Back in the days of the Krays and the corrupt Flying Squad, you mean?
But was crime higher or lower than it is now in those days?
Back in the days of the Krays and the corrupt Flying Squad, you mean?
Forgot about the last 3 neurons, sorry.
Add to my post the phrase "after an enquiry is successfully completed and facts are clear that the killed entered the premises uninvited"... from the no shyte sherlock catalogue.
Do you really think I want people killed and no questions asked???
Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.
Seriously, do you think that such thing can happen today with technology following our every move.
Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.
You need to dial that back.
Prosecution and enquiry are 2 different things.With all this technology making information available to everyone yet myths and lies and untruths and misinformation abounds even more. Technology is not a panacea.
You need to dial that back.
Deterrents to reoffend do not work in manycases...chopping hands off will defo stop them burgling again..A good flogging would definitely deter.Fewer reoffending frees up police to catch more crims.People going round and round in the system is no good to anyone.deterrence means "dissuading people from committing the crime in the first place"
you are talking about something that happens after a crime has been committed and investigated, the criminal tracked down and successfully prosecuted.
most crimes don't get that far.
Have you been to texas?We can easily check that.
Have burglaries stopped in Texas?
What reminded me of that example was that in around 1997/8 I was working for a charity, training up troubled/naughty/excluded kids in mechanics and we got ESF (European Social Fund) money. It was money for old rope - we had a contract with the local authority education department and were well paid for them but we were allowed to double count, even triple count with funding from the NSF (Neighbourhood support fund) for these kids. One of the criteria we had to satisfy was a reduction in local crime and we satisfied that criteria by simply stating in the form words to the effect that "while these kids are with us, they are not out in the streets committing crimes". The ESF really was a virtual bottomless pot of funding. We even had an ESF budget allowance to give the kids attendance and performance bonuses and, I swear on my kids lives, non-attending school age students were going home at Christmas with over £500 cash in their pockets!Even if it’s not a 'good deterrent', if you lock a burglar up for a long time, that’s a long time they won’t be out burgling people. It’s protecting society from them isn’t it?
I live in a very safe low crime area, but in other areas do see houses with steel gates at windows and doors - I can imagine what it must be like for those people having to live like that, so sympathise.
I say the criminal should be made to pay for repairs and reparations in full as part of the sentence - attachment of earnings/savings/benefits or sell their property to cover costs - should also reduce insurance costs for the rest of us.Or better, pass a law that anybody breaking into someone's home, automatically loses all human rights and the homeowners will not be prosecuted whatever happens.
The burglaries would stop immediately.
Benefit scrounging again?What reminded me of that example was that in around 1997/8 I was working for a charity, training up troubled/naughty/excluded kids in mechanics and we got ESF (European Social Fund) money. It was money for old rope - we had a contract with the local authority education department and were well paid for them but we were allowed to double count, even triple count with funding from the NSF (Neighbourhood support fund) for these kids. One of the criteria we had to satisfy was a reduction in local crime and we satisfied that criteria by simply stating in the form words to the effect that "while these kids are with us, they are not out in the streets committing crimes". The ESF really was a virtual bottomless pot of funding. We even had an ESF budget allowance to give the kids attendance and performance bonuses and, I swear on my kids lives, non-attending school age students were going home at Christmas with over £500 cash in their pockets!