Sunday, September 21, 2008
Lock Him Up Before He Go Goes & Does It Again
Maybe I am being dim, but why exactly has George Michael been let off with a caution for being caught in possession of Crack Cocaine, a Class A drug? It's not exactly a first offence, is it? Whatever the arguments about cannabis, surely most people (apart, obviously, from those who would argue for the legalisation of all drugs) would agree with a zero tolerance approach to the possession of Class A drugs? The message George Michael's caution sends out is all wrong, and further confuses an already confused message about drugs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
43 comments:
What good would locking him up do?
How much does it cost us per week to keep prisoners in jail?
What would the public gain from jailing him? It's not as if he's running around hitting little old ladies on the head & nicking their purses to pay for his habit is it?
What would he gain from being jailed? I suspect he'd come out and carry on as before, perhaps being a little more careful.
There are higher priorities in the justice system than jailing celeb's (or anyone for that matter) for their own lifestyle choices.
the truth is that none of those in 'lawful authority' know if they are coming, going or just breathing heavily.
when it comes to drugs we just seem to end up with 'policies and strategies' and all the other cliches used to avoid actually deciding on what to do and then doing it.
either crack down hard as they do in singapore or legalise all 'recreational drugs' as a government monopoly and franchise their sale as a heavily taxed item.
Jailing celebs (as Bulldog puts it) is exactly what should be happening. It's called 'pour encourager les autres'.
Celebs are the people who should be setting examples to our youth...not displaying their lack of intelligence for all and sundry to view.
What public good will be achieved?
His demons are for him to sort out.
But he's a celeb!
They're untouchable.
The headline was slightly tongue in cheek. I do not suggested that he should necessarily be banged up, but I do think he should have been prosecuted and let the due process of law take its course. What good is achieved by constantly letting him off for the myriad of offences he has been arrested for?
Here's a better idea: legalise drugs, make them cheap and subject to government taxes and government standards. Provide free drugs to hardcore addicts with a free option to get treatment but no pressure to do so.
Cut out the criminal activity that criminalises many hardcore addicts, and give the government one fewer reason to stick its nose into everyone's life.
If George Michael wants to get off his head on crack, I don't see why that should be anyone's business but his own.
If, whilst off his head on crack, he then goes on to commit a crime, prosecute him accordingly.
No point locking him up as he would just be blackmailed bu hard nuts in jail.
Better to make him go to rehab and spend say 50 days on suspended sentence helping drug addicts or assisting them in some way.
I hardly think George Michael is public enemy number one. Leave him alone. Pick on the real bad guys - the dealers.
I agree - lock him up!! A gay drug addict would fit in perfectly in a modern British jail. I'm sure he won't be scared to meet 'Mr. Big' in the showers either....
Methinks Guido, bulldog and Iain are all right. Yes, the legislation in place is nonsense, and there's no reason he should be locked up, but we must respect the law as it stands.
Why? It's his body and mind he is ruining. He isn't hurting anyone but himself.
So why are you baying for his imprisonment?
Besides that, if you lock him up, he'll only do it inside 'again', plus he'll get serially victimised for being a famous gay guy, especially by those in jail who feel they have a religious duty to hate him.(and there are many of those nowadays)
I think the problems with drugs is more with people like you who panic and want to ban, jail and otherwise hitlerise people into doing what you decide is right for them.
Why don't you have a talk to a Imam about your sexuality? Because you get to swap roles, you see -- he'll have plenty or arguments for you to live a wholesome hetero life and have kids, and as we all know, in Iran the Islamic Nirvana, there are no homosexuals, they are all cured (one way or the other...)
You'll claim your sexuality hurts no-one, he'll claim it's against the deity and you're denying society children which in itself is a crime.
Just swap the topic, but keep the pattern and you have the perennial discussion about drugs which we no longer have about gays (and that is a good thing, have to start to be sane somewhere...!)
Sometimes I've a feeling that if you were not gay and out yourself, you'd be against homosexuality, because you have the basic thinking patterns that are required for this sort of opinion.
Look, let's just all support the two tier justice system in the UK. He's rich and famous FFS. If he was banged up who knows where it will end.
Agree he should be prosecuted, but what good does banging up adicts/ users do. Dealers; yes, should go to gaol.
Drug possession is a crime where the victim is prosecuted. If a drug user steals to feed his/her habit, gaol them for theft not using drugs.
why?
the man has paid millions in taxes over the years and remained in england. Surely there are worse people in this world to lock up than that sad middle-aged man walking the parks of london at night.... He clearly has demons.
I used to be against decriminalising drugs, but over the past few years have come to see that it is the only way forward.
I have just been reading about the draconian attempts by the Turks, the Japanese and the Chinese in the 17th Century (yes, 17th) to ban the use of tobacco, all such attempts were failures and I believe all our attempts are similarly doomed.
Given the George spends most of his time outside the UK for tax reasons, locking him up would pay for itself. He's a tosser anyway.
Accepting a caution means that the person is accepting guilt without having to go to court: it does not mean the person is let off. The caution is noted on the person's record.
"Guido Fawkes said...
What public good will be achieved?"
I'm a member of the public and it would do me the power of good to have a bloody good laugh.
Obnoxio the clown said: "Here's a better idea: legalise drugs, make them cheap and subject to government taxes and government standards."
make them cheap and subject to government taxes? I think I've spotted a small flaw in your logic. Just look what the 646 do to alcohol, cigarettes, petrol etc. There is no way they will be cheap while subject to government taxes.
Ordinary people get the full force of the law for far more minor misdemeanors because it is easy money and target-hitting for the plods.
It isn't so much the crime etc (though I think dealers should be skinned and tossed into a salt mine) but what gets my goat is the unfairness of the handling of the law by the authorities, be they Police or sentencing judges. Do 34 mph in 30 zones in most places now and feel the full force of the law - a crime worse than being a druggie!
as one of those nasty immoral people who think that all drugs should be legalised (and - what's worse - the especially devious and sickening kind that has logical arguments and qualifications in relevant areas -ugh!) I couldn't disagree more. And however 'tongue in cheek' you're being Iain, it's a stupid idea,
@arkangel: so bang goes impartiality before the law, eh? Let's all go round 'making examples' like some kangaroo court. B***s.
I also happen to be one of those irritatingly old-fashioned types that remembers when we did things because they were good things to do, rather than to 'send a message', because sending messages is for telegraph companies. I now discount anything said by someone invoking the go-awful phrase "sends out completely the wrong message". It means their talking drivel.
More George Michael Demons
Get the T-Shirt:
http://www.shotdeadinthehead.com/products/info.php?products_id=257&wx=1310&wy=651
Sorry Iain but I think you've misjudged the public (your readers') mood on this one.
Hope Cameron and co can come up with a less sensationalist approach.
I don't actually write my blog thinking about whether my readers will agree with me. I write my blog to give my honest views. And on this, my honest view is that he should not have been let off with a caution.
On this basis does murder equal an ASBO if your a celeb?
What good is achieved by constantly letting him off for the myriad of offences he has been arrested for?
Quite a lot of good actually: it eloquently exposes the fact that even people who claim to support the current drugs laws actually know they are complete and utter nonsense.
Anonymous @16:06 has already said what bothers me most about this tale.
The legal system (I dare not say justice) in this country is rapidly degenerating into a two tier system. If your alleged crime requires the involvement of our police 'services' chances are they won't bother to turn up, or if they do they will try very hard to avoid any court case.
If your alleged crime involves a litter warden, or a traffic warden, or a speed camera, or just some council busybody approved person, heaven help you. There is no effective way to challenge any allegation and the standard for evidence is very low or non-existant. Automatic conviction and penalty.
As for 'the war on drugs' - any reasonable examination of the evidence must question the efficiency of such an activity. It is the acme of self-defeating activity to 'punish' the dealers but go soft on the users. Historically bans on alcohol and tobacco in many countries have not worked. Probably best to decriminalise drugs, even if legalisation is a step too far...
"Sorry Iain but I think you've misjudged the public (your readers') mood on this one."
So are you saying that the public thinks celebs should be treated differently under the law than anybody else? I don't think so. How many more times are they gonna let this clown off with a caution?
You never know, a good kick up the arse might do him good. It would certainly bring back some crediblity to the law.
Iain - I was also surprised that he only received a caution, particularly as he has been in trouble with the law numerous times in the past.
Maybe different police forces have different policies for these things.. at the end of the day though, they only really care about the mid-level dealers and upward.
Iain Dale says: "I don't actually write my blog thinking about whether my readers will agree with me. I write my blog to give my honest views."
I guess that's why you're not an elected politician ??
heheheheheeeeeeeeee
;)
canvas-and why Dave is??????
anon - Dave won an election, Iain lost one...
As adorable and 'honest' as Iain is - I guess he just doesn't reflect popular opinion?
;)
heheheeee
Leave George Michael alone and get rid of Gordon Brown.
"Leave George Michael alone."
I wouldn't touch him with a barge pole.
I am always mystified by the argument that legalising drugs would reduce crime.
Al Capone didn't go straight when Prohibition ended, did he?
I am always mystified by the argument that legalising drugs would reduce crime.
Al Capone didn't go straight when Prohibition ended, did he?
You're lucky he got a caution.
My sister-in-law is a teacher. She caught a pupil selling drugs in her class. The pupil admitted it was cocaine.
Headmaster called the police who promptly refused to attend due to the small amount involved.
I thought we believed in freedom. Ian you have really let yourself down here. You are always moaning about the way the cops deal with real crime so why on Earth can't people take as many drugs as they like? Millions take drugs every week and providing they don't cause any problems for people who don't who cares? Apart from you of course.
0/10 must try harder
freedom to propser
Gee I must get back to UK as soon as possible! Fancy, I can only bother with the laws I like.
Doesn't seem to matter at all that it is against the law to be in possession of cocaine - we don't like the law so let's ignore it.
If you don't like the law then work to change it, but if you want a more civilised society then you should respect the law.
Sad to see Iain joining the po faced moralisers of ConHome.
It is trivia and no one cares.
George Michael's latest drug escapade bores me rigid. The fading old poof is a national treasure- mainly for the Wham! stuff- who just loves 'getting caught in compromising situations'. If anything the affectionate p*sstake that the StarStories team did on Yog was spot-on. Something tells me that he would quite enjoy the jail experience....
Gee I must get back to UK as soon as possible!...
Doesn't seem to matter at all that it is against the law to be in possession of cocaine - we don't like the law so let's ignore it.
oh dear, it seems francis left the UK under the misapprehension that this was not already the case!
Juries are entitled under common law to acquit where they find the law to bu unjust, and the Judge, Prosecution and Defence all have a duty to inform the jurors of that fact. So yes, if none of us like the law, we can all ignore it. Although it might be worth checking that everyone agrees first.
Post a Comment