America doesn't pussy foot around like Australia does when it comes to identifying young (underage and accused/convicted) criminals.
I like this.
I'm sick of young Aussie scumbags, who, just because they're under 18, are protected from being identified in the media.
The picture of the accused murderers of Chris Lane:
The only thing I'm not so hot on is identifying them whilst they are still accused, and there has been no formal trial and conviction. If for some reason, one or all of these blokes are found not guilty, it isn't fair to have their pictures and identities splashed around. There will always be a section of society that will think that one or all are guilty even if they're found innocent.
If they're found guilty, sure, I have no problem with media publication of their faces and names. In addition, I would still apply for the death sentence even though they are under 18 and it can't be applied. The world doesn't need these accused arseholes on the street that kill for no other reason than for 'fun'. Put them in front of a firing squad and shoot them so they know what it's like to be killed by gunfire.
Still, we are now paying for slack parenting, and kids having too many rights, and not being given proper boundaries, so they grow up with no respect for anyone.
I'm would even be happy to have a 'vandals' page in the Advertiser whereby local graffiti vandals both under and over 18 have their names and photo's published. Shame can be a very powerful deterrent at times. I know there'll always be a bunch of these dickheads that think that having their pictures published in one of these pages is a trophy to how clever they are, but I think the shame factor is much greater. In addition, it might also make the parents of these vandals wake up and start laying proper rules for their kids.
I still think the best way of stopping graffiti vandals is the surgical removal of a finger every time they are convicted. I'm sure after one or two fingers are gone, they'll soon stop their anti-social and bogan ways.
Back to identifying underage convicted crims. Just do it. Stop pussyfooting around. Sure, it's bound to affect them in 5, 10 or 20 years when they get out of jail, but tough luck. They should have thought about that a bit earlier.
Look at it this way. An 18 year old is convicted in a court and receives 15 years in jail and has his or her picture and name splashed all over the media. It's a case of tough luck - you did the crime, so you suffer the consequences of media scrutiny and the associated problems upon release. But, if that same person commits the same crime one month before they are 18, nothing can be reported that identifies them. Stupid isn't it?
I know all the do-gooders will get out there and say "They're underage", "Silly" and "Just don't know what they're doing". That's crap. Kids these days are growing up with little respect for adults, little respect for the law, and little respect for teachers. This I'm sure is due to slack parenting and the lack of providing proper boundaries for kids whilst they are growing up.
We also need to reduce the age at which a person can be tried as an adult to 16, from the current 18 years old. Hit them harder when they are younger and make them shit scared of getting into criminal trouble later in life.
Get Real
I like this.
I'm sick of young Aussie scumbags, who, just because they're under 18, are protected from being identified in the media.
The picture of the accused murderers of Chris Lane:
The only thing I'm not so hot on is identifying them whilst they are still accused, and there has been no formal trial and conviction. If for some reason, one or all of these blokes are found not guilty, it isn't fair to have their pictures and identities splashed around. There will always be a section of society that will think that one or all are guilty even if they're found innocent.
If they're found guilty, sure, I have no problem with media publication of their faces and names. In addition, I would still apply for the death sentence even though they are under 18 and it can't be applied. The world doesn't need these accused arseholes on the street that kill for no other reason than for 'fun'. Put them in front of a firing squad and shoot them so they know what it's like to be killed by gunfire.
Still, we are now paying for slack parenting, and kids having too many rights, and not being given proper boundaries, so they grow up with no respect for anyone.
I'm would even be happy to have a 'vandals' page in the Advertiser whereby local graffiti vandals both under and over 18 have their names and photo's published. Shame can be a very powerful deterrent at times. I know there'll always be a bunch of these dickheads that think that having their pictures published in one of these pages is a trophy to how clever they are, but I think the shame factor is much greater. In addition, it might also make the parents of these vandals wake up and start laying proper rules for their kids.
I still think the best way of stopping graffiti vandals is the surgical removal of a finger every time they are convicted. I'm sure after one or two fingers are gone, they'll soon stop their anti-social and bogan ways.
Back to identifying underage convicted crims. Just do it. Stop pussyfooting around. Sure, it's bound to affect them in 5, 10 or 20 years when they get out of jail, but tough luck. They should have thought about that a bit earlier.
Look at it this way. An 18 year old is convicted in a court and receives 15 years in jail and has his or her picture and name splashed all over the media. It's a case of tough luck - you did the crime, so you suffer the consequences of media scrutiny and the associated problems upon release. But, if that same person commits the same crime one month before they are 18, nothing can be reported that identifies them. Stupid isn't it?
I know all the do-gooders will get out there and say "They're underage", "Silly" and "Just don't know what they're doing". That's crap. Kids these days are growing up with little respect for adults, little respect for the law, and little respect for teachers. This I'm sure is due to slack parenting and the lack of providing proper boundaries for kids whilst they are growing up.
We also need to reduce the age at which a person can be tried as an adult to 16, from the current 18 years old. Hit them harder when they are younger and make them shit scared of getting into criminal trouble later in life.
Get Real
No comments:
Post a Comment