Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To want life in prison to mean life in prison

203 replies

drnoitall · 18/02/2014 09:33

For horrendously serious crimes.
Watching the news this morning and from What I understand a decision will be made today about whether or not England and Wales will uphold the decision for life in prison to mean whole of life in prison for people who commit the most abhorant crimes or to bow down to Europe who call it unlawful.
I'm astonished that a human rights lawyer used the word "degrading" in reference to prisoners reaching old age in prison during a whole life sentence.

AIBU to absolutely want life to mean life for people who commit vile crimes against people.

OP posts:
horseycoursey · 18/02/2014 18:42

Yanbu. I'd lock all convicted murderers up for full life sentences as well as paedophiles. I wouldn't bother rehabilitating them at all, as what they've done is take someone else's life or abuse a child which is likely to leave the child scarred for life.

I couldn't live with my conscience if a paedophile/murderer were released andwent on to commit aanother crime. I know this view isn't popular with paedophile loving liberals but I make no apology for wanting to punish and prevent them from EVER having the opportunity to re offend.

perplexedpirate · 18/02/2014 18:47

Horsey, your heinous comment about 'paedophile loving liberals' completely nullifies all you have to say.
Regardless of your politics, that is indefensible.
You should feel a deep shame.

ProfPlumSpeaking · 18/02/2014 18:54

I agree with the very first post from itsallgoingtobefine:

"Have a look at the Norwegian prison system. Compare their sentences, their prisons, their reoffending rates with ours."

SauvignonBlanche · 18/02/2014 18:57

paedophile loving liberals
What offensive shite! Angry

StepAwayFromTheEcclesCakes · 18/02/2014 19:08

I am sue this has been said but I just wish there was less discretion for judges and a more uniform penalty system, I know this would be hard to do but sometimes I see a sentence that is harsh for one crime then a less harsh sentence for a crime I see as less severe, and if sentenced to life why do some get out after a few years biut others are in for the full haul> there are some awful crimes for eg that match the Brady murders but they get out? it may be down to stuff we as public do not know but sometimes I wonder how some crimes get off 'lightly' whilst others get the book thrown at them... seems to be very little consistency which I fail to understand Sad

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 19:11

Repeated studies show that when it comes to sentencing, the GBP are far more lenient in expressed views than the judiciary decisions when it comes to handing out prison sentences. Once details of cases are known, the public has a strong tendency to search for community-based sentences rather than locking someone up.

innisglas · 18/02/2014 19:24

I'm afraid I haven't read all the comments, so I don't know if anyone has mentioned this here but I always understood that when you take the hope of ever being released away from prisoners, it gets extremely difficult to control their behaviour inside the prison.

Also saw WooWooOwl's disagreement with rehabilitation and think that is ridiculous, for society's sake we want the ones who are released into the community to be able to fit in and be valuable members of society, and for the sake of the convicts, well sometimes when you know the back story you realise they never did get a chance in life.

Dawndonnaagain · 18/02/2014 19:29

Nice to see the flog 'em and hang 'em brigade out in force. Hmm
I too agree with the first post:
"Have a look at the Norwegian prison system. Compare their sentences, their prisons, their reoffending rates with ours."

HadABadDay2014 · 18/02/2014 19:32

I don't think murders should ever be released.

April jones was a little girl just playing out, holly and Jessica was two 12 year olds walking together, Sarah Payne was a 8 year old walking along a country road. These children suffered a horrific death in the hands of these monsters.

To me I think fuck it, you took that life so now you lose your freedom.

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 19:37

Those examples are nothing like representative of the profile of the murders in this country.
Further, the re-offending rate of released murderer/manslaughterers are infintessimally small. They are not a risk to the public (usually) in the future.

Original poster
drnoitall · 18/02/2014 19:43

Under
I think the point some people are making, is that they don't care about the reoffending rate, these evil bastards should not be released. Should not be released. Should not be released.

OP posts:
UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 19:46

yes I get that. Trouble is they are not 'evil bastards' (whatever that means) generally, and reactions are often just not well-thought ones. Just a self-comforting knee jerk.

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 19:47

that article doesn't look at re-offending rates of murderers, does it?

HadABadDay2014 · 18/02/2014 19:49

The category includes murder, rape, child sex abuse, wounding and serious assaults.

HadABadDay2014 · 18/02/2014 19:51

So up to 2000 people lives have been ruined or ended because the person responsible managed to convince a panel that they are safe to the public.

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 19:58

Yes but we aren't talking about that wider category are we?
Also, they wouldn't largely be parolees. They will be people released automatically as per their sentence. No panel involved at all.

Fairenuff · 18/02/2014 20:01

Re-offending rates are irrelevant when talking about full life sentences.

The lowest rate possible is 0%.

Full life sentences are the only system that would guarantee 0% possibility of re-offending and should therefore be supported.

HadABadDay2014 · 18/02/2014 20:04

Perhaps then you wouldn't mind these people living next door to you. Perhaps working in hospitals or nursing homes.

If you truly think murders and rapist can be fully rehabilitated, why not have them working with children or the vulnerable.

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 20:10

I didn't say anything about 'rehabilitation' Had - you seem to have made that up yourself?

HadABadDay2014 · 18/02/2014 20:15

So back to the OP should life mean a whole life sentence for these serious crimes.

gordyslovesheep · 18/02/2014 20:20

Fairenuff people can offend in prisons - your argument is wrong

Had plenty of people who have escaped conviction/detection already do all those jobs - I'd rather have a supervised ex offender.
although those with certain convictions would never be allowed to do those jobs

I would take each person as an individual case by case basis - which is what the parole board already do and what the EU are sort of suggesting

Handsoff7 · 18/02/2014 20:22

YABU

If for nothing else than the fact that it'd be a big waste of money. It'd make the state spend £30k pa per person to keep a load of octogenarians locked up 50 years after they'd committed their crimes and when they'd be no further risk to anyone.

UnderYourCommand · 18/02/2014 20:24

Maintaining people in prison til they die, across the board is just absurd.