snowychap Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I dont understand the 'regardless of what they did' bit mate? Would i hang two 10 year old boys for stealing sweets...no. Would i hang two 10 year old boys for murdering and torturing a small child...hand on heart i would walk them to the gallows. Society has no place for these two individuals. Should society have a place for those keen to walk two small children to the gallows, I wonder? What if it were two eight year olds? ... when you were 10, did you know that it was wrong to punch someone in the face? Did you know that you would get in trouble if you were caught punching someone? At age 10, did you know what murder was and if you commit said crime you will go to prison? At 10 years old they still knew the consequences. Well, the consequences (if they were as fully aware of everything as you seem to think) were that they wouldn't get dealt with and punished in the same way as an adult, so I'm not sure what you are saying. :? If ten year olds should be treated as adults by the law (and why stop at that age - why not eight or seven or younger?), why shouldn't they be allowed to drink/smoke/drive (if they can pass a test)/marry/leave school/leave home/be left alone by their parents and do everything else that the law says that they are not mature enough to be given the legal right to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Are you saying you could honestly hang two 10 year old boys, regardless of what they did? I don't think i could. I dont understand the 'regardless of what they did' bit mate? Would i hang two 10 year old boys for stealing sweets...no. Would i hang two 10 year old boys for murdering and torturing a small child...hand on heart i would walk them to the gallows. Society has no place for these two individuals. That's pretty messed up dude. If you buy a puppy and you hit it and beat it and starve it and have it fight other dogs the dog will pretty quickly become agressive and dangerous. The same thing happened to these kids. If you can reprogramme them and reteach them surely that is better than just killing them and washing your hands of it? Precisely. Barbaric "Justice" FTL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 Nature vs. Nurture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If they go anywhere near my girls, I swear, I'd do time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 A thought: if there's an obsession with anonymity - how the **** did his re-arrest become public knowledge in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If they go anywhere near my girls, I swear, I'd do time. This ^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Are you saying you could honestly hang two 10 year old boys, regardless of what they did? I don't think i could. I dont understand the 'regardless of what they did' bit mate? Would i hang two 10 year old boys for stealing sweets...no. Would i hang two 10 year old boys for murdering and torturing a small child...hand on heart i would walk them to the gallows. Society has no place for these two individuals. That's pretty messed up dude. If you buy a puppy and you hit it and beat it and starve it and have it fight other dogs the dog will pretty quickly become agressive and dangerous. The same thing happened to these kids. If you can reprogramme them and reteach them surely that is better than just killing them and washing your hands of it? Precisely. Barbaric "Justice" FTL We are not talking about a **** puppy. Lets not walk around blind here lads with our heads up our arses. CAN YOU ALL REMEMBER WHAT THESE TWO DID TO JAMES BULGER!!! If your unaware of what they did and the extent of the brutality, pain and suffering then i suggest you research it, cause i dont buy this 'not knowing right from wrong' bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I dont understand the 'regardless of what they did' bit mate? Would i hang two 10 year old boys for stealing sweets...no. Would i hang two 10 year old boys for murdering and torturing a small child...hand on heart i would walk them to the gallows. Society has no place for these two individuals. Should society have a place for those keen to walk two small children to the gallows, I wonder? What if it were two eight year olds? ... when you were 10, did you know that it was wrong to punch someone in the face? Did you know that you would get in trouble if you were caught punching someone? At age 10, did you know what murder was and if you commit said crime you will go to prison? At 10 years old they still knew the consequences. Well, the consequences (if they were as fully aware of everything as you seem to think) were that they wouldn't get dealt with and punished in the same way as an adult, so I'm not sure what you are saying. :? If ten year olds should be treated as adults by the law (and why stop at that age - why not eight or seven or younger?), why shouldn't they be allowed to drink/smoke/drive (if they can pass a test)/marry/leave school/leave home/be left alone by their parents and do everything else that the law says that they are not mature enough to be given the legal right to do? Try telling that to James Bulgers mother or father...im sure you would very quickly be told in the most polite way possible to **** off. God forbid, but imagine if it was your own child... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 Maybe if James had survived the attack he would have grown up to be like Venables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If he has re offended it depends on the severity of it. If it is a very severe crime he has committed then he should never ever be let out again. Some people will not take up their second chance in life, therefore they should NEVER get a third. tough shit I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 We are not talking about a **** puppy. Lets not walk around blind here lads with our heads up our arses. CAN YOU ALL REMEMBER WHAT THESE TWO DID TO JAMES BULGER!!! If your unaware of what they did and the extent of the brutality, pain and suffering then i suggest you research it, cause i dont buy this 'not knowing right from wrong' bullshit. If you don't buy it, I think thats your problem and not the systems, because theres quite a lot of evidence for people from **** up backwards having **** up mentalities. Try telling that to James Bulgers mother or father...im sure you would very quickly be told in the most polite way possible to **** off. God forbid, but imagine if it was your own child... Which has precisely nothing to do with what we're talking about. The victim has no real influence, asides from deciding guilt, in a legal case, and thats as it should be. To raise this point of Bulgers mother or 'if it were your own child' is moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 From what I've read about the case, Venables and Thompson, although not having fantastic home lives, were probably no worse off than thousands of kids from poor Liverpool familes at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 From what I've read about the case, Venables and Thompson, although not having fantastic home lives, were probably no worse off than thousands of kids from poor Liverpool familes at the time."From what I've read" is the key phrase though. None of us really knows the full story. The tabloids like it that way though, because it allows them to speculate and whip up public hysteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 In one of those dopamine-fuelled fits of embarrassment that occasionally overtake me, I had to get up and leave the room when she started talking about Jon Venables and how James Bulger's family has a right to know why Venables has been returned to custody. I'm sure that this will offend someone somewhere, and that's not my intention; however, the state of British civic education seems to be as dire as that of maths instruction, so a few home truths should be pointed out. Any victim of crime, or their relative, who says they want 'justice', either for themself of their relative, after an accused person has been convicted should be taken to task. They have had justice. In the UK, we do not have personal justice. Justice is dispensed in the Queen's courts in her name and for the benefit of all. Strong words, perhaps; but having seen a miscarriage of justice take place before my eyes and been powerless to stop it, and also having represented child offenders, I do speak from a position of some knowledge. I knew this guy was a clearing in the woods as soon as he wrote "they have had justice". errrr, no they haven't. His twatishness was confirmed when in his own opinion he wrote "I do speak from a position of some knowledge." What a pompous clearing in the woods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 8, 2010 VT Supporter Share Posted March 8, 2010 In one of those dopamine-fuelled fits of embarrassment that occasionally overtake me, I had to get up and leave the room when she started talking about Jon Venables and how James Bulger's family has a right to know why Venables has been returned to custody. I'm sure that this will offend someone somewhere, and that's not my intention; however, the state of British civic education seems to be as dire as that of maths instruction, so a few home truths should be pointed out. Any victim of crime, or their relative, who says they want 'justice', either for themself of their relative, after an accused person has been convicted should be taken to task. They have had justice. In the UK, we do not have personal justice. Justice is dispensed in the Queen's courts in her name and for the benefit of all. Strong words, perhaps; but having seen a miscarriage of justice take place before my eyes and been powerless to stop it, and also having represented child offenders, I do speak from a position of some knowledge. I knew this guy was a clearing in the woods as soon as he wrote "they have had justice". errrr, no they haven't. But he explains that in his next sentence - British law is NOT about "personal" justice (i.e. revenge). You may disagree with this state of affairs, and want more of an "eye for an eye" system, but that - rightly or wrongly - isn't currently how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I think this thread shoule be renamed the John Venables fan club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If these sub-human creatures had done this to my kid, i would make it my mission to spend every minute dedicated to hunting them down... and when i eventually found them.... well lets just say i would go to jail for a lot longer than they did! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 But he explains that in his next sentence - British law is NOT about "personal" justice (i.e. revenge). You may disagree with this state of affairs, and want more of an "eye for an eye" system, but that - rightly or wrongly - isn't currently how it works. i agree it's not about personal justice, but it should be about the LAW giving out justice. In this case, the 'Justice' system failed. Therefore there was no justice given. Not at any level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelle Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I think this thread shoule be renamed the John Venables fan club. Why? No one from what I've seen has said that he was right in doing what he did. I'm quite sure that everyone on here think it was a horrible crime. Just because some don't think he shoukld be sentenced to death doesn't make them a fan of him. I'm against death penalty no matter what. Doesn't exactly make me a fan of the Ted Bundy's of this world. Quite the opposite, AAMOF. To ask the mother about what she thinks is just wrong. She's not anywhere close to being able to look at this objectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiganvillain Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 If you don't buy it, I think thats your problem and not the systems, because theres quite a lot of evidence for people from **** up backwards having **** up mentalities. Well that makes at least 2 of us with the problem. If there is eveidence that a "**** up background" gives someone "**** up Mentality" where does it say we have to tolerate it as that's what you're advocating Chindie. I don't give a shit where someone's "**** Up Mentailty" comes from that fact they have it is in no way an excuse for anything they do and the sooner we get this back into our thinking the better our society will become Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts