probably no, as it appears from what is posted on blackoutaudio that he has either committed further crimes or fucked up his life in some other form (unless i hear some more positive news, as these posts on blackout don’t appear to be as reliable info as what I dug up 8 years ago).

there are people far closer to me than a record store owner I met years ago as a naive teenager in London that I have cut out of my life because they took the wrong paths (particularly being bullies/harsh to women), these people I couldn’t care if they lived or died (although dead they would be less of a burden on society).

I suppose that’s fair enough.

The question I was really interested in will have to be hypothetical then – if you knew someone had committed a violent act that was inexcusable, would you consider putting it in the past if you were convinced they regretted it and would never do it again?

No.

if it was “inexcusable” to me this would mean it was not self defence or defending a loved one, both of which I’d say were acceptable uses of force. Unless it was something as trivial as a schoolyard fight where no blood was drawn or cops never got involved.

But If someone killed the piece of scum what raped his missus or sister or mum I’d say it was perfectly excusable even if they tortured the attacker a bit and done a few years inside because of that. In that case I would “put it in the past”…

Hmm…

So what you’re saying is that if someone fucks up once, they’re fucked for life?

If people don’t forgive and forget, then what is the point in changing, if people only remember the bad things?

It makes the whole idea of rehabilitation rather pointless, really.

if its a seriously violent offence which will physicaly or emotionally scar the victim or their family for a significant time or results in death (even manslaughter) then yes. I’m not talking about minor fisticuffs or a pub scuffle though (which would get a caution anyway these days). Not even the fairly minor incident that led to this thread.

its cases of serious violence its often a life sentence for the victims after all (even if they aren’t killed)

people don’t only remember the bad things – but it means that someone needs to put in more effort if they are genuinely remorseful. if they don’t change and they reoffend then they just go back to jail for longer, perhaps a actual whole life tarrif.

for some people it is.

in these prison is only there to keep those scum away from society, as state-sanctioned execution is no longer acceptable or cost-effective in a modern society.

I know people do violent crimes as “one offs”, in those cases they often are self-defence and the courts usually sentence accordingly.

OTOH there are those who are calculated, know exactly what they are doing and prison is no deterrent to them unless its a very long tarriff (i,e they will be fit for the old peoples home if they come out).

Even then there would be a duty of to the staff of their care facility that they were made aware of their previous. Some people, whatever the circumstances, won’t feel that “its a fair cop gov, I will do my time like a man”. They might play lip service to it in Court (especially if the brief says it will reduce their tarrif) but they will want revenge when outside.

A 60 year old man can still swing a punch or use a walking stick as a weapon (in fact many blokes go in Norwich for the first time at age 60+ usually due to killing a family member in a domestic).

Consider the Steve wrights of this world, that man will never show any remorse and may be guilty of many other crimes. He also cost the town I live in its freedom, trust and community spirit (strangers used to talk to one another in Ipswich, now they don’t since December 2006).

I see what you are saying. People can also commit a one-off violent offence that is misjudged rather than self defence. I wasn’t talking about serious serious offences such as near murder, but the two people mentioned in this thread – actions like those.

I don’t know. Personally in my experience if someone does something that’s a bit off and wrong and people snub them for it, they fall part of a crowd who accept it as the right thing to do – i.e. gangs and alike.

And then that person just falls down shit-creek without a paddle, yet if people had been willing to give a second chance they could still have been a decent person and done positive things with their life.

I’d say the first person in the threads offence was minor, and his penalty also minor. it may even have been self-defence or not without provocation.

Choci and the taxi driver – I’m not so sure. He got a fair stretch at the time when Blair had just got in and Britain was a lot more liberal and lenient than I ever remember it to be in my lifetime which would indicate that it was a serious incident.

then allegations arise over further offences.

he’s went from being a successful big name DJ to a violent criminal, and its not even like grooverider who harmed noone but just had drugs.

I’m sorry but that isn’t being a disadvantaged youth. Thats being a fucking numpty and destroying everything he worked for.

Anyway I think he paid the price for ending (or damaging) the taxi drivers career with his music career, and so justice has been done.

I’ve found that the sort of people who are driven to gang culture were always a bit angry and violent and prepared to take physical action, and if a peer group of todays society with often a less authoritarian outlook on life do snub them then they genuinely have been sociopathic.

Even then they do get chances from todays politically correct justice system, but too many piss those chances up the wall. What I draw from mine and others personal experence of the criminal justice system, is that is it is lenient compared to 10-20 years ago (and there are a lot more chances for rehab, such as a mate who taught himself IT and reading skills in prison (he was barely literate before then).

But in some cases there has to be a time where the cell doors shut, and stay shut.

Weekend curfew! it would have to be a wild wednesday night!

i know what you sayin GL n i agree to some extent… but you always struck me as the kinda guy who would give kids who fucked up a bit of a chance… or not just kids, people.

people say i’m “fanny-liberal” in my believe that people do take bad turns and act out of character and that people can change… i dont know, maybe i’m bein young and idealistic… but from my experience (and that aint ightly, i may be young but sure as fuck seen some wrong shit happen) its somethin that needs to be done more

Society has become a lot more liberal and given more chances but this started just before you were born. Even prison is a lot less harsh than it once was.

But there has to be a limit, especially as things become more fragile with all the conflicting cultures and ideologies in a multicultural society like great Britain, plus a lot of young men fighting for control over their territories. If people repeatedly take the piss they have to be dealt with.

I’ve given people chances in the past and they have repeatedly fucked them up – plus its turned out not to be “out of character” but just that they hadn’t got found out as quickly.

I have never believed in that “non-judgemental” crap. Without judgement by wider society, scum will rise to the top and sadly it ends up with only cops or even soldiers being able to deal with it, like what has happened in North London recently and what happens on a worse extent in foreign nations.

There is serious decline in our society today – an actual lack of respect for others life. A teenagers fight for instance increasingly becomes a fight to the death (even with the attackeres presumably being aware with CCTV everywhere they will get caught eventually)

However I only judge people though by the moral standards I hold myself up to (which gives a lot of leeway for being a bit more alternative than “normal folks”).