Why do you say ‘problem’; do you think I am sympathetic to Jon Venables and Robert Thompson or am suggesting leniency in their case?

Not at all. The problem is you address sociopaths in a purely analytical way as a simple mathematical problem. And yet they are for more easily dealt with then children dying of malaria. Here is one thing we can do (and no I don’t advocate killing them I want them locked up forever) that is not hampered by governmental corruption, by individual greed, by apathy or by anything else that prevents the destruction of malaria (which could easily be done by the careful use of DDT) in the third world.

The biggest problem in dealing with the malaria issue is the local governemnts.
There is no such problem dealing with sociopaths. Oh wait a minute…there shouldn’t be a problem and yet… there is. That is the problem.

Here is a readily identifiable cancer within our social systems and we are not allowed to remove them for the benefit of all. And now with Venables recent attack we see the results of a pithy sentence.

The anger comes from the fact that the little boys death was pre-meditated.
If a hyena kills, it kills for food not entertainment. If a poor child dies from malaria, while tragic, it is however natural and the child does not realise what is happening to him or her. They are fortunately either semi or completely unconcious. Jamie Bulger experienced terror that neither you, nor I, nor any normal person will hopefully ever experience and your rather anemic
“Yes, it was an evil crime and an innocent child was killed in most harrowing circumstances,” reveals you to be more analytical then empathic as regards the victim.

That is why the general civilian population is so repulsed by the actions of this sociopath and why there was a universal acceptance of the general population when people said they would be happy to kill the offenders.

The problem with nice people like you and Bumblebee and others is you have no experience or comprehension of just how cruel and heartless monsters like Venables can be. It simply does not compute that some person can be this vile. That is understandable, you are nice people. You have been very fortunate that you don’t have to deal with individuals like this (so far I’ve only been involved with one, which I guarantee you is enough for the rest of my life) just realise that if they are not removed from society forever they will continue to hunt until they finally are removed forever.

Gary

The statistics I quoted are well supported by many years of rigorous research
by multiple researchers.
Sociopaths are disturbing, violent individuals. They are not repairable. They are predators. Deal with them in a non-extreme way at your peril.

Cheers
Gary

I will grant you this. However in certain extreme cases (such as this) the individuals involved are classified as sociopaths and in that case the normal rules don’t apply. Will you grant that point?

Generally children aren’t thought to be as able to figure out the consequences of their actions in as rational a way as adults.

One thing does interest me though. What difference does it make that they were children?

You seem to be under the impression that I’m playing down what they did,which I can assure you I’m not. Of course the murder and torture of a child is indefensible so you don’t need to take that tone with me.
The sentence given out was totally inadequate for what they did.
I still stand by what I said,they were children at the time.
If you think justice is best served by the public lynching of two children,that speaks for itself.

I have never said they should be killed. I have said they should never have been released from prison for the remainder of their lives. What you can’t understand is they are children in age only. They matured far earlier than you can imagine and developed a taste for murder that no normal human being ever would or could.

You have a fundamental inability to understand that with creatures of this sort their age is not relevant. They will do the same, and behave the same 20, 30, 40 or 50 years from now as they did when they were ten…if given the chance.

You seem to be under the impression that I’m playing down what they did,which I can assure you I’m not. Of course the murder and torture of a child is indefensible so you don’t need to take that tone with me.
The sentence given out was totally inadequate for what they did.
I still stand by what I said,they were children at the time.
If you think justice is best served by the public lynching of two children,that speaks for itself.

The sentence they recieved was derived by an imbecile pure and simple.

Is eight years and a resettlement package really a suitable sentence for those crimes? Whatever the age of the perpetrator? It seems Venables at least has hardly become a reformed character. They were given the opportunity to be rehabilitated, an opportunity not given to some others. In Venables case it doesn’t seem to have worked.

Can anyone honestly say, either with or without the benefit of hindsight, that the leniency of the sentence imposed upon Thompson and Venables was appropriate?

Regards,

kev35

In certain cases they are Joey. Criminologists know with certainty that here in the US 7% of the criminal population commits 80% of the violent crime. Lock that population up forever and the violent crime rate plummets. That is pretty black and white!

If you can’t see grey then I cannot comment further other than to say that to see black and white is only to see extremes. Life is made up of complexity and enigma and however beautiful or however terrible an experience or an act, it is never just black or just white.