Would You Accept A Rapist Playing For City?

[SWP's back]

I don't think I will be in the minority.

Of course there is always a loud uneducated minority who like to bang on about issues like this and try and take the moral high ground by saying that people should never be forgiven for their crimes.

We live in a civilised society that has said that the crime ched did was punished by a five year jail sentence and he can be released in 2 1/2 years. He has served this time and is now ready to move on with his life and go back to his job. I would like to think that most people would accept that.

In addition the majority of people complaining don't come from the club he is going to play for. There has been little sign of any sheffield united protest that they will soon be employing ched. So unless you are going to claim that sheffield united fans are different to fans of other teams I don't see how you can say that the majority of city fans would in the same situation refuse to accept it.

If we had a star striker who went to prison for rape and he came back to the club after his sentence I think we would welcome him back.[/


You must be aware of the irony.

I'm out now as no amount of logical debate and presentation of facts will alter your opinion.

Ched Evans is a convicted rapist.

Fact.

Yes I am not disputing that....

I suggest you read this column. It's a broadsheet newspaper I'm afraid so you may need someone to help you with the longer words.

<a class="postlink" href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100283231/the-medievalism-of-the-campaign-to-stop-ched-evans-from-getting-his-old-job-back/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brend ... -job-back/</a>

LOL you're a cretin, it being a link to a broadsheet newspaper means fuck all, especially when it is a fucking blog!

Like I have said in this thread before, Lance Armstrong got banned from profressional cycling for life after being found guilty of taking dope. That doesn't mean he can't get a job, it means he can no longer do one form of sport as a career.

Are you saying rape is performance enhancing?

 

[cyberblue]

IT is a very emotive subect & not something to take lightly . if a person convicted of rape cant get a job he will be on benifits payed by us for the rest of his ,life if the person is in his 20s that is going to cost the taxpayer a small fortune .the alternative is to employ that person .if he is hight profile the public have a choice ,first of all they dont have to pay to watch him or pay to watch him but not support him .In this case i think Sheff Utd should take council from organisations such as women against rape .there is no easy solution .but how ever distasteful the crime once people have "paid there debt to society" should they not be allowed to earn a living? if you think they shouldnt be allowed to earn a living fair enough ,but you will be working to pay for his keep

 

[dobobobo]

Yes I am not disputing that....

I suggest you read this column. It's a broadsheet newspaper I'm afraid so you may need someone to help you with the longer words.

<a class="postlink" href="http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100283231/the-medievalism-of-the-campaign-to-stop-ched-evans-from-getting-his-old-job-back/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brend ... -job-back/</a>

LOL you're a cretin, it being a link to a broadsheet newspaper means fuck all, especially when it is a fucking blog!

Like I have said in this thread before, Lance Armstrong got banned from profressional cycling for life after being found guilty of taking dope. That doesn't mean he can't get a job, it means he can no longer do one form of sport as a career.

Are you saying rape is performance enhancing?

Nope.

Why didn't you read the thread?

 

[SWP's back]

LOL you're a cretin, it being a link to a broadsheet newspaper means fuck all, especially when it is a fucking blog!

Like I have said in this thread before, Lance Armstrong got banned from profressional cycling for life after being found guilty of taking dope. That doesn't mean he can't get a job, it means he can no longer do one form of sport as a career.

Are you saying rape is performance enhancing?

Nope.

Why didn't you read the thread?

I did and couldn't agree with much of what you said.

You are arbitrarily arguing for which jobs people should be allowed to do after serving the time the laws states that they should be incarcerated.

 

[cibaman]

"Playing for City" muddles the issue, since we would be paying millions and he would achieve near superstar status.

Do I think Evans should have a chance to resurrect his career? Yes

Do I think he should re-start at Sheffield United or a similar level? Re-start his career where he left off? Probably not. It would seem more appropriate for him to drop down a couple of divisions initially. Earn something nearer to average earnings for a couple of years, at least until he's "served" the full 5 years.

In many ways I agree with this - I too think that once someone has served their time for any crime then they deserve a second chance, as the alternative would be thousands of folk coming out of custody with no chance of finding employment, which would just increase the risk of reoffending.
Where I do disagree is just where he resumes his career - he has done his time, and therefore should be entitled to work for any employer who is prepared to pay him - expecting him to earn less is simply punishing him again for an offence he has already been punished for, and this just isn't how the real world works anyway.
Jeffrey Archer wrote a best selling novel whilst in prison, so clearly he didn't suffer financially, and the Guinness fraudsters all got early release on medical grounds only to get well paid jobs in the city, so they weren't punished further either.
I can't stand rapists, but if they have served their sentence, then they should have the same employment prospects as the rest of us.

Yes, I didn't mean to suggest that he should be prevented from playing for Sheffield United, or anyone. Just saying what I thought would be a "fair", if impractical, outcome.

 

[Rascal]

If you have served the punishment that the state acting on our behalf has decided fits the crime then of course you should be able to become a member of society again and work and act as a free man or woman.

Otherwise as i see it the whole point of crime leading to punishment leading to rehabilitation is just pointless. If you give somebody who has wronged no hope of redemption or acceptance back into society it must only ensure the likelihood of reoffending as they have nowhere else to turn apart from there past.


I understand some crimes are seen as more heinious and emotive than others and people have been directlly and indirectly affected by such crime but the heart of a fair and just society is always that if you have done wrong you do have a chance to redeem yourself. Otherwise whats the option? We just execute all criminals regardless, we lock people up for ever, we make the Isle of Wight an island for criminal incarcaration like that film did with New York.

Do the crime, do your time, is fair to everyone regardless of the crime

 

[dobobobo]

Are you saying rape is performance enhancing?

Nope.

Why didn't you read the thread?

I did and couldn't agree with much of what you said.

You are arbitrarily arguing for which jobs people should be allowed to do after serving the time the laws states that they should be incarcerated.

That's cool that you don't agree, but I already expanded on that point so I aint repeating myself.

 

[Shaelumstash]

If you have served the punishment that the state acting on our behalf has decided fits the crime then of course you should be able to become a member of society again and work and act as a free man or woman.

Otherwise as i see it the whole point of crime leading to punishment leading to rehabilitation is just pointless. If you give somebody who has wronged no hope of redemption or acceptance back into society it must only ensure the likelihood of reoffending as they have nowhere else to turn apart from there past.


I understand some crimes are seen as more heinious and emotive than others and people have been directlly and indirectly affected by such crime but the heart of a fair and just society is always that if you have done wrong you do have a chance to redeem yourself. Otherwise whats the option? We just execute all criminals regardless, we lock people up for ever, we make the Isle of Wight an island for criminal incarcaration like that film did with New York.

Do the crime, do your time, is fair to everyone regardless of the crime

You're absolutely right in what you're saying in terms of ex cons deserve to be able to work and contribute to society after serving time.

But playing for the club you support? That's an entirely different matter. Many would not accept Suarez at the club because he bites people. Christ, some said they would not accept Yaya back because he wanted a birthday cake! It's not because they think those "crimes" are so heinous that the perpetrator never deserved to work again, rather that they wouldn't want those kind of people associated with the club they love.

I'm sure we all have different moral limits of what we'd find acceptable, and what we wouldn't. Would you accept Gary Glitter to come and sing at next years City Live? Or Bashar al-Assad as CEO?

 

[Rascal]

If you have served the punishment that the state acting on our behalf has decided fits the crime then of course you should be able to become a member of society again and work and act as a free man or woman.

Otherwise as i see it the whole point of crime leading to punishment leading to rehabilitation is just pointless. If you give somebody who has wronged no hope of redemption or acceptance back into society it must only ensure the likelihood of reoffending as they have nowhere else to turn apart from there past.


I understand some crimes are seen as more heinious and emotive than others and people have been directlly and indirectly affected by such crime but the heart of a fair and just society is always that if you have done wrong you do have a chance to redeem yourself. Otherwise whats the option? We just execute all criminals regardless, we lock people up for ever, we make the Isle of Wight an island for criminal incarcaration like that film did with New York.

Do the crime, do your time, is fair to everyone regardless of the crime

You're absolutely right in what you're saying in terms of ex cons deserve to be able to work and contribute to society after serving time.

But playing for the club you support? That's an entirely different matter. Many would not accept Suarez at the club because he bites people. Christ, some said they would not accept Yaya back because he wanted a birthday cake! It's not because they think those "crimes" are so heinous that the perpetrator never deserved to work again, rather that they wouldn't want those kind of people associated with the club they love.

I'm sure we all have different moral limits of what we'd find acceptable, and what we wouldn't. Would you accept Gary Glitter to come and sing at next years City Live? Or Bashar al-Assad as CEO?

Where it comes to my club im a person who has a fairly high moral standpoint. I never watched us play live whilst Thaksin was owner and gave up my season tickets in protest.

But i do believe that if somebody has done there pennance for the crime they have committed then its slate wiped clean and everyone deserves a second chance.

Glitter and Assad are extreme cases, albeit i know little of Assads wrongdoings but if either were offered a chance i would judge on my own merits. Obviously neither will ever happen though.

But if Ched returns to football and he is like say Rickie Lambert a late developer and becomes a proper centre forward who could help us win trophies i would judge him on his football ability because he has served his time for his wrongdoing.

 

[Petetheblu]

No, he's scum and the only time I'd like to see a rapist is in a MMA ring getting the shite kicked out of him. The worlds gone mad if we're to be told to accept cheering on someone who has wrecked another familes lives with such disregard.

I agree about people getting 2nd chances, we all make errors but rape is not an error. Let them rot!!!