FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Criminal age

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

So there’s a discussion on Radio 4 at the moment, about raising the criminal age to 14. We think it’s wrong, the Bulger killers were 10.

Discuss.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *moothdickMan
over a year ago

stoke

Bring back capital punishment, regardless of age

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Complicated subject, will probably cause some debate so I will make only two points and be done. Please feel free to research as these are not my opinions, rather fact.

1. In humans the prefrontal cortex does not fully develop until around 25 so a persons decision making skills are clouded by a lack of impulse control until then.

2. In every country in all points of history, where capital punishment is or has been used. It as done so not only to punish the most wicked but also simply to get rid of opposition to the powers that be. Also known as political prisoners.

Take this information as you please, as humans with fully developed prefrontal cortexes. But cast yourselves back to your youth and think about all the times you fucked up. Then consider how our culture would be improved by putting children in prison.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andKBCouple
over a year ago

Plymouth


"Complicated subject, will probably cause some debate so I will make only two points and be done. Please feel free to research as these are not my opinions, rather fact.

1. In humans the prefrontal cortex does not fully develop until around 25 so a persons decision making skills are clouded by a lack of impulse control until then.

2. In every country in all points of history, where capital punishment is or has been used. It as done so not only to punish the most wicked but also simply to get rid of opposition to the powers that be. Also known as political prisoners.

Take this information as you please, as humans with fully developed prefrontal cortexes. But cast yourselves back to your youth and think about all the times you fucked up. Then consider how our culture would be improved by putting children in prison. "

I also think and please dont think I'm condoning anything!! That sometimes children grow up in an environment which leads to this behaviour!!

I grew up in a domestic violence household. I did some rebellious things in my teens and I've seen people like me down a bad a path!! Fortunately for me I was too head strong but not everyone is.

When children start acting out and doing things which are potentially illegal maybe we need to check out their situation! They could be crying out for someone to listen to them!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unkym34Man
over a year ago

London

I think the world has changed very much and although we say a child does not fully understand the consequences of their actions many children are much more aware of these than they where 20 years or so ago so it would be hard for me to agree to the age at which some one can be committed of a crime to be Increased. However we should look more at what drives a child to commit crimes at which shock us ( I’m not talking about Nicking apples or smashing a window ) adults are with out a doupt the people that drive these children to commit what we consider crimes whether that be through bad or lack or parenting having children that are just not wanted, abuse, or just simply praying on them for financial gain. I personally would no longer allow anyone under the age of 22 to have children I would also impose a 2 child rule ( with the exception of applying for a 3rd ) and I would impose mush harsher punishments on acts of criminality against children / or using children I would also impose much harsher punishminets for those who neglect children. I feel you would see a turn around then may take a couple of years but things would change for the better. I would also not allow anyone on benifits who says they can not feed the children to own pets. If you can’t feed or care for a child how can you feed or care for a pet.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unkym34Man
over a year ago

London


"Complicated subject, will probably cause some debate so I will make only two points and be done. Please feel free to research as these are not my opinions, rather fact.

1. In humans the prefrontal cortex does not fully develop until around 25 so a persons decision making skills are clouded by a lack of impulse control until then.

2. In every country in all points of history, where capital punishment is or has been used. It as done so not only to punish the most wicked but also simply to get rid of opposition to the powers that be. Also known as political prisoners.

Take this information as you please, as humans with fully developed prefrontal cortexes. But cast yourselves back to your youth and think about all the times you fucked up. Then consider how our culture would be improved by putting children in prison.

I also think and please dont think I'm condoning anything!! That sometimes children grow up in an environment which leads to this behaviour!!

I grew up in a domestic violence household. I did some rebellious things in my teens and I've seen people like me down a bad a path!! Fortunately for me I was too head strong but not everyone is.

When children start acting out and doing things which are potentially illegal maybe we need to check out their situation! They could be crying out for someone to listen to them!! "
I one hundred percent agree with this to. The route cause needs to be dealt with not always what the manifestation of the cause is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Age of criminal responsibility is not the age at which you should be treated like an adult, but the age that we believe people generally understand their conduct, generally understand the concept of consequences, etc.

And honestly, it's not a question of opinion - the decision should be made by child psychologists, based on a broad understanding of the facts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"1. In humans the prefrontal cortex does not fully develop until around 25 so a persons decision making skills are clouded by a lack of impulse control until then."

Interestingly this is why I tend to believe that age of majority should be raised to 25 (though conversely, lots of rights - like the right to vote - should be lowered to the age of criminal responsibility )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *pursChick aka ShortieWoman
over a year ago

On a mooch

The criminal responsibility age is currently 16, however anyone 12 and over can be considered as committing a crime just not possibly the consequences of the crime

Personally I think it should stay at 12. Children are way more advanced in the ways of the world these days than when we were that age

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Age of criminal responsibility is not the age at which you should be treated like an adult, but the age that we believe people generally understand their conduct, generally understand the concept of consequences, etc.

And honestly, it's not a question of opinion - the decision should be made by child psychologists, based on a broad understanding of the facts."

Between the age if 10 and 14 the prosecution are required to show the child did understand. Once the magic number of 10 is reached, doesn't automatically open the floodgates.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The criminal responsibility age is currently 16, however anyone 12 and over can be considered as committing a crime just not possibly the consequences of the crime "

It's definitely 10 (in England and Wales, at least - in Scotland it's messier).

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

The UK has too low an age for criminal responsibility. It's much lower than many countries and is unfair, going against the evidence that we have about child development.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *m3232Man
over a year ago

maidenhead

Crime is crime there should be no age rule.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adMerWoman
over a year ago

Sandwich

Maybe if parents were held accountable for their children’s actions then there would be less bad behaviour?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ty31Man
over a year ago

NW London


"The UK has too low an age for criminal responsibility. It's much lower than many countries and is unfair, going against the evidence that we have about child development. "

I disagree. I think 10 is a very reasonable age to be considered capable of guilt (for very serious crimes). By that age a child is capable of knowing right from wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"The UK has too low an age for criminal responsibility. It's much lower than many countries and is unfair, going against the evidence that we have about child development.

I disagree. I think 10 is a very reasonable age to be considered capable of guilt (for very serious crimes). By that age a child is capable of knowing right from wrong."

Exactly what we feel. That’s why I mentioned the bulged killers. No matter what upbringing you’ve had, you know you’re doing wrong in a situation like that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago

Bristol East


"The criminal responsibility age is currently 16, however anyone 12 and over can be considered as committing a crime just not possibly the consequences of the crime

It's definitely 10 (in England and Wales, at least - in Scotland it's messier)."

Not messier at all.

The Children's Panel system for U-16s is in stark contrast to the vengeance of the English system, e.g. trying two 10-year-olds in an adult system.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ex HolesMan
over a year ago

Up North

What’s Radio 4?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Not messier at all.

The Children's Panel system for U-16s is in stark contrast to the vengeance of the English system, e.g. trying two 10-year-olds in an adult system."

Messier as in not as simple, not as in worse. There's no clear analogue.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hav02Man
over a year ago

Glasgow/London


"Maybe if parents were held accountable for their children’s actions then there would be less bad behaviour? "

Just what i was thinking. Crime starts from home.

Parents serve time while the kids are put into rehabilitation-type care?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just what i was thinking. Crime starts from home."

This is arse. You can be perfectly good parents and your child can still commit a crime. Lots of other influences, and of course personal agency.

Punishing someone for someone else's crime, where there's no evidence of abuse or neglect, is barbaric.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By * and R cple4Couple
over a year ago

swansea


"Just what i was thinking. Crime starts from home.

This is arse. You can be perfectly good parents and your child can still commit a crime. Lots of other influences, and of course personal agency.

Punishing someone for someone else's crime, where there's no evidence of abuse or neglect, is barbaric."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adMerWoman
over a year ago

Sandwich


"Just what i was thinking. Crime starts from home.

This is arse. You can be perfectly good parents and your child can still commit a crime. Lots of other influences, and of course personal agency.

Punishing someone for someone else's crime, where there's no evidence of abuse or neglect, is barbaric."

So most child criminals have a perfectly stable home environment do they?

I think not!!

Plus I didn’t mention whether or not there was any evidence of abuse or neglect, but in the case used as an example there was plenty of abuse and neglect to both children.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So most child criminals have a perfectly stable home environment do they?"

Not what I said, but actually many do. Lots of children who get involved in, e.g. county lines drug running, come from backgrounds that are pretty average, with good parents that love them and do everything we'd expect of a good parent.

Unless parents lock them in the house until they're 18 (note: this is abuse, don't do this) the reality is that you can be a perfectly good parent and your child could still land up committing sometimes very serious crimes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Raise it to the level of other countries with evidence based justification, probably 14 to 16.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If offenders don't fear punishment there is no deterrent; the simple reality is that if young people of any age are not punished for their misdemeanours they will repeat the offence as long as they can get away with it. This will also influence siblings.

Back in the 80s there was a well reported case of a young boy who embarked on a spree of burglary and vandalism and Social services took the option to try to 'cure' him with kindness; presents, holidays etc. he continued to offend as that was what got him the treats. His younger sister, who didn't get such luxuries due to their mother not having much money decided to copy her brother so that she could be rewarded.

Another failed social experiment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackinabox19Man
over a year ago

Harrogate

I also think it’s about educating the parents in many cases it’s a vicious life circle especially when crimes are committed by such young people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So most child criminals have a perfectly stable home environment do they?

Not what I said, but actually many do. Lots of children who get involved in, e.g. county lines drug running, come from backgrounds that are pretty average, with good parents that love them and do everything we'd expect of a good parent.

Unless parents lock them in the house until they're 18 (note: this is abuse, don't do this) the reality is that you can be a perfectly good parent and your child could still land up committing sometimes very serious crimes."

There is still an adult somewhere co ercing them into that behaviour though. They rarely get there by themselves?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alking HeadMan
over a year ago

Bolton

What happens to the perfectly law abiding siblings of the little shit that is responsible for his parents going to prison?

I had three brothers, one with a criminal record and a drug habit. Apparently he was "a nice lad, just easily led " thats according to my mother. I know he was a cunt who lied through his teeth to her.

He knew what was right and wrong from the same age we did, some people just dont care, until they get caught, then their ability to decide has suddenly dissapeared!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Back in the 80s there was a well reported case of a young boy who embarked on a spree of burglary and vandalism and Social services took the option to try to 'cure' him with kindness; presents, holidays etc. he continued to offend as that was what got him the treats. His younger sister, who didn't get such luxuries due to their mother not having much money decided to copy her brother so that she could be rewarded.

Another failed social experiment

"

What was this case? Generally social services don't have the money to shower gifts on children in their care, so I'm highly suspicious of this. In the 80s these services had even less money.

If it was well reported then a name or something would mean I can find those reports, most old articles from major newspapers have been archived.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"So there’s a discussion on Radio 4 at the moment, about raising the criminal age to 14. We think it’s wrong, the Bulger killers were 10.

Discuss."

you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"Crime is crime there should be no age rule. "

fool.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?"

The real question is whether you value your own opinion over the opinions of people who have spent a good portion of their lives trying to answer that question.

If a board of child psychologists say that, on balance, the age of criminal responsibility should be 14 instead of 10, should we resist that?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?

The real question is whether you value your own opinion over the opinions of people who have spent a good portion of their lives trying to answer that question.

If a board of child psychologists say that, on balance, the age of criminal responsibility should be 14 instead of 10, should we resist that?"

specialists their field's you mean? at 10 was you capable of taking a life? understand the gravity of it? fully understood the consequences, the people whod it affect? a 10yr old is a child, regardless of what ANY so called specialist might want to tell me.

those calling for the death penalty for the 2 children (bulger case) are vile human beings and those who attacked the police van are no better than a nonce in my opinion and yes iv told said people to their faces who was there that day. it was a tragedy all round

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?

The real question is whether you value your own opinion over the opinions of people who have spent a good portion of their lives trying to answer that question.

If a board of child psychologists say that, on balance, the age of criminal responsibility should be 14 instead of 10, should we resist that?

specialists their field's you mean? at 10 was you capable of taking a life? understand the gravity of it? fully understood the consequences, the people whod it affect? a 10yr old is a child, regardless of what ANY so called specialist might want to tell me.

those calling for the death penalty for the 2 children (bulger case) are vile human beings and those who attacked the police van are no better than a nonce in my opinion and yes iv told said people to their faces who was there that day. it was a tragedy all round "

Thai is why experts are the preferred choice to be able to decide upon appropriate limits for such responsibility, based on broad and deep levels of evidence. Rarely is anecdotal data significant, where decisions are taken that should reflect close to the reality of millions of people.

In this instance, Clinical Psychologists with esteemed expertise in child and human development, amongst their broader skills, are the appropriate experts to shape policy and law.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?

The real question is whether you value your own opinion over the opinions of people who have spent a good portion of their lives trying to answer that question.

If a board of child psychologists say that, on balance, the age of criminal responsibility should be 14 instead of 10, should we resist that?

specialists their field's you mean? at 10 was you capable of taking a life? understand the gravity of it? fully understood the consequences, the people whod it affect? a 10yr old is a child, regardless of what ANY so called specialist might want to tell me.

those calling for the death penalty for the 2 children (bulger case) are vile human beings and those who attacked the police van are no better than a nonce in my opinion and yes iv told said people to their faces who was there that day. it was a tragedy all round

Thai is why experts are the preferred choice to be able to decide upon appropriate limits for such responsibility, based on broad and deep levels of evidence. Rarely is anecdotal data significant, where decisions are taken that should reflect close to the reality of millions of people.

In this instance, Clinical Psychologists with esteemed expertise in child and human development, amongst their broader skills, are the appropriate experts to shape policy and law. "

so you agree they shouldv been put too trials as 'adults'?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"so you agree they shouldv been put too trials as 'adults'?"

The OP was talking about the recommendation to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14 (from 10). This would have placed the defendants in the Bulger case below that age.

I don't feel qualified to pass judgement on the rights and wrongs of the Bulger case.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ady LickWoman
over a year ago

Northampton Somewhere

My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one."

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though. "

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"so you agree they shouldv been put too trials as 'adults'?

The OP was talking about the recommendation to raise the age of criminal responsibility to 14 (from 10). This would have placed the defendants in the Bulger case below that age.

I don't feel qualified to pass judgement on the rights and wrongs of the Bulger case."

its called having an opinion. i used that particular case as a reference

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly "

I'm sure that's not the case.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago

Hillside desolate


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly

I'm sure that's not the case. "

I think they were tried in an adult court as they were over 10.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central


"you think a 10yr old should be responsible and more importantly to be mentally capable of understanding what it means to take a life?

The real question is whether you value your own opinion over the opinions of people who have spent a good portion of their lives trying to answer that question.

If a board of child psychologists say that, on balance, the age of criminal responsibility should be 14 instead of 10, should we resist that?

specialists their field's you mean? at 10 was you capable of taking a life? understand the gravity of it? fully understood the consequences, the people whod it affect? a 10yr old is a child, regardless of what ANY so called specialist might want to tell me.

those calling for the death penalty for the 2 children (bulger case) are vile human beings and those who attacked the police van are no better than a nonce in my opinion and yes iv told said people to their faces who was there that day. it was a tragedy all round

Thai is why experts are the preferred choice to be able to decide upon appropriate limits for such responsibility, based on broad and deep levels of evidence. Rarely is anecdotal data significant, where decisions are taken that should reflect close to the reality of millions of people.

In this instance, Clinical Psychologists with esteemed expertise in child and human development, amongst their broader skills, are the appropriate experts to shape policy and law.

so you agree they shouldv been put too trials as 'adults'?"

No, I didn't comment about any specific case or people.

My stated point is upon which expertise should be used to form our evidence based approach to changing, if appropriate, our legal system - and specifically who should do this upon the legal age of criminal responsibility. If you read again what I pksted, it defines this responsibility and nominates appropriately, with clear justification. It also outlines why anecdotal reports withhin the scope of amateurs are not pertinent, in comparison to the expertise acquired by those experts, based on all of the research evidence data and their opinion.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eeleyWoman
over a year ago

Dudley

In regards to the Bulger case, I think their punishment wasn't severe enough, the things they did to that poor little boy were horrific, they knew that they were going to hurt and kill him, they also tried to hide that fact. They knew it was wrong and did it anyway.

As for the OP, I don't think the age should be raised, children are far more aware and knowledgeable than they were years ago.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly

I'm sure that's not the case. "

it was in a adult court and not a youth court mate

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago

Hillside desolate


"In regards to the Bulger case, I think their punishment wasn't severe enough, the things they did to that poor little boy were horrific, they knew that they were going to hurt and kill him, they also tried to hide that fact. They knew it was wrong and did it anyway.

As for the OP, I don't think the age should be raised, children are far more aware and knowledgeable than they were years ago. "

I agree with all of that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly

I'm sure that's not the case.

it was in a adult court and not a youth court mate "

That maybe the case but they were tried as children and sentenced as children. They were never in an adult prison.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"My daughter (in year 9, so 14) had a stand in teacher the other day and they were discussing capital punishment and the age of criminal responsibility.

She said they had a vote and the majority of the class felt that children in year 8 (12/13) were responsible enough to know right from wrong, unless they had some kind of special needs.

I agreed until I remembered the Bulger case, it's a difficult one.

It really is difficult. I'm glad we don't have a system like America where children can be tried as Adults though.

we do. they was. if im remembering correctly

I'm sure that's not the case.

I think they were tried in an adult court as they were over 10."

You have to be over 17 to tried as an adult. Children under 10 would not be in court at all.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ady LickWoman
over a year ago

Northampton Somewhere

They were 11 when they went to an adult court.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"They were 11 when they went to an adult court. "

If someone is under 17 they are tried as young people. The sentences are less.

Iv looked it up and they tried in a youth court.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside


"They were 11 when they went to an adult court.

If someone is under 17 they are tried as young people. The sentences are less.

Iv looked it up and they tried in a youth court.

"

your mistaken

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"They were 11 when they went to an adult court.

If someone is under 17 they are tried as young people. The sentences are less.

Iv looked it up and they tried in a youth court.

your mistaken"

I'm not. Look it up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ilth500Man
over a year ago

Merseyside

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

An interesting thing I just read, if we feel 10 olds are mentally capable of making these decisions, would we ourselves be happy to be tried by a jury of 10 yr olds for a crime we may commit?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"its called having an opinion. i used that particular case as a reference "

Yes, and a society where opinions from lay people and experts on a subject are considered equal is not doing us many favours, is it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"An interesting thing I just read, if we feel 10 olds are mentally capable of making these decisions, would we ourselves be happy to be tried by a jury of 10 yr olds for a crime we may commit? "

That's a very good point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"An interesting thing I just read, if we feel 10 olds are mentally capable of making these decisions, would we ourselves be happy to be tried by a jury of 10 yr olds for a crime we may commit?

That's a very good point. "

Good point, well presented.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"In regards to the Bulger case, I think their punishment wasn't severe enough, the things they did to that poor little boy were horrific, they knew that they were going to hurt and kill him, they also tried to hide that fact. They knew it was wrong and did it anyway.

As for the OP, I don't think the age should be raised, children are far more aware and knowledgeable than they were years ago. "

Totally agree the Bulger killers should of had much harsher sentences they still have their lives to live and are protected by the law hidden identities and new start what about that poor innocent little kid never had a life and his family will never get over that.

Also I agree with the death penalty for certain crimes. It costs thousands to keep some of these low life’s in prison for years. Yorkshire Ripper for one what good is he as a person.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top