are guilty, then stoot

> > or

> > > hang the evil descipable bastards, it's quick

> > and

> > > cheap. I'm tired of hearing about the rights

> of

> > > the criminal, whatever happened to rights of

> > the

> > > victims and their families fer fecks sake!!!

> > And

> > > don't get me started on care in the

> > community!!!

> >

> > 3/10

> >

> > you didnt manager to get "its PC gorn mad" or

> > "aqnother Stealth tax on motorists" into your

> > comment

> >

> > must try harder

>

>

> So you would slap them on the wrist and tell not

> to be such naughty boys ever again. F**k off



Did anyone say that ?


the threat of violent retribution - state organised or otherwise - does not stop these crimes from happening

blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>> Did anyone say that ?

>

> the threat of violent retribution - state

> organised or otherwise - does not stop these

> crimes from happening



Right? so we'll do F**k all that will make the world a better place. Until there is evidence which proves beyond ANY reasonable doubt that your argument is 100% spot on I'll take state organised retribution every time thanks. You might want to pass your thoughts on to the mums and dads and the family of those butchered by these bastards, I'm sure they'll take great comfort from them. JEEEEEEEEEZZZZZ. God help us all if anyone of us should ever be in their shoes!!!

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BBW, you say that any punishment is by definition

> revenge. I disagree, I think revenge involves a

> certain emotional content.


Keef It's impartial revenge on behalf of the people. When I crime has been committed no matter how trivial the powers that be such as the Police and the courts have to take into account the example they're setting to the general public. For instance, a man walks into a bank with a gun and threatens to shoot the customers if the cashiers don't hand over the cash. Fortunately the Police arrive in time and arrest the offender. Apart from attempted robbery people have been put in very genuine fear of loosing their lives and loved ones. As a result of having a gun waved in their face they now have to face the psychological effects of the crime. They will also feel angry at this intrusion into their lives that will hinder them in the future. The Police and courts sympathize with them and also want to send out a message anyone thinking of going down the same path as the accused.

The punishment is essentially revenge being dished out to those who intentionally disrupt society and it's rule. O.K, I like to think that the judge isn't sitting there thinking "I want to see you swing from the nearest tree" and that s/he takes everything into account before passing sentence but it is still essentially revenge against the offender if they're convicted.

bigbadwolf Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Keef Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > BBW, you say that any punishment is by

> definition

> > revenge. I disagree, I think revenge involves a

> > certain emotional content.

>

> Keef It's impartial revenge on behalf of the

> people. When I crime has been committed no matter

> how trivial the powers that be such as the Police

> and the courts have to take into account the

> example they're setting to the general public. For

> instance, a man walks into a bank with a gun and

> threatens to shoot the customers if the cashiers

> don't hand over the cash. Fortunately the Police

> arrive in time and arrest the offender. Apart from

> attempted robbery people have been put in very

> genuine fear of loosing their lives and loved

> ones. As a result of having a gun waved in their

> face they now have to face the psychological

> effects of the crime. They will also feel angry at

> this intrusion into their lives that will hinder

> them in the future. The Police and courts

> sympathize with them and also want to send out a

> message anyone thinking of going down the same

> path as the accused.

> The punishment is essentially revenge being dished

> out to those who intentionally disrupt society and

> it's rule. O.K, I like to think that the judge

> isn't sitting there thinking "I want to see you

> swing from the nearest tree" and that s/he takes

> everything into account before passing sentence

> but it is still essentially revenge against the

> offender if they're convicted.



Well said wolfman

They may have no soul in the sense that they couldn't care less about what they've done to another person Daizie but they're still human beings and for a human to loose his liberty/freedom under such conditions that I would like to see put in place for the type of people who inspired this thread would be utterly unbearable.

What's wrong with some revenge after the type of crime these guys committed???

Anyway, FWIW I think that the Death Penalty is too quick and agree that life and being let out when you're 80 (so you can see what you've missed) is best as a punishment.

No one seems to have talked about what caused these horrific crimes. Why did it happen? According to the accounts I have read the murderers came from a background of violence and were high on drugs and drink when they killed these boys. If there is not a society we have succeeded in acceptance of the fact. But if you believe there is a society it is a continuation of our failure to address violent crime not with punishment or retribution but with understanding.


We can't return to the barbarism of the death penalty we either need to take control or accept that we have none.

It happened because the cash point swallowed the card they were trying to withdraw money with. They thought the two students were stringing them along so they thought (stoned or not) that they deserved to be stabbed 200 times whereby some of the wounds were inflicted with suck force the blade penetrated the skull. Yes, I agree that drugs seem to be a major factor in this crime and the other violent incidents that preceded it. They were however in a sound enough state of mind to realise that they'd broken the law in that they torched the house the crime took place in. They knew they'd committed an incredibly heinous crime and saw the need to cover their tracks to avoid punishment.

Please don't see this as an attempt at patronising you, it's not. The two young men had family who when confronted what had happened to their sons will have been overcome with a mixture of emotion, one being retribution. I can only guess that 'understanding' as you put it would've been very far from their thoughts, it would've been from mine in that situation. I don't think there is a human being on this earth that upon suffering this kind of tradgedy wouldn't have felt the same towards those that had inflicted the damage.


I don't mean to be rude but I didn't really understand the last two sentences of your first paragraph EDOldie.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...