• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Go easy on x-service men or not???

Dispensation for X-service Men??


  • Total voters
    19

Aberdeen Shrimper

The Man who sold the world
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
9,758
Location
Strichen
There is an interesting debate currently on Radio 2 regarding the sentencing of x-service men. The question being asked is, should judges go easier on x-serviceman when sentencing them?

There are almost as many former servicemen in prison as there are British forces in Afghanistan, according to a probation officers union.

If an x-serviceman has been in the forces for the last 20 years, comes back to civvy street and commits a violent crime, should there be dispensation because of the life he has been use to leading in the forces??


What are the views of the good people of the Zone???
 
Crime is a crime whoever carried it out. HOWEVER the Government (and not just this one, down through the ages) is dismal when it comes to re-integrating and taking care of ex-service personnel into civvy street. My Uncle suffered in WW2 and as a cause became severely mentally ill - however every government until he died washed their hands of him and it was left to my dad, his other brother and my mum to care for him.
 
Depends on the circumstances.

The A-Team were branded criminals but actually did a lot for society.

Jim McDonald and the Mitchell brothers are nothing but trouble.
 
Last edited:
No. Else that could apply to almost anything, eg abused as a child, time of the month, in a momentary huff, etc.

I agree with MK tho, there should be far more help given to those who have suffered post traumatic stress whether that be the armed forces or anything of a similar nature, eg 911, 7/7.

Prevention of the crime is surely better than trying to sort it out after the event.
 
Oh god yes , and before people say the law is teh law , no it dosnt work like that each case is looked at individually, so in the case of say an ex squadie who saw his mate reducded to mincemeat and a thumb before his eyes who did not recieve care after his demob (and on the Radio 2 programme it appears the demob is 24 hours in a spanish resort to get **** faced , ridiculous )

Southminster those factors are taken into account in cases , if circumstances cuase you to not act in what could be deemed your normal or a normal mental state this is taken into account , if some one force fed you say high levels of testosterone for a month and kept you in a cage, and you commited a crime afterwards (its extreme i know ) theses would be taken into account .
 
After living in Aldershot for 18 months I have no sympathy for squaddies.

They're absolute animals and make the town a no go zone in the evenings.

The amount of fights i witnessed from my flat window was disturbing.

EDIT - just realised this is about ex servicemen. There certainly needs to be a scheme set up to help them integrate back into civvyland.

I know a bloke who said the transition is horrendous, one minute a squaddie the next back in society with nothing to do. He was so frustrated that he went back within a month. The integration of ex squaddies back into society needs to monitored and managed.
 
Last edited:
I am in the middle, and both sides have arguments for and against and like every crime, circumstances should decide the sentence.

I would also like to throw in that the army you learn discipline, so therefore if you take part in a crime, your discipline has been lost.... Not my view as I am on the fence but thought I would put it to discussion.
 
I am in the middle, and both sides have arguments for and against and like every crime, circumstances should decide the sentence.

I would also like to throw in that the army you learn discipline, so therefore if you take part in a crime, your discipline has been lost.... Not my view as I am on the fence but thought I would put it to discussion.

Agreed but the discipline is to become a weapon when required , now using that in day to day life is fine if you dont get mentaly scarred in the process . AS said they have to be helped more that simple .
 
I agree with MK tho, there should be far more help given to those who have suffered post traumatic stress whether that be the armed forces or anything of a similar nature, eg 911, 7/7.

These ***** are responsible for my PTSD made me want to commit a violent crime and I'm not even a trained killer like some ex-servicemen...

41oQoqrx6xL._SL500_AA240_.jpg
 
Go easy? No. Not a chance.

Yes, I know you served our country. Yes, I am very grateful for it. But you can't be given a license a roam because of it, it was your choice to do so after all. Surely an equal and fair law system is part of the country you're fighting to protect.
 
Go easy? No. Not a chance.

Yes, I know you served our country. Yes, I am very grateful for it. But you can't be given a license a roam because of it, it was your choice to do so after all. Surely an equal and fair law system is part of the country you're fighting to protect.

Equal and fair is each case judged on its own merit not one size justice fits all !
 
Equal and fair is each case judged on its own merit not one size justice fits all !

A 21 year old, drunk on a night out, has a punch up with another guy, breaks his nose and is dealt a GBH charge.

You're saying that, if he's a Squaddie or an ex-serviceman he should be granted a more lenient punishment than if he was a regular call-centre worker as an example?

Remind me of that one. I got punched once when I was a kid and I just had to punch someone for revenge, that'll work in your court, wouldn't it?
 
A 21 year old, drunk on a night out, has a punch up with another guy, breaks his nose and is dealt a GBH charge.

You're saying that, if he's a Squaddie or an ex-serviceman he should be granted a more lenient punishment than if he was a regular call-centre worker as an example?

Remind me of that one. I got punched once when I was a kid and I just had to punch someone for revenge, that'll work in your court, wouldn't it?

Whys he drunk what lead to him attacking you , what lead to the fight , is he on medication for schizophrenia , did the other guy provoke him who threw the first punch . Intention, provocation and action are all things that are taken into account to build a case . Urrr no because thats a stupid reason , self defense maybe would be your rational (as the law stands thats an interpretation of reasonable force to defend yourself )
 
A 21 year old, drunk on a night out, has a punch up with another guy, breaks his nose and is dealt a GBH charge.

You're saying that, if he's a Squaddie or an ex-serviceman he should be granted a more lenient punishment than if he was a regular call-centre worker as an example?

Remind me of that one. I got punched once when I was a kid and I just had to punch someone for revenge, that'll work in your court, wouldn't it?

Substitute "appropriate" for "lenient" and you are there. Just banging people with mental disorders into clink and forgetting about them until they come out is wrong, unjust, and counter-productive. Appropriate treatment as part of the legal process is essential, both because it is unjust not to, and not doing so leads to recidivism.
 
I don't personally think that being an ex-squaddie should be one of the considerations when sentencing. However there does has to be more support given to them when they come out of the services to hopefully ensure they don't get into that position in the first place. I'm no expert but it appears that we ask these people to risk their lifes for our country but give them very little help or support after. Then we wonder why so many of them commit crimes!
 
Substitute "appropriate" for "lenient" and you are there. Just banging people with mental disorders into clink and forgetting about them until they come out is wrong, unjust, and counter-productive. Appropriate treatment as part of the legal process is essential, both because it is unjust not to, and not doing so leads to recidivism.

Ah, see there's a difference between Squaddies and people with fully fledged mental disorders... Otherwise you'll just have any old **** in Colchester or Aldershot who got drunk and committed a crime say they're suffering from PTSD and get off with lenience.
 
Back
Top