« Indulging in Cowardice and Thuggery, Liberals Shoot Themselves in the Foot Over Nevada Debate | Main | The Great Global Warming Swindle Revealed »
March 10, 2007
Britain's Top Judge Regrets Murderers Having to Sit in Jail
Here's an easy question: What's next after abolishing the death penalty for murderers? The answer of course is letting them go free, which isn't happening quickly enough to suit Chief Justice Lord Phillips, England's most senior judge.
Lord Phillips thinks it's "regrettable" that murderers have to cool their heels in jail for so long. He would like to see greater use of community service. Mandatory life sentences most definitely do not meet with his approval; he regards even 30-year jail terms for murder as "utterly barbaric."
Presumably Lord Phillips would at least subject killers to a stern talking-to in addition to their community service.
Fortunately Home Secretary John Reid is less of a moonbat. According to a spokeswoman:
The Home Secretary believes murderers and other dangerous offenders should be kept in prison as long as is necessary to protect the public.
Reid also holds the radical view that it is "unduly lenient" that pedophile Craig Sweeney will be eligible for parole five years after being convicted of abducting and assaulting a three-year-old girl.
On a tip from Wiggins.
Posted by Van Helsing at March 10, 2007 10:49 AM
Comments
Also from the Nanny Caliphate of Britain, More Knife Confiscation Insanity.
Posted by: V the K at March 10, 2007 11:32 AM
Also from the Caliphate of Moonbatistan (formerly England), town loses governement jobs for being "too white" and "too British".
Posted by: V the K at March 10, 2007 11:34 AM
What is it they say there? "Twat."
Posted by: pip pip at March 10, 2007 1:32 PM
And in Britain, the incandescent bulb is about to be sacrificed on the altar of Gaia and Manbearpig. Sure, the madated fluorescent replacements have a few drawbacks:
The new CFLs are more expensive and require more energy to make. CFLs contain mercury so extra waste disposal rules may be required. Householders will no longer be able to throw old bulbs out in the rubbish. Consumers will also find that the new bulbs take longer to switch on, that their light is less warm and that they do not work with dimmer switches.
But hey, this means the Earth might be 0.0001 degree less warm in a century. A small price to pay for living like a lab rat.
Posted by: V the K at March 10, 2007 5:48 PM
okay - everybody, "ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..."
perhaps he should be allowed to bring them home with him to live out the rest of their miserable days?
Posted by: nanc at March 10, 2007 6:31 PM
Perhaps that judge would like to bring a few of them home with him? Perhaps they want to be friendly with his wife and daughter.
Posted by: Andre at March 10, 2007 9:07 PM
V the K, that's not merely us. It's the EU dictating it. Our parliament isn't allowed to make laws about lightbulbs because they fall under an area of law that has been snatched by the EU as an EU "competence".
It's ok, the EU will be dead by 2015 so we'll only have to stockpile a couple of years worth of incandescent bulbs. 100watt for preference.
Posted by: Archonix at March 11, 2007 5:25 AM
Archonix,
2015? Does it really have to last that long? One other thing - Are you allowed to use "competence" in same line or even the same discussion where the European Union is mentioned? If so, it sounds like they're getting cocky.
Posted by: tfhr at March 11, 2007 6:37 AM
That's what they call it. I'm sure they don't see the irony. :)
Posted by: Archonix at March 11, 2007 9:11 AM
Moonbats continue to turn the justice system on it's head. I argee with the judge that thinks life sentences for murderers is an injustice. They should be executed. The injustice being perpetrated is against the rest of society. Murderers have proven that they can't be trusted out in society with the rest of us. For us to pay to house them any longer than their trial and sentencing is an injustice against every honest, law abiding citizen.
Posted by: kevin at March 11, 2007 11:29 AM
