I just can't believe what scum some people are. Just because another person dresses differently to someone else does not give them the right to kill, maim, attack that person for the way they look. I'm sorry, but this is something close to me as years ago, when I used to go out frequently, I was the person, with my friends, the scum chose to target.
I'm bringing this up in light of the Sophie Lancaster murder. Her and her boyfriend were targeted as they walked through a skate park by a group of teenagers just because they dressed in the Goth style (just as I did 15 years ago). Now, okay, some might say that I have no right to comment because I didn't know her or know anything about the background of the situation. Talking from experience here, a person will attack another person just for the fact that the first person is not wearing a Lacoste tracksuit (or whatever other tracksuit is 'in'), because the scum can't handle someone not following what they do. I was frequently targeted by idiots because I would wear Para boots with a mini skirt, bullet belt and skinny t-shirt or a long, black skirt, band t-shirt and leather jacket. Or just simply for using a characterised cow backpack when I went out. I really feel for Sophie's parents and boyfriend. Sophie's murder turns my stomach something chronic.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Turns my stomach.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I totally agree Ally,have seen something similar happen.What worries me is the fact that I was a very liberal person and this is changing rapidly.These people really are scum including the recent cases like the father who was kicked to death in Warrington by three scumbags.
In The USA-not my favourite place(environment,war etc)they have three strikes and you are out.Your third offence brings you life and i am really finding it hard to disagree with that policy.Ho Hum what a bloody awful place we live in!!
I think if someone has killed another in cold blood then they should suffer the same fate. I know I sound harsh, but why should they have another chance when they have denied someone else their life? I don't understand why human rights solicitors fight for these people. In my eyes, it makes them just as guilty as the scum. And talking of giving 'life' as a sentence, that's a joke here. I'm sorry, but even 25 years is not comparable. Life should mean life. Sorry for ranting. Just makes me so angry.
rant away, you're only saying what other people think. I am all for bringing harsher punnishment for crimes (the death penalty for child molesters, paedos and murderers)instead of a well kept cell with free access to education. Did myra hindley deserve to gt 2 degrees paid for my my hard earned cash? No she feckin didn't.
It costs £50k to keep a prisoner for a year. I will never even earn that a year! Where is the justice?
But it's ok because it violates the human rights of the offender to do something nasty to them even if the victim is still living in terror 5 years later when they've been let out for "good behaviour"
HOW they can even have that concept in a place where generally you don't have a choice but to tow the line is ludicrous.
I'm with you in the angry corner... considering reading the daily mail these days ha ha - just kidding ;)
Yup, I agree totally with you Skips. Human rights is only geared towards the rights of the criminals, and not to the victims of crime. Why should the lad who has pleaded guilty to killing Sophie Lancaster be allowed to go unnamed just because he is a minor? He is beyond the age of criminal responsibility, and it's not like Sophie Lancaster and her family wanted her name to be in the public eye like it is. There really is no justice.
Post a Comment