On the soap box.....Again.

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2
Thursday 16 December 2010 10.48pm
So, the asylum seeker who ran down and killed a twelve year-old girl and who was at the time disqualified from driving and carrying no insurance, has been given four months in prison.
Four whole months.
He escaped deportation because his lawyers successfully pleaded that to deport him would be a breach of his human rights. He apparently has two children of his own and it was deemed wrong to deprive those children of a father. Considering he also has convictions against his name for burglary, harrassment and drug taking, I think the further his kids are away from him the more chance of a future they will have.
Is it too late for somebody to grab the powers-that-be in this country by the scruff of the neck and shake some sense in to them? I fear it may well be.
Friday 17 December 2010 9.44am
Hold up a second there, Chalkey, if you would.

Is it relevant that this guy's an asylum seeker?

I'm guessing that he got the same punishment for his offence as anyone else would have done, so are you complaining about the tarif for the driving offences or are you saying that asylum seekers should be treated differently from non-asylumn seekers?

...if you press it, they will come.
Friday 17 December 2010 10.35am
Anyone who gets behind a wheel , under the influence or not, drives dangerously without any insurance or tax is the same in my mind as to someone going out with a loaded gun...it's murder when someone in control with a vehicles weighing umpteen pounds and is an effective killing machine in the wrong hands, gets behind a wheel...That poor little girl..her poor family.

I think Chalkey is expressing the frustration lots of people feel when reading about asylum seekers who exploit their right to be here by not realising good honest behaviour is the rent they pay to live freely in society. It's bad enough when you read about benefit fraudsters who steal 3 million pounds from this countrys coffers and dont have to pay any back or serve any sentence apart from derisory suspended sentences or community work...but to read about an innocent childs loss of life from some ****** in a car
makes any decent human beings blood boil.

I personally would deport him. His children may grow up here with their Mum and be better off without him.
and any anus hole who deliberately hurts, kills,maims with or without being behind a wheel should be banged up for a very long time..lets hope the two people who have been found guilty of murdering that poor gay guy by stamping on his head, kicking him whilst he was on the ground just because he remonstrated with them for the insults he and his friend were getting, get the key thrown away for 20 years at least.

ranting waffle over!
Friday 17 December 2010 11.18am
Hang on, though, Jan.

I think it's important to distinguish between your feelings about asylum seekers and your feelings about people being able to kill someone in a car and only get a 4 month sentence.

I wouldn't have thought that whether or not he was an asylum seeker was in any way relevant to the sentence he got in the driving case.

...if you press it, they will come.
Friday 17 December 2010 11.45am
Is it his sentence they are complaining about or the fact that we are unable to deport him following his sentence?
Friday 17 December 2010 1.05pm
My rant was double barrelled. Firstly, four months in prison for the life of that child and the everlasting grief of her family is rediculous. Secondly, as Jan says, if people come to this country and comit crime, then they should be sent back to wherever they came from. Good behaviour should be the pre requisite for anyone coming to this country to start a new life and that should be made clear. I find it hard to believe that the guy in question suddenly became a rotten egg the moment he entered this country. I would wager he had a bit of 'previous.' If so, what's he doing here in the first place?
I've made it clear on other threads my feelings about racism, so there was certainly none intended here. Sorry if, in my frustration, I didn't make it clear in this case.
Friday 17 December 2010 2.19pm
Realised halfway through the above that my daughter had a half day at shool today for end of term, so cut it short in order to collect her.
Got there late. Got a rollocking. Situation normal.
The relevence of mentioning that the guy in question was an asylum seeker was that it lead on to the reason why he hadn't been deported. The deportation thing was relevent becuase to my mind, and probably thousands of others, he should be deported. To have launched straight in to that without mentioning his status would not have made much sense. Believe me, if it had been an English guy behind the wheel of that car and the poor, innocent victim had been the daughter of an asylum seeker, I would have been equally digusted at that derisory sentence.
It seems to me that the phrase, 'Human rights' is only ever invoked in order to save low=lifes from paying their dues. I don't believe in 'an eye for an eye,' but I do believe that if you resort to serious crime, then you should forefeit the rights you had as a law abiding citizen. The law should fight fire with fire.
The human rights of the victim not to be mugged, burgled, assaulted or murdered in the first place, seems to count for nothing these days.
Friday 17 December 2010 6.56pm
I have no concerns really Ivanhoe about asylum seekers, it just seems so unfair as there seems to be no deterrant at all for any crimes committed by anybody..we don't want a return to the fifties where children accept a bar of chocolate from young friends just after rationing for sweets had stopped, not realising that a break in had occurred at a sweet factory at the Borough...then find ones self hauled before the magistrates accused of handling stolen goods! i.e. meet Jan the accused! or when a fifties Fagin persuaded two little boys to climb on rooves/roofs! to steal lead they get arrested at the age of 9....meet Jans little brother!

But if there is nothing to stop anyone committing crime because no punishment..then what?
Friday 17 December 2010 7.45pm
You're spot-on, Jan. No one wants to turn the clock back to the days of draconian punishments that didn't fit the crime but, as per usual, society cannot find the happy medium. If there are no adequate deterrents, then there is no respect for the law. If there is no respect for ther law, then certain people will have no fears about breaking it.
Bring back the birch? All I can say about that is that the birch was still in use in the Isle of Man until 1976, at which time that place had the lowest teenage crime rate in the British Isles. Within a short time of the abolition of corporal punishment on that island, the crime rate continued to soar until, at one point, it had the highest crime rate in the British Isles. Draw your own conclusions. My point is that the punishment should adequately fit the crime and act as a stern deterrent. Archaic it may have been, but it worked, where the metophoric 'slap on the wrist' doesn't. While hit-and-run drivers get sentences measured in months instead of years and child murderers get sentences measured in years instead of decades then these, and other horrific crimes, will continue.
I struggle to get my head around how someone convicted of fraud can spend ten years in prison, while a hit and run driver with a string of previous convictions for a variety of crimes who causes the death of a child, gets four months..... and then bleats about his 'human rights.' It's enough to make a Saint swear!
Friday 14 January 2011 8.46am
I agree with Chalkey. I think that the person who takes other person's life (especially if itís a child) should pay for this the highest price... What can this father give to his children?? Nothing good..
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

Proud to belong to

Independent Community News Network