Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by radiopred)
    Murder is murder, as long as its intentional. At the end of the day that victims right to life has been removed. Murder shouldn't be classified in different forms, oh this type is not as bad as this. That person has taken another persons freedom away and they should all be punished equally. Next ull see people classifying rape, oh thats not as bad as the other. NO it is all the same.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape

    Aka 15 year old girlfriend having consensual sex with her 16 year old boy friend.

    So there are in fact different classes of rape as well.

    Love it when people who have no idea about the criminal law attempt to talk seriously about it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carecup)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape

    Aka 15 year old girlfriend having consensual sex with her 16 year old boy friend.

    So there are in fact different classes of rape as well.

    Love it when people who have no idea about the criminal law attempt to talk seriously about it.
    That is not rape, thats illegal sexual activity. Don't BS with me, and if you are bot, are you really that stupid. Rape is sex without consent, based on ur same principles if a women enjoyed it and got 'wet' but didnt give consent the rapist should be punished less that the woman who was screaming. The same action different forms of punishment for the same thing. That cannot be justified.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by radiopred)
    That is not rape, thats illegal sexual activity. Don't BS with me, and if you are bot, are you really that stupid. Rape is sex without consent, based on ur same principles if a women enjoyed it and got 'wet' but didnt give consent the rapist should be punished less that the woman who was screaming. The same action different forms of punishment for the same thing. That cannot be justified.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm truly honoured to be talking with a Court of Appeal/Supreme court judge on an internet forum, and to have witnessed the creation of a new legal concept known as "illegal sexual activity". Your reasoning is fascinating.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Callahan)
    I'm sorry, you're talking *******s. Someone murders, that's murder, pure and simple. The case of lack of premeditation you've given is completely ridiculous.

    And really, the 'life means life' policy wouldn't produce absurd results as it'd give sentencing more meaning and worth.

    How is letting someone get off on a murder charge common sense, because that's what you're suggesting?
    First off, this is hilarious/terrifying: http://www.castles99.ukprint.com/UKIP/Britishness.pdf

    And also, saying life is for life, that means that a nineteen year old who had a horribly abusive and unfortunate childhood, leading to psychological damage and rage issues who committed murder would then stay in jail indefinitely until he died, maybe as long as sixty years later, during which he could potentially reform, but even if (and we can't prove this but let's say it's true) he was truly reformed, he would never be allowed out of jail.

    That sounds idiotic to me. And let's remind ourselves once more that fear of the death penalty has done nothing to lower the murder rate in America. It's based on a childish view of punishment, how people behave and the legal system.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cellar Door)
    First off, this is hilarious/terrifying: http://www.castles99.ukprint.com/UKIP/Britishness.pdf

    And also, saying life is for life, that means that a nineteen year old who had a horribly abusive and unfortunate childhood, leading to psychological damage and rage issues who committed murder would then stay in jail indefinitely until he died, maybe as long as sixty years later, during which he could potentially reform, but even if (and we can't prove this but let's say it's true) he was truly reformed, he would never be allowed out of jail.

    That sounds idiotic to me. And let's remind ourselves once more that fear of the death penalty has done nothing to lower the murder rate in America. It's based on a childish view of punishment, how people behave and the legal system.
    Are u really that stupid, seriously lol. Hes not saying a life for a life. He is saying that anyone who murdered someone should be treated the same and not differentiate between them as they all removed someone elses right to life. Hes saying all murders for example should be in jail for 20 years not 1 for 5 or 1 for 50.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carecup)
    I'm truly honoured to be talking with a Court of Appeal/Supreme court judge on an internet forum, and to have witnessed the creation of a new legal concept known as "illegal sexual activity". Your reasoning is fascinating.
    Oh look at you. You bring in a different crime. Your argument was that for a same crime people should be punished differently. You lost so know your comparing different crimes, a completely different point. What are you, a BTEC student or something 1+1=2 not 3


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by radiopred)
    Are u really that stupid, seriously lol. Hes not saying a life for a life. He is saying that anyone who murdered someone should be treated the same and not differentiate between them as they all removed someone elses right to life. Hes saying all murders for example should be in jail for 20 years not 1 for 5 or 1 for 50.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well if that's true I apologise, the way the policy is phrased it makes it sound like a life sentence should be for life, which maybe comes up as bad for whoever wrote the policy as for me
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cellar Door)
    First off, this is hilarious/terrifying: http://www.castles99.ukprint.com/UKIP/Britishness.pdf

    And also, saying life is for life, that means that a nineteen year old who had a horribly abusive and unfortunate childhood, leading to psychological damage and rage issues who committed murder would then stay in jail indefinitely until he died, maybe as long as sixty years later, during which he could potentially reform, but even if (and we can't prove this but let's say it's true) he was truly reformed, he would never be allowed out of jail.

    That sounds idiotic to me. And let's remind ourselves once more that fear of the death penalty has done nothing to lower the murder rate in America. It's based on a childish view of punishment, how people behave and the legal system.
    Wow your a law student as well, well its at keele anyway.

    Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person's consent.

    Two rapists should be punished the same. Ur saying that a rapist should be punished differently than statutory rape, thats right, because its a completely different crime.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cellar Door)
    Well if that's true I apologise, the way the policy is phrased it makes it sound like a life sentence should be for life, which maybe comes up as bad for whoever wrote the policy as for me
    All cool, ik i over reacted im just tired, all these long paragraphs, i still dont understand which one im arguing with is the ukip supporter


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carecup)
    I'm truly honoured to be talking with a Court of Appeal/Supreme court judge on an internet forum.
    I have a nice anecdote on this point to lighten the mood.

    So, I'm at a lecture and we break for drinks afterwards. This was in late Feb/early March last year. A man walks up to me and says "Hi, I'm Rob Reed - did you enjoy the lecture?" After some chat, he tells me he is a Judge. It isn't too uncommon to meet one of them at an Inn of Court. "Oh, where do you sit?" I ask, casually.

    "Err... the Supreme Court" came his reply.

    And that was the day I met Lord Reed.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    UKIP can say what it knows we want to hear and dress it up, knowing they won't have to back up all that talk, if you really believe this party would be any good running us you're mistaken.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by otester)
    Asking this in a socialist dominated forum is probably not going to get you the answer you want
    Funny, that. I never see any threads exclaiming that we should all vote for the Socialist Workers Party!

    (Original post by The Islander)
    Norway - A country with a GDP higher per capita than the UK. Who have one of the strongest economies in Europe relative to their population, that has a higher standard of living and human development than the UK. Same story with Switzerland.
    More socially democratic policies help in that regard (especially in the case of the former).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    :dontknow: ..perhaps because they disagree with their policies?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Some real tits on this thread who think because they're students they know how a country should be run. That's the problem we have now - we're being run by a bunch of college kids who have never had real jobs and don't know how the real world works.

    UKIP actually have candidates who have/have had real jobs and know what the hell they're doing, unlike Milibland, Cameron, Clegg.

    The two major parties essentially have the same spineless policies and the same spineless politicians carrying them out. Nothing will change for the better in this country while those two are fighting for power.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Callahan)
    Not half as stupid as staying in.
    In October alone the UK exported about £15 billion to the EU - they're one of our biggest trading partners. Hundreds of thousands of jobs, if not millions, rely on the absence of tariffs within the Economic Area. To quote just one example, the Toyota factory in Derbyshire produces cars for the whole EU; it's had £2 billion invested in it and it supports about 3000 jobs.

    Airlines like Ryanair, which is headquartered in Ireland and benefits from the European open skies policy, has 11 bases in the UK. If we weren't in the EU they couldn't base aircraft here. Thousands of people would lose their jobs, airports would suffer hugely and thanks to reduced competition airfares would go up for everybody.

    If you ever wanted to go and live somewhere else in Europe (for example if you worked for one of the many large British companies which also have operations overseas), you can do it no problem. Although migrants can come to the UK, you can also move overseas with great ease compared to the past.

    The UK may have to contribute quite a lot to the EU budget, but we do also get a lot back, like farming subsidies, funding for regeneration of urban areas, cultural programmes, academic assistance (ERASMUS), etc, etc.

    That's just the reasons why the EU is good for us I could think up off the top of my head. The majority of the reasons for leaving I've heard are just ill-informed misconceptions about foreigners and the Human Rights Act. There's a reason why every government for the past 30-or so years has shied away from a referendum; the EU is good for the UK and to leave it would be complete madness.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paulmch)
    In October alone the UK exported about £15 billion to the EU - they're one of our biggest trading partners. Hundreds of thousands of jobs, if not millions, rely on the absence of tariffs within the Economic Area. To quote just one example, the Toyota factory in Derbyshire produces cars for the whole EU; it's had £2 billion invested in it and it supports about 3000 jobs.

    Airlines like Ryanair, which is headquartered in Ireland and benefits from the European open skies policy, has 11 bases in the UK. If we weren't in the EU they couldn't base aircraft here. Thousands of people would lose their jobs, airports would suffer hugely and thanks to reduced competition airfares would go up for everybody.

    If you ever wanted to go and live somewhere else in Europe (for example if you worked for one of the many large British companies which also have operations overseas), you can do it no problem. Although migrants can come to the UK, you can also move overseas with great ease compared to the past.

    The UK may have to contribute quite a lot to the EU budget, but we do also get a lot back, like farming subsidies, funding for regeneration of urban areas, cultural programmes, academic assistance (ERASMUS), etc, etc.

    That's just the reasons why the EU is good for us I could think up off the top of my head. The majority of the reasons for leaving I've heard are just ill-informed misconceptions about foreigners and the Human Rights Act. There's a reason why every government for the past 30-or so years has shied away from a referendum; the EU is good for the UK and to leave it would be complete madness.
    They've shied away from a referendum because they know what the outcome would be - a comprehensive yes to leaving.

    These companies would still trade with us regardless of EU membership. Switzerland isn't in the EU yet she copes fine. The difference is, she's in the EFTA which allows free trade - which is what the EU should consist of - rather than complete sacrifice of a country's pride, sovereignty, and laws.

    UKIP supports free trade and harmony within Europe, but not the complete dictatorship - led by unelected bureaucrats - that we have now. It doesn't support the complete free movement of peoples across nation borders.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Templar49)
    To answer the thread title, this is why.



    I thought they were libertarian?



    Lololol. Dem Eurocrats, eh?



    Hopefully I don't have to explain why this is stupid.



    This is pretty much begging for rife corruption.



    And we're desperately in need of a larger military, of course. Again, libertarians are supposed to hate big spending, right?

    You're forgetting the most Libertarian policy of them all: banning the burkha. Not to mention the incredibly stringent immigration policy they advocate; why haven't people cottoned onto their Libertarianism?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry Callahan)
    They've shied away from a referendum because they know what the outcome would be - a comprehensive yes to leaving.

    These companies would still trade with us regardless of EU membership. Switzerland isn't in the EU yet she copes fine. The difference is, she's in the EFTA which allows free trade - which is what the EU should consist of - rather than complete sacrifice of a country's pride, sovereignty, and laws.

    UKIP supports free trade and harmony within Europe, but not the complete dictatorship - led by unelected bureaucrats - that we have now. It doesn't support the complete free movement of peoples across nation borders.
    You are aware that EFTA countries are subject to EU legislation, right?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    They do.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Harry Callahan;40800307]If you consider that horrific, I do wonder about your priorities.


    Wonderful, the biggest crisis of our generation that needs to be acted on immediately if our ancestors are to have any chance of a good quality of life, and you would prioritise military spending and exiting the (on the whole, beneficial IMO) EU.

    I, sir, do wonder at your priorities.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.