Harvester Of Souls

Some one can spout endless pages of shite about reality TV but you mention big Bill recommending Tone for the UN job and the thread get's deleted... What's the problem? Two of the biggest killers in the last 15 years not Deathlisty enough?

These polls dilute the quality of the forum.

I've heard something, allegedly, similar! Makes you wonder if this alleged story will ever surface?

Not murder, justice. My argument is based on the failure to rehabilitate. Therefore the current system has another failing. When rehabilitation fails there is no argument to keep someone incarcerated. Toss out the trash. If you want to afford the same rights to this small percentage as you do everyone else then that's entirely up to you. I believe these people are beneath contempt and should be treated accordingly. Many of them are free to live in an enviroment where they no longer have to work, they get decent food and medical care, dedicated leisure activity and access to everything they need. They're awarded a better standard of living than their victims. If there is an offender that wants be cured and seeks treatment and wants to be rehabilitated then so be it. Take the necessary steps. Give them the opportunity to attone but to those that laugh at the system. Refuse all form of rehabilitative treatment and then reoffend constantly in and out of custody then there is only one guaranteed treatment left... By all means fund those that wish to change but not at the expense of keeping the small percentage of real parasites in custody. But they can and do reoffend whilst still in custody. Constantly and because they're incarcerated they're left to it. Why should a first offence teenage burglar be put in an environment where he can be sodomised by someone like Sidney Cooke? How many times would you allow that before you decided enough was enough? There are major failings with the current system, we can agree, but if he (and his kind) were to be kept in isolation there would be an outcry from another section saying his human rights were being violated... where does it end? Easy... the gallows. The death penalty is perfectly acceptable form of punishment for those that are a severe danger to society and cannot be rehabilitated under any circumstances. We have absolutely no moral justification to keep these parasites in the lifestyle they're accustomed to. Pull the lever. Kick the stool away... free up the space for those that can and do wish to change. It's not murder is a treatment for parasites. Not people. Sidney Cooke and other child rapists, sex offenders, multiple murderers, etc like him. The ones that aren't just sick in the head, the ones that take great pleasure from molesting and killing young kids, raping men and women and murdering people who's only crime is to catch the bus. Call me old school.

Still waiting for someone to defend the permanent incarceration of a serial child rapist over his execution. A serial paedophile (and convicted murderer for that matter) that refuses all treatment and one that has confessed to reoffending, whilst out on licence. For all the believers in the goodness of humanity what do you do when rehabilitation fails? Keep them locked up at the expense of the taxpayer? I'm one of many that is sick to death of society being lenient on the worst of the worst. A financial argument is Like I said I used be very staunchly anti death penalty until the full catalogue crimes commited Sidney Cooke was revealed to me. Now I'd seriously pay to flick the switch on old sparky. Kick his stool away from the rope. Put the needle in his arm. Pull the trigger etc etc. Think of it as assisted euthanasia instead of murder, after all both are only a legal definition. Angels don't exist... bit like justice

No. I'm saying that there are a special, small, percentage of criminals in Britain are beyond rehabilitation and are a drain on the taxpayer. Scumbags like Cooke, Webster and French... Beyond rehabilitation and a serious risk to society. The state has been slaughtering since it was invented all those thousands of years ago so please don't try and convince me that we're all rosy and moral. Infact put it to the public and we'd see what the unofficial referendum is on serial child rapists. Maybe not you personally but if you're in the UK then your elected government is slaughtering bucket loads of innocents, daily. Depends how you're looking at it. If you call killing a serial child rapist murder then there is little I can say to convince you but I call it saving the tax payer and future victims alot of hassle (justice is in there as well somewhere) and I would happily pay more in taxes to kick the kiddy fiddlers stool away as he swings from his prison balcony! Maybe we could put them through their various degree courses and get them teaching in primary and high schools across the country... Ruth Kelly seems to think it's a good idea.

I don't accept that explanation at all. I accept that we no longer execute people in this country as part of the EU membership but if our legal and moral values say it's wrong to kill then why are we slaughtering thousands of Iraqi civilians for oil? That's perfectly fine yet we won't allow the execution of a man who repeatedly raped a 12 week old baby girl while his girlfriend took pictures of it. Where is the morality in that? She could be out on licence in 2 years so there isn't even any justice. Anyone fancy having a go at why these people shouldn't be executed based on their individual catalogue of crimes? Why should they be kept alive? Can they be rehabilitated? Will they reoffend given the chance? If not why should they take up the space?

Jesus is also dead. Don't know if you already knew that. Did Jesus even exist?

Okay then maybe you can offer a decent reason why serial child rapist Sidney Cooke shouldn't be executed? Or how about Alan Webster and Tanya French? I keep saying that it's not something that should be applied in anything other than extreme circumstances... like those listed above but can anyone explain why we should keep them alive? Why should the British taxpayer feed, clothe and shelter them when all they will do is loaf around in prison playing pool and watching satellite television? Plus the extra money to keep them segregated from other prisoners. I'm really wondering how anyone can defend the incarceration of these people. Short drop and a sudden stop. Hang the f****rs

You've really got your finger on the pulse there...

It is, it is in extreme cases and it is in extreme cases.

Not the totality maybe but definitely the majority. Have you ever noticed what happens when law and order breaks down and natural disaster strikes? People start looting and killing each other. The strong start to victimise the weak on a larger scale. I think there are more people with sense but they're the ones that would organise the relief effort rather than form a rape gang.

They'd make at least a grand each on Ebay...

I concur!

There is no freedom anywhere. We're all under surveillance. We're all being lied to and we're all being censored. We can all talk the bollocks that is politics until the cows come home. Who's extreme and who is best for the future... there is one thing nobody seems to consider in the quest for their utopia... Human nature. The quest for power. The quest for wealth and the quest for dominance. The only rules in the world are survival of the fittest. If you are a threat to the power you will be crushed whether you're a commie, nazi or just a concerned citizen...

Now now Tempus you're starting to sound like a red top tabloid.

Huzzah! Bravo Sir!

Has he ever tried to change his style?? I can't think of the words to decribe him apart from... well... err... Lemmy. It can be a verb and an adjective...

Churchill did it twice.

I think Windsor should leave political forecasting to the professionals.

I concur...

Well said MPFC! I'm an avid reader of the various Dickyisms but not much of an active poster... Excellent thread appealing to all comers... Huzzah!

Isn't that the American equivalent of Manchester?

They're both tw@s so good riddance.