When Should You Lose Your Human Rights?

[Branch Out 10]

That is not what Branch out posted, stop trolling.

 

Thank you for that defending.

New to the Forum. Think I have thrown myself into too hot a thread here!

[Ash Tray 10]

So somebody who commits a serious crime can no longer be considered human and treated as such?

 

What if it turns out later that the person convicted of the crime was innocent?

 

What if the person convicted of the crime was mentally ill?

 

It depends on how you define human rights, nobody on here has said anyone should be deprived of their human rights

Jailing someone for life is not depriving them of their human rights, they are being jailed to protect decent peoples human rights.

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2014 at 15:53 ----------

 

Thank you for that defending.

New to the Forum. Think I have thrown myself into too hot a thread here!

 

You will find a small group on here who misconstrue and misquote and in doing so cause arguments and get threads closed.

Don't be afraid to stand your ground.

[I1L2T3 10]

And what if the human rights brigade battered down the courts of law rulings even more thus allowing a murderer (for example) to have their sentence shorted on a breach of human rights claim to go on an murder more innocent people (for example).

 

Surely when a person chooses (note the word chooses so I am not directly talking about the mentally ill here) to take the life of someone their own rights should be taken away.

 

By the way, I am refering to human rights here per se, not the death penalty!???

 

No their basic rights do not get taken away. They lose certain freedoms and the freedoms that are lost are at a level that society accepts. We rarely, if ever, see serious cases in the adult judicial system where there is massive public support for reduction of sentences. We tend to see the opposite actually - strong public support for increase in sentences of some offenders. That suggests to me that in general terms sentencing is done pretty well here, although maybe could be better (longer when appropriate) for more serious crimes.

 

But the point stands that basic rights human rights should and do remain unaltered, and the tiered prison system with different levels of security already provides a sliding scale of freedom restrictions based on the seriousness of convictions. People who want another tier where people have their basic rights removed just seem like raving idiots to me.

[Halibut 12]

That is not what Branch out posted, stop trolling.

 

I'll spell it out for you since you seem to have some trouble with basic literacy and comprehension;

 

Branch posted ''The moment you kill a human (without it being in self defence) or rape a kid is the moment you should lose your human rights.''

 

My response was ''So you're saying anyone convicted of murder should be killed straight away?''

 

One of the most important human rights is the right to life, therefore what I said follows exactly from what Branch said.

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2014 at 17:25 ----------

 

Does a person who most likely did not think about another persons human rights when they purposefully murdered another deserve to have their human rights honoured?

 

Yes. That's the whole point.

[Blaschka 10]

The short answer is never.

 

Well one of your human rights is the freedom of movement, so you lose that when you go to prison. There are probably other rights you lose when imprisoned too.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Blaschka

[Branch Out 10]

I'll spell it out for you since you seem to have some trouble with basic literacy and comprehension;

 

Branch posted ''The moment you kill a human (without it being in self defence) or rape a kid is the moment you should lose your human rights.''

 

My response was ''So you're saying anyone convicted of murder should be killed straight away?''

 

One of the most important human rights is the right to life, therefore what I said follows exactly from what Branch said.

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2014 at 17:25 ----------

 

 

Yes. That's the whole point.

 

So if that is the whole point your whole point would be that you are therefore quite happy if somebody commited a deadly act against your loved ones and then claim in prison their human rights had been served an injustice? You would not want their human rights revoked? Can you be certain?

You are a more forgiving person than I then.

 

In response to the OP, it is my own personal belief that human rights should sometimes be lost if a act of violence is commited against another. And that was the OP's thread question..

Edited February 18, 2014 by Branch Out

[Penistone999 10]

The European Court of Human Rights don't oppose whole life sentences in principle - they just insist that their be a review of such sentences at some point. I don't think that's unreasonable at all.

 

 

Yes it is................... you take a life , you should spend the rest of yours in an 8X8 cell ,and the only time you leave is when you die.

[Halibut 12]

Yes it is................... you take a life , you should spend the rest of yours in an 8X8 cell ,and the only time you leave is when you die.

 

What do you think should happen to bent landlord scummers and people who drive on red diesel?

 

---------- Post added 18-02-2014 at 18:16 ----------

 

Well on of your human rights is the freedom of movement, so you lose that when you go to prison. There are probably other rights you lose when imprisoned too.

 

It's curtailed and (hopefully) with good reason.

[Penistone999 10]

What do you think should happen to bent landlord scummers and people who drive on red diesel? .

 

Funny, last time i checked being a private landlord renting out property for profit wasnt illegal.

[Calvin Merry 10]

You shouldn't ever lose your human rights.

[Vaati 11]

Branch posted ''The moment you kill a human (without it being in self defence) or rape a kid is the moment you should lose your human rights.''

 

My response was ''So you're saying anyone convicted of murder should be killed straight away?''

 

 

It was me that said the first part of that ''The moment you kill a human (without it being in self defence) or rape a kid is the moment you should lose your human rights.''

 

And to answer your question no. They should just lose the right to freedom and be locked up without the right of appeal. No appeal if DNA matches 100% or the evidence on camera that sort of thing. (just to clarify)

[mort 10]

One warning and one only. If this thread desceneds into the usual bickering, trolling and name calling I will be issuing bans.