BLUEMOMENT

.
One less stupid idea to worry about.

Not sure I would ever worry about it

bosun higgs wrote:Not sure I would ever worry about it

You would have if he'd carried on with the idea and you had been caught with an absent-mindedly pocketed sailing knife.

It is obviously a problem.
But jail is waste of money, they would just learn how to make and use blades properly there.
Stick their knives up them handle first so they cut their fingers trying to get it out.
That way the punishment would fit the 'size' of the crime.

Ken Clarke ought to know better, he is a barrister of great experience an should understand that sentencing is the business of the court NOT a politician. The law sets a maximum sentence and within that limit the court decides on the basis of the evidence heard in the case and given under oath what the appropriate sentence should be. Even then there remains a right of appeal against sentence.

Rant starts.

If he wants to save some money out of the legal system let him set about systematically reducing the number of laws on the books. He could then cap the amount available in legal aid for civil cases.Perhaps most distastefully of all he could cap the prices paid by the CPS for charges from barristers. And when he's done that he could take the Charter of Human Rights out of British Law and get rid of the number of stupid cases being brought at the taxpayers expense to force the taxpayer to finance a plethora of foreign criminals to stay in this country when they should be deported.

Rant ends

TFT CJ.

Olivepage wrote:Ken Clarke ought to know better, he is a barrister of great experience an should understand that sentencing is the business of the court NOT a politician.

It wasn't Ken Clarke's idea, it was a moronic election promise designed to appeal to Daily Mail readers.

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said he would put sentencing policy in the hands of judges, not newspaper pundits.

I brought it up because there is already at least one case of a yachtsman with a sailing knife in his pocket being charged with posessing a knife. I always have a knife in my sailing jacket pocket. It was just a stupid idea.

Yes - I don't disagree.

Its a further example of a trend started by Jack Straw some years ago of politicians seeking to control how the courts administer the law. I well remember how Straw tried (without success) to dictate to magistrates courts that they should stop sending people to prison.

Sentencing is NOT a matter that politician should have any part of. That is a matter solely for the courts.

Its most disappointing that a man with Clarke's experience and background should continue the practice. The knife business is just another example of a politician trying to influence sentencing for political reasons and its quite wrong.

Prison is an available sentence for carrying a knife and has been for many years. Courts have had, and as far as I know still have, the duty to sentence on the facts of the offence. I've not checked recently so I may be amiss, but my belief is that if a knife is carried for legitimate reasons and the kniife itself is appropriate for that reason there is no offence. So a sailor carrying a sailing knife commits no offence. If he carried a machette there probably is an offence.

If the police arrest and charge someone then the police have to prove the charge and the court can throw out the case if they fail to do that.

The point is that a court is the proper mechanism to decide such things - it is NOT a decision that politicians should have any say in. My point about Ken Clarke is that he was a barrister for many years and must understand these things better than we do and its really very amiss of him to go against such fundamental principles.

Olivepge : rant.
Gets my vote on all points