Acid Attacks

[NewDaddie]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/14/six-month-minimum-sentence-proposed-repeat-acid-attacks

Does this go anywhere near far enough? Would it make you feel safer?

''Anyone caught twice possessing corrosive substances without a good reason will automatically face a prison sentence of at least six months''

''The consultation document says it is not intended that “corrosive substance” will be defined in legislation, as the offence “must be flexible enough to cover a range of possible situations''

I can see 2 potential problems;

1. What is a corrosive substance, how is it defined and if it is that dangerous why isnt it a controlled substance?
2. What is 'a good reason' in law?

That sounds like Persons Unknown to me. Potentially very dangerous, on the level of getting shot in the tube while carrying a bag of tools.
Various crimes are already illegal and men still do them. Its the underlying attitude of macho, bullying entitlement that needs dealing with.

Interesting DJ I also wondered why it wasn't already controlled I had this discussion irl and how acid attacks are part of the spectrum of hate crimes against women.

I don't know much about the stats and even less about the law and was hoping to be educated on both.

As far as I know, in the UK acid attacks are mostly a male on male, gang related crime. They are intended to mark the victim for life in the same way that glassing or slashing was used in the past.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24835910

Globally, acid attacks are mostly used against women who refuse a man.
I personally feel that in the UK, it should be a separate offence. Male violence is out of control and needs special measures to tackle it; more laws arent doing anything to help.

2) What is 'a good reason' in law?

In this particular situation? Seems quite clear- the person is a professional plumber/drainage contracter/ painter/ decorator doing their job or you have a blocked drain/ woodwork needing attention.

I'm pleased this is getting attention.

Male violence is out of control and needs special measures to tackle it; more laws arent doing anything to help

Acid attacks are carried out by women too.

Apparently the vast majority are carried out by men, unless you know of evidence that this isn't the case? I don't think it's helpful to draw attention or focus onto the small number of women perpetrators.

I don't think it's helpful to draw attention or focus onto the small number of women perpetrators

I was not doing that. Acid attacks are carried out by both sexes. I don't think it is helpful to deny that. This legislation is aimed at the perpetrators of acid attacks. Perhaps if it were difficult to obtain corrosive materials this attack might not have happened.

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

Schoolgirl locked up over music room acid attack - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-40852690

I'm not denying that women carry out acid attacks and I can recall a couple of incidences that made the news with female perpetrators. But what is the point of insisting that "women do it too!" when they are a very small number of the perpetrators and it is a majority male

..crime.

Male violence is one thing and acid attacks are another.

Until now there had been no specific legislation dealing with carrying corrosive materials in the same way as there is with carrying a knife.

I'm utterly puzzled why anyone would object to what is being proposed or try to divert attention from the issue that it is a male problem.

I am not insisting women do it too other than to dismiss the idea that corrosive attacks are a male problem.

or try to divert attention from the issue behind this legislation by saying that it is a male problem, rather than a particularly horrendous crime in its own right.

I applaud what is being done, the new legislation should be massively helpful, nowhere have I said otherwise. Discussing it as an issue of male violence is not diverting from the issue at all, not sure why you think that's the case. Do we not want to try and understand why all these young men want to carry and use acid?

Do we not want to try and understand why all these young men want to carry and use acid?

Did I said we didn't?
Do you want to try to prevent these attacks?

Do you want to understand what possessed a woman to pour sulphuric acid over the face of her male partner when he was asleep ? Blinding him and literally melting the flesh off his face.

You're being very argumentative over this, not sure why.

"Argumentative" means not agreeing with you.

Acid attacks are terrible. I am pleased Amber Rudd is dealing with this.

Thanks, that makes sense. I thought knife crime was male on male, and acid was male/female on female. But I'm from London so sometimes the balance of my views/opinions tends to be more foreign than British.

Of course it does.

I actually don't really know what you're disagreeing about. This legislation is an improvement, it's good that it's being looked into. I think restrictions on sales to under 18s (or more widely, if appropriate) is also necessary. It is a predominately male crime, with mainly male victims in the UK. I think it's worth also looking at reasons why young men use acid in this way, and look at ways of addressing the issues that seem to make (young) men commit these crimes.

I'll try to explain myself more clearly. The proposed legislation is too loosely worded to be safe.
It does not specify what a corrosive substance is.
It does make it illegal to carry a corrosive substance without 'a good reason'.

Under the proposed legislation, I could be convicted of carrying a bottle of bleach home from the supermarket, if I already had a bottle at home.

Under the proposed legislation, I could be convicted of carrying a bottle of bleach home from the supermarket, if I already had a bottle at home

Firstly this is nothing more than the initial stages. There will be considerably more detail to follow.

Secondly - no you would not. The Crown would have to establish beyond a reasonable doubt you had no good reason for buying It- already having a bottle at home would get nowhere as being indicative of no good reason.

The home secretary, Amber Rudd, said: “All forms of violent crime are totally unacceptable, which is why we are taking action to restrict access to offensive weapons and crack down on those who carry acids with the intent to do harm.”

From the article linked in the OP. I've no idea how you can crack down on those who have the intent to do harm. Little old man with his bottle of bleach?

Obviously the clause 'intent to do harm' is the problem in this piece of nonsense and reactionary legislation.

One has to ponder on Brexit negotiations if this is the best this government can come up with.

It's going to work like current laws about knives and tools like screwdrivers surely? So a chef carrying a roll of knives to/from work is never going to be charged with carrying a knife. A builder with a screwdriver on a utility belt isn't going to be charged with going equipped for stealing. So a person carrying a cleaning product home from the shops in its original container will be extremely unlikely to be charged with this new crime. But carrying acid in a disguised container like a drinks bottle whilst generally hanging around, that's going to be dealt with.

Yes. Assassinated

I'm not deliberately picking on a female example- but the case of the school girl carrying a bottle of bleach to school in an instrument case. She had no reason to have it other than an intent to harm.

"Intent to do bodily harm" is an existing legal concept. Intent (mens rea) is a fundamental aspect of criminal law.

But how is mens rea enforceable in the buying and selling of acids?

Are the companies who sell acids complicit in the mens rea?

How can we be sure that the girl was carrying it with intent? She may well have had it put into her bag by a relative.