There is a report in the newspapers today that suggests that young offenders...robbers, muggers etc who are reliant on drugs, or who can prove that they have a drink or gambling problem are to be let off with a caution.....a 'final' warning(though how many of these will get more that one final warning is anyones guess).
The police may impose conditions......such as attendance at a substance abuse course....or community service of unpaid work.
Do you consider that this is justice for the victims of these crimes?
Do you think it is a soft option for the offenders?
Will it stop re-offending?
The police may impose conditions......such as attendance at a substance abuse course....or community service of unpaid work.
Do you consider that this is justice for the victims of these crimes?
Do you think it is a soft option for the offenders?
Will it stop re-offending?


And in Canada, it's the First Nations people who are over-represented in the jails. I wonder if poverty and the unequal distribution of wealth and justice might have something to do with it? O. J. Simpson literally got away with murder, because he could afford millions of dollars worth of legal aid; Tyrone and Jesus go to the chair. I'm not wandering off topic; I'm offering a thumbnail of a model lots of you guys seem to want to follow. Maybe the answers your government(s) are coming up with are not the right ones; maybe they won't work all that well; but that shouldn't stop the search for solutions that will work ... rather than go back to solutions that have been proven not to work. I've expressed these opinions before, with little success .... and I don't expect much change this time around.

ya don't live in "Buckingham Palace" do ya?