Sentencing!!

[c***@yahoo.com]

A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/display.var.728842.0.dublin_case_nurse_jailed_for_two_years_for_car_smash_that_killed_four.php

[Old Fa*t]

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

What's her colour got to do with it?. Why is it PC gone mad?.
It's not political correctness it's a disgusting sentence handed from an
idiotic judge.

[Peter]

Post by Old Fa*t

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

What's her colour got to do with it?. Why is it PC gone mad?.
It's not political correctness it's a disgusting sentence handed from an
idiotic judge.

Is it disgusting in that she has been sent to jail so she is split from her
kids, or is it disgusting because you think it is not long enough?

IMO the sentence sounds about right.

[Michael Cargill]

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she did
kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

[Cynic]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 19:01:18 +0100, "Michael Cargill"

Post by Michael Cargill

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she did
kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

It will allow the self-righteous morons to say, "Serves her right!"
Whilst squealing like a stuck pig should they get heavily fined for
eating a Mars bar whilst driving or similar.

[Andrew McGee]

Post by Michael Cargill

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she
did kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

I second this - there is rarely any point in imprisoning people for
accidental harm.

[Old Fa*t]

Post by Michael Cargill

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she
did kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

It doesn't matter if it wasn't in malice, she killed them, through her own
selfishness and ignorance.
I'm sure the parents opinion differs. As does mine

[Michael Cargill]

Post by Old Fa*t

Post by Michael Cargill
So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she
did kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

It doesn't matter if it wasn't in malice, she killed them, through her own
selfishness and ignorance.

What 'selfishness' are you talking about here? And you haven't explained
what is to be gained by jailing her either - prison is supposed to be about
rehabilitation, not retribution or punishment.

Post by Old Fa*t
I'm sure the parents opinion differs. As does mine

And your point is what?

[milou]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 22:14:40 +0100, "Michael Cargill"

Post by Michael Cargill
What 'selfishness' are you talking about here? And you haven't explained
what is to be gained by jailing her either - prison is supposed to be about
rehabilitation, not retribution or punishment.

Rehabilitation. LOL.
There is no point jailing convicted terrorist then.
Do you really think that Abu Hamza and similar garbage will be
rehabilitated?
Are you Cherie Blair?

[JVB]

Post by milou
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 22:14:40 +0100, "Michael Cargill"

Post by Michael Cargill
What 'selfishness' are you talking about here? And you haven't explained
what is to be gained by jailing her either - prison is supposed to be about
rehabilitation, not retribution or punishment.

Rehabilitation. LOL.
There is no point jailing convicted terrorist then.
Do you really think that Abu Hamza and similar garbage will be
rehabilitated?
Are you Cherie Blair?

I noticed the germans maintain strong sentencing, last week one of blair's
friends in PIRA was jailed 16 years after trying to blow up the WO's & Sgt's
mess in Quebec Barracks Osnabruck. June 19th 1989)
Luckily I heard these so called freedom fighters beating up an old man Herr
Kettleman (Civilain) within the camp and managed to evacuate my friends from
the mess before one of six devices went off.

Also the BKA Bundeskriminalampt have no quams about disposing of terrorists,
like the Baader / Mienhof who topped themselves, Ulrika Marie Mienhof on
mothers day 1976 (reached the end of the wrong road apparently) and the
others on death night 1977, (saved the taxpayers a fortune)

So I have no problems with murders being dealt with severly, just that with
our liberal elite we cannot expect justice for the true victims of crime.

JVB

[Michael Cargill]

Post by milou
Rehabilitation. LOL.
There is no point jailing convicted terrorist then.
Do you really think that Abu Hamza and similar garbage will be
rehabilitated?

Right, so presumably you think we shouldn't ever let anyone out of jail
then...?

[milou]

On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 20:37:54 +0100, "Michael Cargill"

Post by Michael Cargill

Post by milou
Rehabilitation. LOL.
There is no point jailing convicted terrorist then.
Do you really think that Abu Hamza and similar garbage will be
rehabilitated?

Right, so presumably you think we shouldn't ever let anyone out of jail
then...?

That's not an answer to my question.

Kindly supply a list of rehabilitated prisoners.
Reborn christians/mormoms/whatever do not count.

[Cynic]

Post by milou

Post by Michael Cargill
Right, so presumably you think we shouldn't ever let anyone out of jail
then...?

That's not an answer to my question.
Kindly supply a list of rehabilitated prisoners.

I think it would be fair to regard any former prisoner who has not
reoffended within, say, 10 years as being rehabilitated. If you
agree, then such a list would make an unacceptably large post.

[Michael Cargill]

Post by milou
That's not an answer to my question.
Kindly supply a list of rehabilitated prisoners.

Erm, that list would quite obviously include just about all the
former-prisoners who haven't re-offended.

[Cynic]

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:31:16 GMT, "Old Fa*t"

Post by Old Fa*t
It doesn't matter if it wasn't in malice, she killed them, through her own
selfishness and ignorance.
I'm sure the parents opinion differs. As does mine

Selfishness? Taking other people's children out for a treat is
selfish?

Ignorance was not a crime last time I checked. If it were you might
not be at liberty to post your views.

[Scott]

Post by Old Fa*t

Post by Michael Cargill

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

So what is to be gained by her being jailed for a long time? Whilst she
did kill 3 children it wasn't in malice or with the intention to do so.

It doesn't matter if it wasn't in malice, she killed them, through her own
selfishness and ignorance.
I'm sure the parents opinion differs. As does mine

So if it was just her own child she killed you would still be in
favour of jailing her?

[Old Fa*t]

So if it was just her own child she killed you would still be in favour of
jailing her?

That did not happen so the argument is not really comparable within this
discussion. It stated that one of the underlying reasons that the accident
occurred was due to the amount of children within the car. I used to have
the same car as her, and I could barely get my dog in the boot comfortably,
let alone two teenage children.
However, to answer your question, yes I believe that had her own child died
why should she not be imprisoned. If it were in the same circumstances, she
neglected her duty of care so why shouldn't she be.

[Cynic]

On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 09:34:50 GMT, "Old Fa*t"

Post by Old Fa*t
That did not happen so the argument is not really comparable within this
discussion. It stated that one of the underlying reasons that the accident
occurred was due to the amount of children within the car. I used to have
the same car as her, and I could barely get my dog in the boot comfortably,
let alone two teenage children.

You travelled with an unrestrained dog in the boot? Wasn't that akin
to aiming a loaded rifle at a person's head and pulling the trigger?

[Old Fa*t]

Post by Cynic
On Wed, 12 Apr 2006 09:34:50 GMT, "Old Fa*t"

Post by Old Fa*t
That did not happen so the argument is not really comparable within this
discussion. It stated that one of the underlying reasons that the accident
occurred was due to the amount of children within the car. I used to have
the same car as her, and I could barely get my dog in the boot
comfortably,
let alone two teenage children.

You travelled with an unrestrained dog in the boot? Wasn't that akin
to aiming a loaded rifle at a person's head and pulling the trigger?

I don't see how he was unrestrained when we had a dog guard fitted by the
manufacturer.
Foolish response to an otherwise reasonable debate.

[Scott]

Post by Old Fa*t

So if it was just her own child she killed you would still be in favour of
jailing her?

That did not happen so the argument is not really comparable within this
discussion. It stated that one of the underlying reasons that the accident
occurred was due to the amount of children within the car. I used to have
the same car as her, and I could barely get my dog in the boot comfortably,
let alone two teenage children.
However, to answer your question, yes I believe that had her own child died
why should she not be imprisoned. If it were in the same circumstances, she
neglected her duty of care so why shouldn't she be.

And if no children had died or were injured, should she still be
jailed? Whether anyone was injured was just a matter of chance, had no
car been coming the other way, chances are no one would have been
injured. So unless you want to turn sentencing and justice into a
lottery I assume you will want to jail her for exactly the same period
of time.

If you believe it was due to the number of children in the car, do
you think she should have be jailed if she had been stopped the moment
she started the car engine?

[Old Fa*t]

And if no children had died or were injured, should she still be jailed?

No, of course not. She has taken those childrens lives forever, and should
be punished accordingly for it.
Had she not, she should be punished, but to a far lesser extent.

Whether anyone was injured was just a matter of chance,

As is life. You take your chances, and pay if they go wrong!

So unless you want to turn sentencing and justice into a lottery I assume
you will want to jail her for exactly the same period of time.

Sorry, your assumption was wrong. Punishment should fit the crime. Simple
as that

If you believe it was due to the number of children in the car, do you
think she should have be jailed if she had been stopped the moment she
started the car engine?

I didn't say I believed it was due to the number of children in the car.
That's what the original report stated, however having attended many RTC's
there are always major factors in causing an accident, and I would tend to
agree with the report. However, she might have just been a crap driver.

[Dr Zoidberg]

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

I didn't realise she was black , and I don't see that it had any part in
affecting the sentence.

Or perhaps you would have preferred a longer sentence because of her skin
colour.

[Cynic]

Post by c***@yahoo.com
A black women who's driving killed 3 children and an adult,gets only 2
years imprisonment.PC gone mad???

Oh, she was *black*. I hadn't realised. That makes all the
difference. She should have got 10 years at least for allowing her
son to fraternise with decent god-fearing white folk.