In light of events over the past few years, I find myself querying the competence of judges and magistrates to carry out their duties.

Sentencing is a joke, the point of which escapes the community at large.  Sentencing a young thug for the murder of a taxi driver is a case in point.  If two years in jail is the worst an offender can expect, this sentence serves only to increase the vulnerability of taxi drivers everywhere.

Recently another thug kicked a man in the head, resulting in this man’s later death.  I believe a suspended sentence was the outcome.  When outraged victims of crime hit back, they, not the criminals who provoke this reaction, are the ones prosecuted.  I understand too, that if a burglar is injured while robbing you of your possessions, he is entitled to sue you for damages, etc.  I would suggest that our law is not merely an ass, but run by self serving officials who choose to allow the crime rate to remain sky high in order to keep themselves employed.

It is an interesting point that judges in the USA are elected officials.  At the same time, sentencing in that country is more realistic than in ours, reflecting more accurately public opinion.  Is this fairer sentencing a result of a judge knowing that if his sentencing is too lenient, then come the next election, he’ll be in the dole queue?  You tell me!