We often hear of criminals using the "human rights" argument in appealing against their sentencing. For example, a rapist in the UK had been sentenced to deportation, but managed to remain in the UK when his lawyers argued that his human rights to remain with his family has been violated. There are too many examples to list here, as you just have to read the newspapers to find out that criminals seem to have more rights than ordinary folks in the eyes of today's blind justice system.
If we are playing by the rules, then the rules must have been written by the mob. Doesn't the law care about the rights of people who have been violated? Don't they have rights too? In the above, the rape victim has the right to walk around without being attacked. The public has the right to their home and neighbourhood not being threatened by a migrant rapist. So why are the judges so keen to uphold human rights for criminals while condemning the public to criminal wrongs?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment