Keiran Loveridge (1 Viewer)

[Kiraken]

fuark

hahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha

god

I brought up an example which demonstrated the serial killer being sentenced to 21 years, when research largely speaks to the improbability of their rehabilitation. You can't dispute that other than say it's irrelevant, when you brought that up.

Everything you say is irrelevant, but I'm still responding to it. You started this whole recidivism thing, and my example was relevant because it clearly set the countries intentions in something other than rehabilitation.

Yes because anders brievik who has barely been in prison is the perfect example of why rehabiliatiom does not work amongst people who get drunk and commit manslaughter

"rehabiliation doesnt work for anybody cos some serial killers have not been rehabilitated"

:")

 

[Spiritual Bean]

Yes because anders brievik who has barely been in prison is the perfect example of why rehabiliatiom does not work amongst people who get drunk and commit manslaughter

"rehabiliation doesnt work for anybody cos some serial killers have not been rehabilitated"

:")

it distorts the intentions of their justice system idiot lol

you just said norway out of your ass lol

 

[wannaspoon]

I agree with you 100% and you know my arguments illustrated this.

No one wants to know the truth man, and I'm glad that there's a lawyer (or soon-to-be) that champions the truth. I respect you a lot for that.

your arguments were focused on the notion of rehabilitation... my arguments are based of denouncing such conduct and providing the appropriate closure to the victims family...

 

[Kiraken]

Just because a persons prospects for rehabilitation are good it does not mean justice shouldn't be punitive...

there is a retribution element that is clearly lacking in this case... the verdict failed to give the victims family some sort of solace...

the acts Mr Loveridge committed can be likened to savagery the court should have handed a verdict which reflected the callousness of the actions and denounced such actions... rather than relying on the legislature to rush through legislation which is based primarily on a knee jerk reaction to public outcry...

just my actual 2 cents...

Justice isn't about retribution, did we not go through this several pages ago?

The decisiom was not a kneejerk reaction to public outcry, rather public outcry was a kneejerk reaction to the decision

 

[Spiritual Bean]

Lol please stop, I did tell you to stop the ad hominems but if you are really that intent on embarrassing yourself, go ahead

your argument centers so much on rehabilitation, when that is one component of sentencing (srs)

inb4 I didn't know

inb4 i know im shit but im just going to tell you you're shit

 

[Spiritual Bean]

your arguments were focused on the notion of rehabilitation... my arguments are based of denouncing such conduct and providing the appropriate closure to the victims family...

hey
my argument was saying not to unnecessarily center rehabilitation

this discourse between kiraken and I is just highlighting his illogic

 

[Spiritual Bean]

Justice isn't about retribution, did we not go through this several pages ago?

The decisiom was not a kneejerk reaction to public outcry, rather public outcry was a kneejerk reaction to the decision

Purposes of sentencing
3A Purposes of sentencing

The purposes for which a court may impose a sentence on an offender are as follows:

(a) to ensure that the offender is adequately punished for the offence,
(b) to prevent crime by deterring the offender and other persons from committing similar offences,
(c) to protect the community from the offender,
(d) to promote the rehabilitation of the offender,
(e) to make the offender accountable for his or her actions,
(f) to denounce the conduct of the offender,
(g) to recognise the harm done to the victim of the crime and the community

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa1999278/s3a.html

 

[Kiraken]

it distorts the intentions of their justice system idiot lol

you just said norway out of your ass lol

No it doesn't because the low rates of recidivism demonstrate an overall success in the system. Anders Brievik is a particularly absurd counter example (not that one counter example disproves a massive trend anyway) simply because he hasn't even been assessed for rehabilitation on account of him only being in prison for like a year lol

 

[Spiritual Bean]

No it doesn't because the low rates of recidivism demonstrate an overall success in the system. Anders Brievik is a particularly absurd counter example (not that one counter example disproves a massive trend anyway) simply because he hasn't even been assessed for rehabilitation on account of him only being in prison for like a year lol

it puts it into question

you can't say that killing 77 people is a minor thing

or maybe you can, based on your logic, not entirely sure

 

[Kiraken]

Purposes of sentencing
3A Purposes of sentencing

The purposes for which a court may impose a sentence on an offender are as follows:

(a) to ensure that the offender is adequately punished for the offence,
(b) to prevent crime by deterring the offender and other persons from committing similar offences,
(c) to protect the community from the offender,
(d) to promote the rehabilitation of the offender,
(e) to make the offender accountable for his or her actions,
(f) to denounce the conduct of the offender,
(g) to recognise the harm done to the victim of the crime and the community

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa1999278/s3a.html

I do not see the word retribution lol

 

[wannaspoon]

Justice isn't about retribution, did we not go through this several pages ago?

The decisiom was not a kneejerk reaction to public outcry, rather public outcry was a kneejerk reaction to the decision

of course not, so if somebody stole your car you wouldn't want to break their nose...

I'm saying the decisions provided the NSW government with the catalyst to make laws based on a whim and a public outcry...

 

[Spiritual Bean]

of course not, so if somebody stole your car you wouldn't want to break their nose...

I'm saying the decisions provided the NSW government with the catalyst to make laws based on a whim and a public outcry...

nope

he'd invite them over for dinner to talk things over

 

[Kiraken]

it puts it into question

you can't say that killing 77 people is a minor thing

or maybe you can, based on your logic, not entirely sure

Lol are u retarded? He is barely a year into his sentence you cant say he hasnt been rehabilitated yet haha

And no, one crime does NOT disqualify the merits of the system when considering the massive overall trend

 

[Spiritual Bean]

I do not see the word retribution lol

oh no

I wasn't saying that

it was in response to you unnecessarily centralising rehabilitation when there are other factors

I was just looking for the first opportunity to quote anything you said

 

[Spiritual Bean]

And no, one crime does NOT disqualify the merits of the system when considering the massive overall trend

that's actually 77 counts

not 1 count

 

[Kiraken]

of course not, so if somebody stole your car you wouldn't want to break their nose...

I'm saying the decisions provided the NSW government with the catalyst to make laws based on a whim and a public outcry...

There is a difference between justice in the law and your emotional want to get revenge. That is what separates us from animals.

Oh? Please explain to me which part of the judge's decision was a knee-jerk reaction or had no grounding in legal principles that have been there for a while?

 

[Kiraken]

that's actually 77 counts

not 1 count

One person

Out of thousands

That one person not even being a valid example cos u cant assess rehabilitation in him anyway haha

 

[wannaspoon]

There is a difference between justice in the law and your emotional want to get revenge. That is what separates us from animals.

Oh? Please explain to me which part of the judge's decision was a knee-jerk reaction or had no grounding in legal principles that have been there for a while?

ok.... I am saying,

Court: hands down decision;
Media says: what a crock of shit
Public watches media outlet and says: what a crock of shit
Government then: flexes muscle, creates some stupid law based on public outcry that is probably going to be poorly drafted and reformed later on down the track...

Judiciary should have: flexed its own muscle, handed down a sentence that was actually proportionate to the crime and kept everyone happy... legislature the would not need to get involved and manage to fuck up the present law (like they have done with almost every other law)

 

[Kiraken]

you still said one crime

you're wrong

idiot

we can highlight the improbability of his rehabilitation through studies

Lol even then my point still holds. Im sure ur good at pointing out pointless mistakes considering that whatever you write is a mistake

Show me the studies and tell me how that shows rehabilitation is ineffective for any nom serial killer such as kieran loveridge haha

 

[Kiraken]

ok.... I am saying,

Court: hands down decision;
Media says: what a crock of shit
Public watches media outlet and says: what a crock of shit
Government then: flexes muscle, creates some stupid law based on public outcry that is probably going to be poorly drafted and reformed later on down the track...

Judiciary should have: flexed its own muscle, handed down a sentence that was actually proportionate to the crime and kept everyone happy... legislature the would not need to get involved and manage to fuck up the present law (like they have done with almost every other law)

You haven't demonstrated how it was disproportionate or unfair

Furthermore, the law isn't based solely on what keeps the media or public happy, nor should it be