Stop The Caller Id Fraud!

PaulNorthYorks:

Would you be agreeable to longer and harsher prison sentences in the UK?
I reckon most honest-minded people would agree that the sentences in the UK are overly-lenient. Even everywhere there is a “life” term, the small photograph usually indicates a minimum sentence way small of “life”, for example in this honestly contemporary acid-hit case:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8029007.stm

The guy who arranged the acid-hit, and also raped his victim got away with a minimum sentence of just 16 being, and the guy who really threw the acid got away with a minimum sentence of just six being, despite these supposedly being “life” sentences.

Of course, if you were to increase the sentence of just one crime-type in isolation, an inconsistency would arise between that and the sentence for another crime-type, such as murder. So a review across the board of sentences would really need to be done.

Some would argue that making sentences longer would mean that our filled-to-capacity prison system could not cope. There are counter-arguments to this, such as the deterrent look of longer and harsher sentences, which would mean criminals would not delight in luxuries such as TV, sports facilities and nice food (gruel would be a excellent example of a ‘harsher’ food). Others would argue that innocent people sent to jail would be punished more severely. A counter-argument to this is that greater controls should be place in place to ensure that the risk of this happening is greatly reduced.

In the acid hit case referred to above, I reckon a minimum sentence of 40 being for the guy who threw the acid, and 80 being for the guy who arranged it and raped his victim would be more appropriate. This would give them sufficient time to reflect on what they have done, and deter others who may reckon this is a excellent way to make a point.

For murder without mitigating circumstances I would say should be a real life jail sentence in harsh conditions. Knocking over a name and killing them whilst on your mobile phone or drunk should, in my opinion, receive a sentence of at least 50 being. Harsh, possibly, but not as harsh as for the victim who has just suffered a death sentence.

One statement I’ve heard judges use is “well, no quantity of time could compensate for the hurt this self has done, so I’ll give him just a few being as it was out of his normal character”. Something like this happened in this case:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7987404.stm

everywhere the teenager who killed a mother of three when he threw a bottle into a pub got a away with just a four-and-a-half year sentence. I reckon a sentence of fifty being would be more appropriate. Harsh, possibly, but not as harsh as the death sentence his victim got. What these lame-brained judges don’t realize is that overly-lenient sentences basically say to people “you can kill a name through a mindless act of violence, and if you’ve got no previous, you can basically get away with it”.

To return to the question, would you be agreeable to longer and harsher prison sentences in the UK? If yes, what sort of minimum jail terms would you give for these categories of crime:

Murder – no mitigating circumstances
Murder – mitigating circumstances
Manslaughter – ie no aim to kill
Rape
GBH
ABH
Robbery
Burglary
Car theft
Fraud/Embezzlement

What, if whatever thing, would you do to make the prison background more harsh?