to think this is the wrong way round

[booyhoo]

reading local paper and two reports struck me as contradictory. one was a known drug dealer, with previous for same getting arrested and being given 100 hours community serviceand 3 years on probabtion after a raid on his property. the other was a man who smashed a window on a car in an attempted theft. he got 2 months in prison. to me that doesn't seem rational. surely a drug dealer poses a greater risk to the community? why isn't he the one being kept away from it?

Had the window man no previous convictions?

the report didn't say. it just said that he had smashed teh window causing £X amount of damage and had received a two year prison term.

Hard to compare like with like then, the smashed car window could have been the latest in a long line of similar crimes/break ins/criminal damage.

Of course, one might think that a custodial sentence was not the right thing for this kind of crime and both should have received Community Service.

Yanbu for thinking the drug dealer should have a custodial sentence. However, I disagree that it's just the 'wrong way round' because personally I'd be glad that someone who smashes a car window in an attempted theft, is off the streets (albeit for a measly few weeks)

It probably depends on the drug dealing as well - there might be a different approach if you're selling a few friends some dope compared to supplying the entire local neighbourhood with crack.

But yes, it does seem a bit bizarre.

The fact that he's on drugs is in his favour. It's almost like the fact thats he's addicted to drugs is a mitigating circumstnace. He's only doing it to fund his habit, he would be a law abiding citizen in normal circumstances. It's all v bizarre.

sorry, i should clarify i don't think the car smasher shouldn't have gottena sentence. i just think that out of the two cases, i found it strange that he was teh one that did. i agree it was right he should have done. i just don't understand teh logic that dictates a car thief egts a sentence but a drug dealer doesn't.

durham, yes, that was something teh judge referred to in his decsion. teh fact that he was dealing to fund his own habit.

I tend to think that non-violent crimes shouldn't result in custodial sentence, so neither should have ended up in prison.