In the final sentence of my post below, I made mention of 'murderous yobs' which reminded me that one of the two particular 'murderous yobs' who slaughtered the young family-man and lawyer, Tom Ap Rhys, has had his sentence increased from the vomit-inducing 17 years to - wait for it and have your sick-bag handy - 20 years. That means he will be out when he's 37 and able to enjoy another, say, 35 years of living. The young thugs who infest our sub-culture must be quaking in their shoes!
Incidentally, virtually every week the media report an addition to the seemingly never-ending list of slaughtered innocents. Starting from Thursday I intend to keep a running tally. I thought I would start last week when two murders took place, a young girl and her unborn child, but Thursday is my birthday and it will help my doddering old memory to make the final tally in a year's time. Of course, my memorial to the innocent victims of the liberal society will not be statistically accurate because I don't follow current events too closely, but I will do my best.
Their inscription will read: They did die in vain!
You've got my support David.
.........but only if you ditch all this 'PC' rubbish about the noose being a meaningful deterent to murder and simply state that the sole reason for bringing it back would be for the purposes of societal revenge.
Posted by: The iLL Man | Tuesday, 15 May 2007 at 23:06
*Collective Societal Revenge. If such a thing exists. I could just have made that term up for all I know.......
Posted by: The iLL Man | Wednesday, 16 May 2007 at 01:34
The revenge imperative is sniffed at by liberals who have either, never experienced anything to raise it, or, lack the imagination and empathy required to visualise it in others. Gradually over the centuries we have passed our desire for revenge against those who hurt us to the state who have, in turn, and predictably, cheated on the deal.
Sorry, Illman, but I do think that deterrence works, in this, as in other areas of human activity. It doesn't work at 100% but when it comes to murder I am certain that it would reduce the rate considerably.
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 16 May 2007 at 17:27
Economists and the like have looked at the question of deterrence from time to time. They seem to reckon on about 10 murders averted per execution. On the other hand, I find most social statistics to be dubious, going on rubbish. Still, who's dead can't repeat the crime.
Posted by: dearieme | Wednesday, 16 May 2007 at 18:54
"Still, who's dead can't repeat the crime."
Can't argue with that!
Posted by: David Duff | Wednesday, 16 May 2007 at 20:41