"Cavedweller - there are four theoretical bases for imprisonment: prevention, reform, punishment, and Hegelian balance (the balance between right and wrong). Total prevention (ie lock them up for ever so they can't do it again) is wholly unaffordable. It is also morally wrong since the punishment then does not fit the crime, as was the case in the bad old days. The USA has one of the highest prison populations per capita in the first world - and one of the highest crime rates. We do pretty badly on that scale too. Your kneejerk reactions learned presumably from Melanie Phillips are no recipe for a cure."

Richard, By "Cavedweller", I assume you mean me. That is a personal insult and against forum rules. I haven't called you names, please don't call me names - hardly the proper behaviour for someone who professes to be a lawyer.

And yes, I studied law at college, albeit forty-five-or-so years ago, and I'm well aware of those four bases. Read my posts again - I have not suggested locking them up forever - again, I'm well aware of the cost of such an exercise, and that to do so would be disproportionate to their offence(s). What I have suggested is that, in the present circumstances, punishment and deterrence trump Reform and the Hegelian Balance, and that they should have long prison sentences. The precise length of those sentences is not for you or I to decide, but it should be proportionate to the crimes, which are in my view heinous. If your dog shits on your carpet, you punish it. These dogs shat on everyone's carpet, and should be punished - properly and proportionately. That's all.

Regarding prison populations - why are you unable to comprehend a simple fact - the USA has a high prison population precisely because it has a high crime rate. Horse before cart, Richard. Why do Lefties always put the cart first and try to blame prison for criminals' criminality, and why do they have greater concern for the criminal than the victim?

Finally, I have not insulted your professional career. As far as I remember, my only reference to you was as Ian Mather's 'mate'. I don't know you, I don't know if 'Richard Bridge' is your real name and, to be perfectly frank, I don't care a toss about what you do. Lawyer or shithouse-cleaner, it's all the same to me.

I hope that makes my position crystal clear?

Have a nice evening Richard. Be sure thatI will.