Summary

A 15-year-old boy was sentenced to life in prison for fatally stabbing a stranger, Muhammad Hassam Ali, after a brief conversation in Birmingham city center. The second boy, who stood by, was sentenced to five years in secure accommodation. Ali’s family expressed their grief, describing him as a budding engineer whose life was tragically cut short.

  • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    It should not be legal to hand out life sentences to minors, period.

    In Germany the maximum sentence for minors is 10 years and depending on your developmental state you can count as a minor until you are 21 (You are always treated as one if you are under 18). And that is how it should be. Locking people up for life helps nobody.

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      When I was 15, I knew it was wrong to stab people. It’s not like getting into a fight on the playground. When you bring out a knife, or any deadly weapon, you immediately escalate things way beyond what school administration can handle.

      As a kid, I knew there were crimes I could do that were just “boys being boys.” Smoking weed, petty theft, vandalism, even getting into fist-fights. I also knew there were crimes that were off limits, such as rape and murder. Just about everyone around me knew the same thing, too.

      You’re advocating for a culture that encourages kids to commit more crimes and more serious crimes than they otherwise would because they know they will get off easy.

      • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s very obvious from your posts that you neither know what the purpose of a punishment in a legal state is, nor what the effects of them are.

        The idea that a multi year sentence is “getting of easy” is insane. And from what you are writing I get very strong vibes that you are one of those people who still subscribe to debunked ideas of perpetrator types, which are unironically Nazi-ideology.

        The world that you want to create is not a safer one, quite the opposite in fact. Rehabilitation is the by far most important aspect of a punishment and the idea that crimes like the one in question are committed by people who carefully weigh how many years they are willing to spend in prison and could thus be deterred is beyond ridiculous.

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Your prescription seems to assume that either:

      1. Everyone can be rehabilitated, which no society has ever achieved.

      2. That it’s preferable to push a well understood risk to people’s lives back into the community than it is to keep that risk in the care of the state where they can’t kill more people.

      …but you strike me as too sensible to prescribe that kind of thing, so what have I missed?

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Lots of/most/almost all prisoners are rehabilitated though?

        We only hear about the very small minority that make attention grabbing headlines.

        I’m in Europe BTW.

        • Paddzr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not really. Look up the life of car thiefs. Most gain inside knowledge after leaving prison with fresh connections.

          Prisons are almost like a networking opportunity. Mark Cann made an interesting video about it.

            • Paddzr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m too stupid to have the right answer. I can just make noise and hope someone smarter comes up with better solutions.

      • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        “Western” countries don’t have a way to deal with the handful of truly irredeemable criminals. They will not and cannot be members of society ever.

        But what do we do with them? Lock them up forever? Kill them? Nobody knows.

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think it’s pretty straightforwardly reasonable to say that we should above all else, remove their ability to continue to do harm. There’s going to be a range of views on exactly what that should look like - mostly based on your view of how punitive we should be. Options would include confinement, exile, medication, lobotomy, and execution.

          Personally, I think ending someone through death, lobotomy, and the like is unnecessarily barbaric. Confinement in one form or another seems like the most reasonable option, and I think consentual alternatives are debatable.

      • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Locking you (and everyone making similar comments here) up would also help all the people that you won’t have the opportunity to hurt or kill. Because how can I know that you won’t ever commit a crime like that?

        The idea that you can get security by simply locking everyone up who commits a crime is delusional and for the outcomes you only need to check the US.

          • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            The crazy thing about minority report is that nobody, least of all the people who made it, seem to have understood the problem that the movie depicted:

            Having the ability to predict attempted killings and interfere with them would be a genuinely good thing! The problem was the notion that everybody who is predicted to commit such a crime gets an extreme punishment without even a trial, consideration of the circumstances, or any of the other things we would normally attempt to do if we learned about someone attempting to commit a crime. Equating premediated murder out of greed with an over-reacting in a highly surprising situation, with self-defense, with pretty much just accidents and punishing them all in the most cruel way you can imagine is what was so idiotic about the movie that it was hard to take seriously. Trials are there for a reason, and that reason isn’t just to figure out what happened physically!

        • ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          If only our past behavior could give you some insight into the kind of people we are and how we can be expected to behave in the future. But given the complete absence of data I guess that’s just impossible. Oh well.

    • NightShot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Why the fuck should he get a second chans on life when his victime never will ? If it where my son who where dead I wouldn’t settle for anything else.

    • Paddzr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Fuck em.

      The victim got a life sentence. They’re gone. I’d be fine with him being executed. There’s ZERO remorse over filth like this. 15 is developed enough to know they literally killed someone.