This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Sentencing in Australia is a disgrace


Daisy you are right. Dare I suggest the dreaded words "Concentration Camps" where the predators could be segregated quite cheaply, and at the same time put to useful employment.
 


I don’t have the same hesitation; maybe I got used to life being snuffed out for no reason, that I quietly accept the need of terminal punishment too.

In Australia annual road fatality about 1000 a year, US about 25,000 a year.
Various accidents, recent bushfire took 208, maybe more.

There are numerous murders too, so for me few more few less doesn’t make that much difference.

I rather see them as liability, there is danger of wrongful death, but it would not be deliberate and taking into account that so many innocent lives are taken out for no other reason than being in a wrong place, I can live with that too.

I would rather spend $60,000 a year for the rest of life on free dental care / hospitals instead any day.

In recession it makes even more sense.

Maybe one day.


But Australia is not alone with lenient sentencing >


 
It's a crazy world. The other day we were talking about the dangers of releasing the Yorkshire ripper. The doctors say he will not re-offend providing he continues to take his schizophrenia medication.

And now we have the case of Cornelia Rau being arrested in Jordan for behaving erratically after failing to take her medication. The very rich Ms Rau has, of course, many supporters and advisers, and they are blaming the Australian authorities for failing to protect her. Ironically the only way to make Ms Rau take her medication would be to lock her up again, and that could lead to another compo claim.

NewsCom
 
It's a crazy world.

Another example >




Of course, miner could die in a road accident or mining accident, but he didn’t and died from hand of paranoid schizophrenic!
 
Jail is not the place for people who are mentally ill.

Once upon a time we had functional psychiatric institutions with secure wings where people whose violent behaviour made them unsafe to be at large were kept. Better for them and better for the community.

The whole experiment of 'treating mentally ill people within the community' has been a dismal failure.
 
It emerged later that 59-year-old Maguire, a paranoid schizophrenic, had been convicted of manslaughter in 1994 and served almost eight years in prison before being released in 2002.

I wish these people who are so clever and release these creeps actually were the ones who were effected
 

Agree Julia. Deinstitutionalisation was just a cynical cost cutting exercise. Apart from the criminally insane there are so many others with psychiatric illnesses who have suffered neglect from this policy. (small town... I see them every day...some are kind of local identities)

What I have always found puzzling is the definition of criminally insane. e.g. your everyday murdering raping psychopath is, in most cases, not considered so.
 
They aren't.

There are stories here of prisoners wanting to help other prisoners to learn how to read, but are disallowed from doing so. No wonder they end up back there.

They're not in jail to better themselves; they've had that chance in the outside world before they committed the crime. They're in there to serve the time they've been sentenced to. Why should the government be providing any services to prisoners. They should be locked in cells the entire time with a food slot and a window when it comes time to get out, they get out; that simple.

And there have been recent cases where prisoners are released without having the appropriate treatment (sex offenders) when they were having that treatment on the outside, which is a disgrace.

Sex offenders shouldn't be let out. They don't understand the word NO. Even a dog understands that simple command if you train it properly. Don't give me this crap about "they're insane, they didn't know what they were doing".

I believe all men have the capacity for rape; the difference is most know when to stop themselves or at least ask permission first.

Most of them have jobs inside.
Most of the jobs they do hardly pay for their crimes they committed is what the previous poster was getting at. They should be worked till they collapse then be at it again the next day. Today's sentences hardly fit the severity of their crimes.

Or you don't have a clue.
You must be one of those civil libetarian types. What if it was your child that was raped or your brother or sister murdered or a family member that was run down by a drunk idiot in a car? Sure you wouldn't think it was funny then.

Amazing how often people look at a crime and the resulting sentence and think, "pathetic, they should have gotten longer". What does that tell you? That the government, that used to be for the people is now hardly anything of the sort and the "do-gooders" that are trying to save the criminals from themselves should be taking more of a "rot in hell" type stance.

For the final year of their sentence I think they should maybe be moved to a reasonable type share accommodation like a parole system where they have to report in still but they live with some type of guardian (non-prisoner) to help get them work that they HAVE TO STAY AT and assist their reintegration into society and show them how to live a settled "human" life again; not that of the animal they used to be.

...and anyone has the capacity to become an animal. Back anyone into a corner and abuse them and they'll turn, be sure of it.

Christian
 
.

Sex offenders shouldn't be let out. They don't understand the word NO. Even a dog understands that simple command if you train it properly. Don't give me this crap about "they're insane, they didn't know what they were doing".

Christian

Agree.
My question about criminal insanity was in support of this statement not against it. If they are not redeemable/treatable then why let them out?
If you forget about punishing them and just work on protecting us from them...
Calliope's 'concentration camp' suggestion seems highly practical.

Thanks for that article Julia. It explained it very well.
 
Apart from the sentencing of sociopaths and psychopaths, which put all of us at risk, is the other question of sentencing people who do not fit into the above category.
What is this rubbish about a judge handing down, say a fifteen year sentence, and then in the next breath substantially reducing it?
And also the one that allows offenders to serve sentences concurrently?
How insulting is that to the victims of these offenders?
 
Hang murderers, Castrate violent sex offenders, multiple crimes multiple sentence (no concurrent sentences) throw away the key and forget all this bulldust about criminal rights. They couldn't respect the rights of others and accordingly thier rights are forfeit.
 


Looks like perfect start to slowly change this great country to safer place for all those who just want to live safely here.
 
No mention of what the victim had to say about all this.

SMH
 
Give crims the Singapore treatment and then see if they still think they can thumb their noses at the law.
Singapore is one of the safest countries with one of the lowest crime rates in the world.
No lenient treatment over there, no ifs buts or maybes.......you break the law, you get hit, and you get hit hard.
We should copy their model if we're serious about drastically reducing crime in Australia.
 


I wander if it is possible to apply Singapore punishment model in Australia?
 
I wander if it is possible to apply Singapore punishment model in Australia?

Why because we have people here that care more about animals than humans?

I think bunyip has hit the nail on the head, if you steal then a nice flogging, next time you steal again a finger goes (if your dumb enough to do it again) a hand goes etc..........

When you have zero tolerance towards punishment people learn quickly.
 
I wander if it is possible to apply Singapore punishment model in Australia?

Definitely not. Our jails are not big enough. In Singapore discipline starts in the home, so fewer kids grow up to be criminals.
 
Definitely not. Our jails are not big enough. In Singapore discipline starts in the home, so fewer kids grow up to be criminals.

I would happily pay more tax to build more jails and keep the streets clean, but it's not just that is it it's the Judiciary and the "system".
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...