[Bridgie]

.

[MK Chris]

I never saw the point in jailing someone for life and then releasing them after a few years. If you're going to let them go, bloody say so.

Similarly, people get 20 years but can get out earlier on "good behaviour." Yeah right, so if you don't bugger a fellow inmate you get your sentence halfed? (Sorry to be crude, just putting my point across, feel free to edit Chris.)

[magenta]

They review it after so many years anyway basically. The idea is that they rehabillitate you and let you out once you're rehabillitated.

The whole idea of prison I think is that you have your liberty taken away - like you took away someone elses by comitting the crime that you did - not that you're locked in a tiny cell with nothing but a metal bed & only let out for porridge twice a day. Human rights wouldn't allow it anyway.

I dunno really though...

[Gigglyboots]

The same happened to someone I knew (not close, but still) And it was around ten years. To me, thats injustice. If you take away someones life, you deserve to suffer.

It's like them people who killed James Bulger (right?) and they now get excellent qualifications, a new identity, a new life..and it's not fair. These people get into universities and do degrees that my family or myself will pay thousands to put me through and they get for free. That angers me a bit.

It is a good idea in a way that Bridgie. But they would just end up saying it's invasion of human rights or something like that.

I do think they should pay the price, but like all other human beings I guess they need a second chance depending on the crime.

It's a sort of difficult topic, but there's a lot of injustice in what goes on now imho.

[Sidders]

To be fair though, the murderers of Bulger were kids anyway, so they didn't really see the implications of murdering someone.

[Gigglyboots]

I understand that point, but there are others, adults, who get similar opportunities also. Like degrees, courses and all that non-criminals fork out a lot of money for.

[Gaspode_The_Wonder_Dog]

To be fair though, the murderers of Bulger were kids anyway, so they didn't really see the implications of murdering someone.

hmmm very dangerous ground.

[Sidders]

I know. To be honest I don't really like to comment on issues like this. People always assume that people who commit offences such as murder are always of sound mind. Say one day you went completely insane and decided to murder someone, how would you like to be treated?

[MK Chris]

I think Thompson and Venables knew what they were doing when they killed James Bulger. You can say what you want but at 10 years old did you know that it was bad to take a two year old down the the train track and batter his head in? I think so.

At the end of the day, yes they were obviously immature at that age but I think it was far more sinister than that. It would be interesting to know how they behave now.

[superwoman]

apparently one of them was in the prison not far from me, umm, i think their sentence should have been longer and i strongly disagree with all the rewards criminals get in jail for good behaviour!

[Sidders]

At the end of the day, yes they were obviously immature at that age but I think it was far more sinister than that. It would be interesting to know how they behave now.

But how do you know they were thinking straight at the time?

[Gaspode_The_Wonder_Dog]

sidla you really need to read more about the case an what they actually did. as for the state of peoples minds its very subjective...

[superwoman]

imagine how the parents felt.....

could you live with urself knowing your 10 yr old could do that?

[Sidders]

sidla you really need to read more about the case an what they actually did. as for the state of peoples minds its very subjective...

I know all of what they did and admittedly it was brutal.

I agree, it is very subjective, but nobody can know what they were thinking at the time. They were probably thinking something like "this'll be great" or something like that, and that obviously means they weren't thinking straight.

[magenta]

Thomson & Venables knew what they were doing. We watched a video on it a few weeks ago, I've never really had a strong opinion - but Jamie Bulger was crying & screaming & people stopped them & said "is he OK," & they said "yeah he's fine, he's our brother - he's always like this." Things like that. If they were clever enough to tell lies like that then they were clever enough to take him down to the police station & say something like "we've just found him, he's not ours etc." They had so many chances to back out, more than one person stopped them to ask if he was OK but they just lied their way out of it...

[Sidders]

I don't doubt that they knew what they were doing, but anyone who wants to go out, find some kid and murder him is obviously not right in the head.

[magenta]

But I don't think they planned to do it - they just got themselves in too deep & felt like they couldn't back out, because they'd be backing down - and being lads wanted to impress each other and so on.

[Sidders]

Exactly, which would imply that they regreted what they'd done after they'd done it.

[magenta]

Which says that they are right in the head to me - if they're showing remorse for it.

[Sidders]

Yeah, but if they'd stopped to think about it then they probably wouldn't have done it. The point is that they didn't think.

[Gigglyboots]

Well, I mean if they do find out the criminals are insane, they can't be put too trial, can they? That was like the case of the two girls last summer, and the caretaker has not been tried yet has he, because they put him in an insititute until they found him in a safe mental state to put him up to trial.

[Mcqueen_]

Yeah, but if they'd stopped to think about it then they probably wouldn't have done it. The point is that they didn't think.

I think alot of crimes wouldn't be commited if they stopped and thought about the consequences. Saying 'they didn't think about it' is no excuse for murder.

[Sidders]

True. I don't really know where I was going with that argument really. Just goes to show that you should think before you act.

[Morals]

Okay, time to throw a coupl eof spanners in the works here and really get this debate going:

Firstly, should people under the age of 18 be tried as adults as obviously it was considered they knew what they were doing when they murdered James Bulger?

Secondly, should we bring back capital punishment?

Over to you...

[Gigglyboots]

Well if someone my age committed a murder, they would fine well be old enough to know the consequences and all the surrounding things. But there's a sort of thing, I mean if you were 10, that's a tad young, someone from 14 (intelligence considering) would know what was going on.

Capital punishment is a good idea, only if the person is certainly guilty, and perhaps confesses. But the cost of capital punishment is more for the whole trial and legalities behind it than it is to keep them alive their whole lives.

Lots of aspects that have to be considered really.