Why is burglary treated as a minor crime?

[R1Geezer]

I consider it a very serious invasion of personal space/property, a virtual rape. Some of the victims are traumatised permanently, often having to move. Yet our courts treat it like shop lifting. To get jailed a criminal has to have dozens under the belt. So why as a society can we not lock this scum up for longer?

[ummmm]

I think someone likes to go against the grain for arguments sake..

[Oneeyedvic]

Do you think the average crackhead makes a decision like "Hmmm, I was going to break into this house and steal some jewellery to pay for my habit, but since I will probably get 10 years instead of 2 years, I now no longer will".

What about the more premeditated burglars - any chance that they will now go 'tooled up' - as if they are going to get a 10 year minimum, may as well go in armed.

[tamborine]

burglars wont break in to cricketters houses.

[ludwig]

//Do you think the average crackhead makes a decision like "Hmmm, I was going to break into this house and steal some jewellery to pay for my habit, but since I will probably get 10 years instead of 2 years, I now no longer will". //

Ok, let's follow this logic to it's conclusion. What you're saying is that effectively there is no sentence that can deter people such as drug addicts because they don't think straight. Fair enough, so why do bother with any punishment at all? Seriously, wouldn't it save time and money to just let them go free? If you don't agree with that, and you'd like to see a sentence imposed, I'd like to know why, when we both know it's not going to act as a deterrent.

[R1Geezer]

yes vic and they'll be off the street for 10 years instead of a slapped wrist! Sorry mate we're in this mess because right on trendy lefty thinking has failed. Time to rip up the system and start again.

[Oneeyedvic]

Would I like to see them go free? No. I would like them to be put into a 'prison' style of home where they can be weeded of whatever drug they are on and educated, so that when 'released' they can actually do something productive.

[Oneeyedvic]

Sorry R1 - you don't seem to have addressed the second point. Do you think burglars will go more tooled up since there is such a heft penalty? Currently 'only' 5 years minimum for carrying a weapon. May as well bring one along with you if you are going to commit a burglary, wouldn't you say?

[R1Geezer]

they might, not sure why though, you mean so they can beat up the householder? Not sure why that would be any more likely than as at now. Even so they'll get 10 years for burgkary and whatever for GBH/murder, remember under the Geezer system, no concurrent sentences, so they are out of circulation for a long time.

[R1Geezer]

MP's are useless showers of sh1te, who care only about what they can screw out of the system. Do you really think canvassing an MP is worthwhile/effective, it's becuse of MP's we are in this mess.

[ludwig]

Vic, obviously the sentencing would be adjusted accordingly. For example - robbery 5 years - with a weapon 10.

[Oneeyedvic]

So, the good old three strikes law in the US - how did that help. Prison quality over there is hardly Butlins. Being caught three times means essentially that you will go to prison for life.

Well, its made bug'er all difference to the crime rate, and the numbers of rapes, murders and assaults has actually increased. http://en.wikipedia.o...Effects_in_California

Still, better that we just go on your 'gut feeling' that any real studies in case they have been conducted by beardies eh?

[ludwig]

Vic, not sure who that's directed at but no-one has mentioned or suggested a 3 strikes approach have they?

[Oneeyedvic]

ludwig - the suggestion is that harsh sentences deter this behaviour or keep crime off the street. That is exactly what the three strikes was meant to achieve.

It doesn't work.

[jake-the-peg]

Seems you want to senetnce burglars to harsher terms than those who commit GBH and assault

is that the case?

[craft1948]

some scum low-life burgled an 82 year-old widow living in the next street to me about 3 weeks ago. She wasn't hurt and he just took her purse............she is now so scared she is talking about going into an old folks home just to feel safer.......

[Oneeyedvic]

ahmskunnirt - the comparisson to the States is the only comparative I can come up with. Are there any other countries that share a similar culture that have such harsh measures?

It is easy to come up with ideas (like Geezers) but when you can see it enacted in a similar country (ie democratic, consumerist etc) with no good consequences, then you have to wonder if that idea will work.

[jno]

We already have about 150 in every 100,000 locked up - more than such easygoing nations as Algeria, Zimbabwe, Burma or China. Obviously, having much more wicked people than any of these law-abiding countries, we need many more jails and tougher penalties. To quote the Guardian recently: 'Labour has created more than 3,000 new offences since 1997, of which 1,472 at the last count were imprisonable. You can go to jail in Britain for not having a licence for a church concert, smoking in a public place, selling a grey squirrel, trans-shipping unlicensed fish, or disobeying a health and safety inspector.'

So Labour are doing their best.