Radical Muslims who attempted to murder get just 2/4/5 years (UK)

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]They talked about killing him and the injuries they caused could have killed him. Attempted murder in my eyes and most rational people I imagine.Ninja-Hippo

poor guy, they should have served more in jail ..... but I bet there is more to this story, the teacher must have had said something absured about Islam which still doesn't justify what they did.

omho88

[QUOTE="omho88"]

poor guy, they should have served more in jail ..... but I bet there is more to this story, the teacher must have had said something absured about Islam which still doesn't justify what they did.

LJS9502_basic

My lack of faith in the UK law makes me doubt everything they say. I won't believe a word. If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. Simple as that. We have been complaining about the legal system for years, what will a bloody letter do?CannedWorms

If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. CannedWorms

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="omho88"]

poor guy, they should have served more in jail ..... but I bet there is more to this story, the teacher must have had said something absured about Islam which still doesn't justify what they did.

m25105

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"][QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

Isn't attempted murder typically 5 years?

BuryMe

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="CannedWorms"]If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Fact; no it isn't. I'll repeat that for extra clarity; FACT. Not opinion. Fact.Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]You're right, you don't know the law here, so stop trying to pull it out of your posterior. If the CPS didn't prosecute for attempt murder, it's not attempt murder.Ninja-Hippo

'This is the dog we want to hit, to strike, to kill.'

Attempted murder. It's a simple definition. Understand it please.

this man knows his laws. today we have learned that beating someone in the face with a metal pipe and smashing his skull in until the victim is motionless is definitely NOT attempted murder (even though it was a premeditated assault in which the perpetrators were taped saying they wanted to kill him)

Well then I guess shooting a gun at someone is not attempted murder...it's shooting a gun at someone.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Well then I guess shooting a gun at someone is not attempted murder...it's shooting a gun at someone.

Ninja-Hippo

this man knows his laws. today we have learned that beating someone in the face with a metal pipe and smashing his skull in until the victim is motionless is definitely NOT attempted murder (even though it was a premeditated assault in which the perpetrators were taped saying they wanted to kill him)

ItalStallion777

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Well then I guess shooting a gun at someone is not attempted murder...it's shooting a gun at someone.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"] Why isn't the punishment for 'attempted' murder the same as murder, if the intent is th e same.. it's just as bad.Inconsistancy

if it were my choice i'd give them life in jail.

Except here that is attempted murder.;)LJS9502_basic

Slap on the wrist. They should have been charged with a hate crime, assault + battery, assault with a deadly weapon and the guy should sue for damages. This is definitely not something that should receive lenient sentencing. It can only encourage others to do the same thing when it carries such a light sentence. Extremists give up their lives for less.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="omho88"]

poor guy, they should have served more in jail ..... but I bet there is more to this story, the teacher must have had said something absured about Islam which still doesn't justify what they did.

LJS9502_basic

No matter he said, what these idioits did is unexcusable and they should be severly punished. I am not against the victim, I thought this was pretty clear ... ohh, yeah, you are preoccupied with the idea that I am a terrorist and I support beating people who offend me !!

[QUOTE="CannedWorms"]My lack of faith in the UK law makes me doubt everything they say. I won't believe a word. If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. Simple as that. We have been complaining about the legal system for years, what will a bloody letter do?Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

this man knows his laws. today we have learned that beating someone in the face with a metal pipe and smashing his skull in until the victim is motionless is definitely NOT attempted murder (even though it was a premeditated assault in which the perpetrators were taped saying they wanted to kill him)

Ninja-Hippo

can i not disagree with the outcome of this case? from the facts that i see and my basic understand of its definition this an clear case of attempted murder. we all understand that merely saying the words "i want to kill you" is not attempted murder, but what i am saying is that when it is accompanied with a relevant action such as using multiple weapons to beat a man to near death then it is. from my point of view im looking at this at a very logical, clear cut way. do i know every single fact in the case? no, nor do you but i feel that based on the facts that we both know, i have made a better case at providing my opinion on why it is attempted murder. i say we let the OT jury decide... :P

Actually just shooting a gun at someone in the US isn't attempted murder unless the shot was clearly intended to kill and that was the intent of the person. They also have to prove that it's the persons intent to kill somehow before it's attempted murder. As you yourself said, you shouldn't assume.Ace6301

Well that is not actually correct. If someone uses a brick and metal poll with the intent to kill an individual that would be murder. It depends on the case, of course...but you can't say it's a fact that that would never be murder.LJS9502_basic

See what happens when you assume?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Except here that is attempted murder.;)Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"]

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

this man knows his laws. today we have learned that beating someone in the face with a metal pipe and smashing his skull in until the victim is motionless is definitely NOT attempted murder (even though it was a premeditated assault in which the perpetrators were taped saying they wanted to kill him)

ItalStallion777

can i not disagree with the outcome of this case? from the facts that i see and my basic understand of its definition this an clear case of attempted murder.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Except here that is attempted murder.;)LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Wrongo. No it isn't. Fact.LJ_basic

Ah but if you had read my first post to Ninja I stated that one CAN use a brick or metal pole to attempt to kill someone. He said no. Which is frankly wrong. There is no assumption. I clearly stated it.;)LJS9502_basic

This is the last time I am saying this: it was attempted murder. You attack someone with a a large weapon to the skull then thats attempted murder. You can use the law to dispute this but it doesnt't negate common sense. ::typing from mobile::CannedWorms

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Ah but if you had read my first post to Ninja I stated that one CAN use a brick or metal pole to attempt to kill someone. He said no. Which is frankly wrong. There is no assumption. I clearly stated it.;)LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="CannedWorms"]My lack of faith in the UK law makes me doubt everything they say. I won't believe a word. If you hit someone round the head with a metal pole and a brick which results in a broken skull, that is ATTEMPTED MURDER. Simple as that. We have been complaining about the legal system for years, what will a bloody letter do?CannedWorms

To get an attempted murder conviction, you need to prove intent to kill. Hitting some one in the head with a pole proves intent to harm, but not kill

That's why you follow the train of thought. And in the US shooting at gun at someone is considered attempted murder. The word AT is very important there. Nonetheless.....it was a comment to show how erroneous his argument was.The UK does have laws against murder...and using an object...be it a brick, knife, metal pole, gun with the intent to kill that individual would qualify as murder if successful and attempted murder if not so success...yes?LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Ace6301"] "Well then I guess shooting a gun at someone is not attempted murder...it's shooting a gun at someone." Your post. You didn't clearly state anything other than shooting a gun at someone. You really should just admit when you're wrong. Ace6301

US Law.... In order for a person to be guilty of attempted murder, that person should have deliberately, intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life, attempted to kill someone.

Firing a gun at them qualifies...

Edit: Head shots alone do not qualify and contrary to video games it's expedient to fire center mass...not at the head.

Actually it's you who are wrong. Going by your logic...there is no such crime as murder or attempted murder. In the US an individual that did that would be charged with either murder or attempted murder unless they can show self defense. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"] Obviously your understanding of the facts of the incident is superior to that of the prosecution. Maybe they read the wrong article on the internet? :roll:

Ninja-Hippo

can i not disagree with the outcome of this case? from the facts that i see and my basic understand of its definition this an clear case of attempted murder.

if you read my full post i clearly say that we don't know all the facts. on the other hand there's not too many ways to spin a broken skull, major lacerations, and their voice on tape. and yes i think the prosecution is in a much better position to decide what is what. i also think president bush or obama are in a much better position to know what's best for the country given that they know more facts then us. Does that mean i should blindly agree with them? hell no. in this case i looked at what was said in the presented article and formed my own opinion on it. i think that if what is said is accurate, which i assume at least most of it is, this is attempted murder.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]That's why you follow the train of thought. And in the US shooting at gun at someone is considered attempted murder. The word AT is very important there. Nonetheless.....it was a comment to show how erroneous his argument was.The UK does have laws against murder...and using an object...be it a brick, knife, metal pole, gun with the intent to kill that individual would qualify as murder if successful and attempted murder if not so success...yes?LJS9502_basic

US Law.... In order for a person to be guilty of attempted murder, that person should have deliberately, intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life, attempted to kill someone.

Firing a gun at them qualifies...

Edit: Head shots alone do not qualify and contrary to video games it's expedient to fire center mass...not at the head.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] No. It isn't. If I shoot a gun at you it is NOT attempted murder unless I'm clearly aiming for your head or the prosecution can substantiate that I was trying to murder you and not just shooting you. Either way though, you're wrong here. What you're claiming is attempted murder...isn't. This isn't a point of view thing, this is the way the law works. And yes this is US law.Ace6301

US Law.... In order for a person to be guilty of attempted murder, that person should have deliberately, intentionally or recklessly with extreme disregard for human life, attempted to kill someone.

Firing a gun at them qualifies...

Edit: Head shots alone do not qualify and contrary to video games it's expedient to fire center mass...not at the head.

if you read my full post i clearly say that we don't know all the facts. on the other hand there's not too many ways to spin a broken skull, major lacerations, and their voice on tape. and yes i think the prosecution is in a much better position to decide what is what. i also think president bush or obama are in a much better position to know what's best for the country given that they know more facts then us. Does that mean i should blindly agree with them? hell no. in this case i looked at what was said in the presented article and formed my own opinion on it. i think that if what is said is accurate, which i assume at least most of it is, this is attempted murder.

ItalStallion777

Also you're more than entitled to form any opinion you want; i remind you that it was you who originally attacked my position which was merely based on the prescription of the law. :? I have expressed no opinion in relation to that.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Except here that is attempted murder.;)LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

if you read my full post i clearly say that we don't know all the facts. on the other hand there's not too many ways to spin a broken skull, major lacerations, and their voice on tape. and yes i think the prosecution is in a much better position to decide what is what. i also think president bush or obama are in a much better position to know what's best for the country given that they know more facts then us. Does that mean i should blindly agree with them? hell no. in this case i looked at what was said in the presented article and formed my own opinion on it. i think that if what is said is accurate, which i assume at least most of it is, this is attempted murder.

Ninja-Hippo

Also you're more than entitled to form any opinion you want; i remind you that it was you who originally attacked my position which was merely based on the prescription of the law. :? I have expressed no opinion in relation to that.