He she never have been considered safe. They should have listened to the judge from 2012.Probably because he was considered safe - he could have left weapons outside and gone back to get them
He was in workshops moving with students telling people about life in prison
And I’m sorry I’m going to edit my comment. Brilliant is a really shitty word to have used in this context - sorryHe murdered a 21 year old woman with learning difficulties. The police had to tell her parents that not only was he out but he was going to be all over the media.
If one of the guys that tackled him was a murderer then we'd have hung him too. So he wouldn't have been there to help and there may have been more people killed.Would two people be alive today if he’d been hung initially?
Yup.If one of the guys that tackled him was a murderer then we'd have hung him too. So he wouldn't have been there to help and there may have been more people killed.
What about the ex-gang members that now run rehabilitation services and charities to try and prevent more kids joining gangs. The kids are going to listen to them more than the likes of us who have no idea of that kind of culture.
Yep probation not involved in decision to release him but they would have been managing the licence conditions. No funding and nowhere near enough time to safely risk asses this sort of risk I don’t think.Being realistic if capital punishment is going to be reintroduced it is going to take years of debate, legal challenges etc. The more pressing issue is why are people convicted of these crimes being allowed to wander the streets. If, as has been claimed, it is purely due to budget cuts that is something that can be immediately addressed.
Of course we used to have the option of keeping people locked up indefinitely if they were considered a danger to the public but that was removed in 2012. Maybe that needs to be looked at again and the funding put in place to allow it to be properly implemented.
You can do horrific and heroic things.
Yep completely agree. Maybe the time has come to decide as a society what we want though. If rehabilitation is a myth then let’s not bother locking people up. Grendel would you prefer hanging or firing squad or maybe ripped apart by dogs for really horrible crimesYou can do horrific and heroic things.
What if one of the people that helped disarmed the terrorist yesterday has no current convictions. Are they are hero? What if they later go on to murder someone? Do they then stop being a hero for their actions yesterday and just become a monster? Would everyone calling them a hero now be considered apologists for a murderer?
Do his actions yesterday make up for his horrific actions against the disabled girl? Of course they don't. But then do his horrific actions mean that his actions yesterday that potentially saved people's lives were not brave and heroic?
How does your logic work exactly?
You need to distinguish between identifying people by what they do and say. Each of us is a series of decisions and actions so a person who makes many terrible decisions can do a good thing and a person who has made a series of wonderful decisions can do a bad thing. It’s lifeSo is the terrorist a hero if you now found out he saved an old ladies life on his way to london bridge?
You make no sense otisHow does your logic work exactly?
So, if you were there yesterday, not knowing anything and you witnessed the intervention, it would be 'Well done, mate, you're a hero.'
He then responds with 'I was convicted for murder some years ago.'
You would reply with 'Then you are not a hero at all.'
It makes zero sense. As has been stated, the two are not mutually exclusive.
One horrific action, one heroic. It merely makes this one action an heroic act. Merely in this instance.
So would you call the terrorist a hero?You need to distinguish between identifying people by what they do and say. Each of us is a series of decisions and actions so a person who makes many terrible decisions can do a good thing and a person who has made a series of wonderful decisions can do a bad thing. It’s life
If it was a heroic thing he did, he would be a hero for that one instance yes, if he risked all to save someone's life.You make no sense otis
I hwve never said the act wasnt heroic. I saod he is not a hero
Just answer my question. Would you call the terorrist a hero if you found out he had saved someone's life earlier that day?