Search results

That's an extremely naive view of the justice system in my opinion. Judges have a lot of discretion with the sentences they hand down (as we're seeing now), and even when they don't, they often just choose to ignore the guidelines anyway. This is partly why very few go to prison for possession...

Depends on the severity of the crime. If your biggest concern is criminals coming into contact with other criminals then prisons wouldn't exist and nobody would ever get locked up. Prisons should be for the most serious offenders and child abusers come into that category as do criminals with...

I'd much rather have them associate with other paedophiles than children.

Starmer is a victim of the response by the police, CPS, and judiciary to the riots. They did far more to prove two-tier policing than anything any right-wing protester could ever say, and he's paying the price for it with his political capital. I haven't mentioned anything about any airport...

I don't know the facts of the Huw Edwards case to be honest but as a very strong rule, I would rather the prison spaces we have available be taken up by child abusers than people posting comments online, however nasty those comments may be. Only 1 in 2 of those convicted of child abuse...

That just sounds like a justice system based purely on emotion rather than rules, and probably why Starmer's paying the price for it politically with his ratings. The rule of law needs to be based on rules not vengeance or emotion, and needs to be applied equally across the board.

Surely this is some kind of joke? I genuinely hope no-one believes the above video is comparable to blocking the M25 haha!!

Nowhere near good enough for City.

It's not about what I personally want to say but what I think should be legal to say within a democracy that values free speech. Do I genuinely believe the attacker was called Ali Al Shakati and an asylum seeker? No I don't. Do I think you should be able to say it without getting arrested? 1...

Yep you can be locked up for your views posted on here. Bluemoon doesn't get an exception under any legislation! Also, just because people can criticise the state (although I'm not too sure about that anymore!) doesn't mean the police aren't like the Gestapo in terms of arresting people for...

The Office for National Statistics. See the above post.

Unfortunately, in a justice system with finite capacity, it is a question of one over another. And the idea that child abusers and knife criminals are all going to prison isn't true. Most criminals who commit knife crime do not go to prison...

They don't have to be released. It's a political choice. But unfortunately, large parts of our state would rather lock up keyboard warriors than child abusers, knife criminals, and even killers. It's a sickness at the heart of our justice system.

There's a 50,000 post minimum for that one mate ha.

For once I agree with you. To paraphrase an old sketch: "What are you in here for? Murder." "What are you in here for? Inaccurate information".

You're right...I'm reading too much shit, it's called the CPS website. Shocking to hear what people are getting locked up for while all kinds of criminals are released/escape punishment but shows what our country's become recently.

Do you really think the authoritarian regimes that have existed over the years just say 'we're locking him for no crime'? They claim they've broken a crime that's 'harmful', 'hateful', 'disinformation', 'inciting violence', 'against national security'...basically all the concepts we use to...

Well yeah of course the vast majority of people involved wouldn't be protesting/rioting if it was a white British Christian...the protests/riots were clearly a hostility to immigration/Islam/asylum seekers so not really sure what clever point you're making or why it took my post for you to...

No the rule of law works when you're arrested and tried for actual crimes, not when you're arrested for non-crimes or made a scapegoat for other people's crimes. The police and CPS tried to criminalise speculation (this had nothing to do with incitement to violence), which should be legal in...

I'm not. You're talking about stalking/harassment which is a crime. Posting an article with a false accusation that somebody is wrongly involved in a crime has always been libel.