[karajorma]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14553330

MPs and justice campaigners say some of the sentences given to those involved in the riots in England are too harsh.

On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots and another was given 18 months for having a stolen TV in his car.

The former chair of the Criminal Bar Association, Paul Mendelle QC, said sentences were too long and harsh.

You know what? **** 'em. If you were dumb enough to go out and riot thinking you'd get the same slap on the hands you'd have gotten any other night you deserve the extra time in jail. Anyone with half a brain knew that the penalties for crimes committed during the riots would be harsher.

[Unknown Target]

Well I guess the societal question this might bring up are these punishments "fair"?

Having not been anywhere near the country where this stuff happened, I really don't feel like I could have a well informed opinion either way.

I just bring it up because with all the other somewhat draconian proposals floating about in the wake of said riots, I think the fairness of punishments meted should indeed be called into question.

Also, it brings up the question of rehabilitation vs. punishment.

Would a better sentence be community service, to force people to help rebuild the neighborhoods they destroyed? Or is the best thing to make an example of them, to show how little such destructive behavior will be tolerated or forgiven?

[zookeeper]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14553330

MPs and justice campaigners say some of the sentences given to those involved in the riots in England are too harsh.

On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots and another was given 18 months for having a stolen TV in his car.

The former chair of the Criminal Bar Association, Paul Mendelle QC, said sentences were too long and harsh.

You know what? **** 'em. If you were dumb enough to go out and riot thinking you'd get the same slap on the hands you'd have gotten any other night you deserve the extra time in jail. Anyone with half a brain knew that the penalties for crimes committed during the riots would be harsher.

What kind of sense does that comment make? The point is exactly that they got four years even though they didn't go out and riot.

Cheshire men Jordan Blackshaw, 21, of Marston, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, of Warrington, were jailed for four years each after admitting using Facebook to incite disorder, although none actually resulted.

[Dilmah G]

Bloody good, they should throw the damn book at them. And as for the two FBers, they should've known better. It isn't a joke when there are actual suburbs in your country that are being torn apart.

[JCDNWarrior]

It's a shame, first they let themselves be led in a useless riot destroying many small businesses (instead of say, parliament as they're much more responsible for society as it is than some small shop or a boutique) and then they get to sit on their burned behinds with more strict rules, more and more police powers and suppression, and generally a lot less freedom. The only 'winners' here are those that benefit from more police power and those that looted the most and sold all the stolen stuff off (and ideally immediately move to another country like Switzerland but I don't know how smart the top looters were). If only these kids were more educated and could vent their anger at the real problem (much rather non-violently of course).

[karajorma]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14553330

MPs and justice campaigners say some of the sentences given to those involved in the riots in England are too harsh.

On Tuesday two men were jailed for four years for using Facebook to incite riots and another was given 18 months for having a stolen TV in his car.

The former chair of the Criminal Bar Association, Paul Mendelle QC, said sentences were too long and harsh.

You know what? **** 'em. If you were dumb enough to go out and riot thinking you'd get the same slap on the hands you'd have gotten any other night you deserve the extra time in jail. Anyone with half a brain knew that the penalties for crimes committed during the riots would be harsher.

What kind of sense does that comment make? The point is exactly that they got four years even though they didn't go out and riot.

I was referring to everyone the entire article mentioned not just those two guys.

But for those two guys, they incited to riot. You are aware that the penalties for that can be just as stiff as if you actually went out and joined in on a riot, right?

[Nuke]

if your gonna loot dont get caught.

[Flipside]

The ironic part is that it seems an awful lot of the people who thought they were going to get off lightly (and were stupid enough to post pictures of themselves holding what they had stolen) had felt that way not because of experience of the Police, but because that's what they'd heard on the Media over and over again.

[JCDNWarrior]

Isn't that the definition of propaganda, to propagate, expand, a certain viewpoint? Showing kids it's all fine to loot and steal (then again pop culture has been pushing similar imageries the past decades) is irresponsible at best.

[NGTM-1R]

But for those two guys, they incited to riot. You are aware that the penalties for that can be just as stiff as if you actually went out and joined in on a riot, right?

Inciting convictions for full penalty when nothing actually happened is morally problematic at best.

[Black Wolf]

Repost from SG regarding the 2 facebook blokes. They're unquestionably idiots, and deserve some punishment, but incitement to riot should be handled carefully, especially in nations who walk the tightrope of free speech (Australia, England etc. - protected, but not to the crazy extremes of the US).

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2844792.html


4 years is excessive. Punishment should be for the crime. Circumstances notwithstanding, using it to scare people this way.

[headdie]

Repost from SG regarding the 2 facebook blokes. They're unquestionably idiots, and deserve some punishment, but incitement to riot should be handled carefully, especially in nations who walk the tightrope of free speech (Australia, England etc. - protected, but not to the crazy extremes of the US).

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2844792.html


4 years is excessive. Punishment should be for the crime. Circumstances notwithstanding, using it to scare people this way.

If it was just a typical case of incitement I would agree but the level of looting and mindless destruction involved, not to mention the number of innocent people assaulted in varying ways means that examples should be set in their cased, exceptional circumstances require consequences measured against the situation.

[MP-Ryan]

While I must admit that some of the sentences I've read about do seem a little over-zealous, I also temper that sentiment with the fact that the UK judicial system has been notoriously lenient on some types of offences in the past couple decades and these riots are in a small part the culmination of that.  A demographic, marginalized and widely accepting petty crime as a lifestyle, has learned over 20 or so years that the judicial system is inclined to do very little about their actions.  They expanded this to a belief about policing, and were partially vindicated by the sheer amount of time it took for the authorities to get a grip on the issue.  Now they have the audacity to whine about the judicial system actually taking their crimes seriously?

Then again, I was a proponent of invoking the old riot act and calling the military out to the street corners at night to deal with the rioting, so perhaps I lean a little toward the punishment/deterrence side of the justice scale anyway.

[zookeeper]

While I must admit that some of the sentences I've read about do seem a little over-zealous, I also temper that sentiment with the fact that the UK judicial system has been notoriously lenient on some types of offences in the past couple decades and these riots are in a small part the culmination of that.  A demographic, marginalized and widely accepting petty crime as a lifestyle, has learned over 20 or so years that the judicial system is inclined to do very little about their actions.  They expanded this to a belief about policing, and were partially vindicated by the sheer amount of time it took for the authorities to get a grip on the issue.  Now they have the audacity to whine about the judicial system actually taking their crimes seriously?

Well, the article is expressly about months-long sentences (plus the 4 years from incitement) from completely minor offenses, like stealing at most a couple of pounds worth of ice cream or water. I don't see a problem with long sentences from actually causing major damage or danger (like, you know, by setting buildings on fire or assaulting someone), but for offenses like the aforementioned it's pretty stupid.

Looks like one person mentioned in the article appealed the original 5-month sentence for accepting a pair of stolen shorts and got it turned into 75 hours of work of some kind. Now that's a lot more reasonable, as I'm sure everyone would agree.

[JCDNWarrior]

Something else that's interesting is the report of people that have been caught that may have been provocateurs (my words), wouldnt be surprising as it always seems to happen with G20 protests too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2027973/More-150-people-caught-rioting-swept-UK-foreign-nationals-deported.html

Could be a interesting angle to the story.

[karajorma]

I'd advise you that the Daily Mail fails at even being fit to wipe your arse with. Their favourite hobby horse to ride is blaming everything on immigrants. I'm not surprised that you'd get a lot more people who are foreign nationals involved in the riots, I doubt that means that they had anything to do with provoking it.

[Bobboau]

the crazy extremes of the US

[karajorma]

But for those two guys, they incited to riot. You are aware that the penalties for that can be just as stiff as if you actually went out and joined in on a riot, right?

Inciting convictions for full penalty when nothing actually happened is morally problematic at best.

Ummm, one of the guys actually turned up to riot. The only reason there was no riot is cause no one else did.

[Veers]

Erg, sitting here in Australia just makes me uneasy. Cause any situation can turn volitile like that anywhere.

But from where I'm sitting,

Community Service,
Gaol (jail) time,

It all depends, the looters/rioters/destroyers. Should be cleaning up and rebuilding, fines, maybe time in jail or such
The 'masterminds'/ organisers should be slapped around a bit, make them help the same way, but still.. slap them around for organising and causing the destruction.

In all honesty... I hate people. 

[JCDNWarrior]

I'd advise you that the Daily Mail fails at even being fit to wipe your arse with. Their favourite hobby horse to ride is blaming everything on immigrants. I'm not surprised that you'd get a lot more people who are foreign nationals involved in the riots, I doubt that means that they had anything to do with provoking it.

Actually, I don't mean foreigners such as immigrants from Africa or Eastern Europe, but provocateurs that influence legitimate anger of the local population into a harmful riot that will only make the situation worse, or, like G20, cause legitimate non-violent protests to be discredited so that military police can have their way with beating unarmed peaceful protesters up. This case is a little different in that the response comes later in the form of more police state measures.

One thing I also found interesting is that they were -shocked- that the CCTV did nothing to curb crime, it's only meant to survey the population and have more proof to arrest criminals (of course real criminals will always find a way around it but that's a whole different discussion).

Anyhow, it's all theory for now.