I'm hardly a blinkered fan of the police (having seen at first hand their 'bad side' a few times), but it's not always the police's fault. The judiciary is far too lenient on persistent petty criminals, especially those who commit 'routine' robberies/burglaries/assaults against individuals. It must be soul destroying for a detective to solve a string of burglaries but when the scumbag burglar is up in court and found/pleads guilty, they get a suspended sentence and token fine. Despite having its faults, I do have a liking for that '3 strikes and you're out' system they had (have?) in America.
I can never help, though, contrasting this with the generally much stiffer sentences for white collar crime against corporations (especially by their employees). I still starkly remember a few years ago a woman who lived close to us was jailed for 5 years for embezzling £80k from Nat West where she worked; she was addicted to gambling and it was her first offence. The next article in the local paper was a thug who'd beat to a pulp some lad at a taxi rank one Saturday night; the lad was hospitalised with fractured skull and other serious injuries and was still suffering months later. Despite a long list of previous convictions, the thug got about 50 hours community service and a slap on the wrist. In terms of impact on the victim, the crimes were universes apart, yet to me the sentences were the wrong way round.
But I digress wildly!
Originally Posted by: Saint Snow