The England riots led to several deaths, destroyed many more livelihoods and created fear in our communities. Even leaving aside the economic cost as a result of the looting and fires, England has been left shaken.
Therefore, we have every right to be angry who those who rioted. But disqualifying them from social security benefits would be a knee-jerk reaction (as the 200,000 who have signed the Parliamentary e-petition wish to see.) It is unnecessary to take action beyond the remit of the judicial system. Our justice system should deal with these thugs - that is its proper role and we should leave it to serve justice. Besides, the courts have been serving harsh sentences in the aftermath of the rioting - consider the case of two young people sentenced to four years for attempting (but failing) to orchestrate rioting via Facebook.
Removing convicted rioters benefits is perhaps akin to taking the role of serving justice into our own hands. We would dissaprove of a vigilante going out and attacking convicted rioters. The same principle should apply to removing their benefits. The rioters will receive their proper punishment through the courts - we should not act more than that. In a time when emotions are running high, we should not react in a disproportionate manner.
The e-petition raises an inconsistency. Convicted rioters would loose their benefits but a convicted rapist would not? This highlights that this petition is a knee-jerk reaction.
Besides, it may actually prove to be counter-productive to us. If it is the case (we must be careful not to generalise here) that a rioter is on benefits, then disqualification can make the situation worse. The rioter consequently has even less stake in their society - and even more reason to cause trouble.
Therefore, we have every right to be angry who those who rioted. But disqualifying them from social security benefits would be a knee-jerk reaction (as the 200,000 who have signed the Parliamentary e-petition wish to see.) It is unnecessary to take action beyond the remit of the judicial system. Our justice system should deal with these thugs - that is its proper role and we should leave it to serve justice. Besides, the courts have been serving harsh sentences in the aftermath of the rioting - consider the case of two young people sentenced to four years for attempting (but failing) to orchestrate rioting via Facebook.
Removing convicted rioters benefits is perhaps akin to taking the role of serving justice into our own hands. We would dissaprove of a vigilante going out and attacking convicted rioters. The same principle should apply to removing their benefits. The rioters will receive their proper punishment through the courts - we should not act more than that. In a time when emotions are running high, we should not react in a disproportionate manner.
The e-petition raises an inconsistency. Convicted rioters would loose their benefits but a convicted rapist would not? This highlights that this petition is a knee-jerk reaction.
Besides, it may actually prove to be counter-productive to us. If it is the case (we must be careful not to generalise here) that a rioter is on benefits, then disqualification can make the situation worse. The rioter consequently has even less stake in their society - and even more reason to cause trouble.
No comments:
Post a Comment