Surely that could be said of many careers. Are we to have a lengthy list of jobs that ex-cons are not allowed to do, and if that's their only skills then hard luck, you may have served your time, but society it going to punish you until you die. Or maybe we draw up a massive grid, with jobs across the top and crimes down the side and then certain combinations aren't allowed.
That's on a very limited level though, what's hinted at here is that any job that is deemed a privilege to have (which is a purely subjective measure) should be deprived to those who have served their time. The reason I mentioned the fairly ludicrous grid idea is because plenty of footballers have served time, but it is only those that have killed or raped/sexually assaulted that tend to get these kind of reactions around how they shouldn't be allowed to play again.
Whether a club would want to hire them after they come out is another matter all together. I know if I ran a company I'm not sure I'd want to hire a rapist, or thief, or someone convicted of any violent offence. I guess in this particular case it comes down to whether you think it was a callous act, carried out without concern for the victims and without remorse. Or is it a solitary error of judgement that had the worse possible outcome that the perpetrator is truly sorry for and, you would hope, has learned from.
If it's the latter, should we ruin yet another life in some sort of vengeance for a past event that now cannot be changed, or should he be allowed to try and build a new life post prison?
It comes down to what we see the role of prison to be. Is it purely punishment, or does it have a role in education and rehabilitation? If we think that those leaving prison are permanently tainted by their crimes, that they shouldn't be allowed to have jobs or any role in our society then surely the only option is to bring back the death penalty.
Alternatively, we have to believe that people are capable of learning and changing, that they won't make the same mistakes again and can rejoin society and make a healthy contribution. The argument then is purely whether the prison term served is enough to meter out the amount of punish society deems fit, whilst also rehabilitating the criminal to the point where they are ready to be released.
Unfortunately the re-offender rates in this country (and most of the western world it seems) indicate the prison doesn't achieve any of it's goals, the punishment dealt is not enough to be a deterrent, and the education/rehabilitation isn't enough to allow many criminals to (re)join society in a productive manner. However, our own attitudes and treatment of past offenders may (and probably does) prevent this from happening, meaning more crime is the only solution they see.
Yes, ok he has the right to carry on his football career, but its a terrible choice by any club to take him on. Is there no better goalkeepers out there with a clean criminal record who'd love the chance to play for swindon? Do they really have to offer a player who really is the pitts a contract or is it just a PR stunt
If I was a Swindon fan, I would not be happy, and bloody sure I let the board know how I felt too.
I think what he did was terrible and he has to live the rest of his life with the guilt, he's done his time set out by the courts, addmitidly It should have been longer, but he should no be allowed to get on with his career.
The problem people have with this is the fact he's a footballer and people are bitter because he is doing a well paid job that we all would love to do, if he was coming back out to work for mcdonalds nobody would be complaining
What he did was unforgivable and 7 years does not seem fair punishment but it is what he has been given and served. He should now be free to work like any other Tom, Dick or Harry that is let out from prison.
I think what he did was terrible and he has to live the rest of his life with the guilt, he's done his time set out by the courts, addmitidly It should have been longer, but he should no be allowed to get on with his career.
The problem people have with this is the fact he's a footballer and people are bitter because he is doing a well paid job that we all would love to do, if he was coming back out to work for mcdonalds nobody would be complaining
Excatly that and yet the crime would still have been the same ,
we all have done things i am sure that we are ashamed of and i know i have dsone some downright ridiculous stuff that looking back on i am very lucky that things never went wrong.
most of them in my late teens and early 20's , i have learnt without it ending in tradegy
Just to reiterate, I am not saying he shouldn't be allowed to play. I have no idea whether he feels remorse or not, hopefully and surely he does. The reason for this post was more I wondered why any club would bother with the aggro and fall out that is bound to come their way. Again, my biggest issue is with his representatives and Swindon FC negotiating a deal while he is still serving his punishment. Seems pedantic I know, but I feel he should have been released from prison before touting himself around the league. Would not be happy if Charlton had done that.
He made a terrible mistake for which he got punished, and he will live with it for the rest of his life. People leave prison and get jobs again, if he got a job as a toilet cleaner would we criticise his employers for having no morals?
3 and half years is no punishment for what he has done.
Sad situation is that most footballers need to be brought down a peg or two, they earn too much money and think they are dons! (Terry, Defoe etc)
Most Footballers?
I can't help but think that it's a percentage game and compared to people other than Footballers the percentage of Arseholes to good people is fairly evenly spread in most professions.
The fatal crash was caused by McCormick falling asleep at the wheel. Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before. Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough. He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept, and then drove to work in the morning?
The fatal crash was caused by McCormick falling asleep at the wheel. Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before. Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough. He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept, and then drove to work in the morning?
Pouso said the crash was at 5.45am. There's a difference between inoccently not knowing your still over the limit and it being blindingly obvious that you are.
The fatal crash was caused by McCormick falling asleep at the wheel. Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before. Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough. He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept, and then drove to work in the morning?
Pouso said the crash was at 5.45am. There's a difference between inoccently not knowing your still over the limit and it being blindingly obvious that you are.
What a load of rubbish! There is NO difference between the two. If you are out drinking the night before then go out at 5.45 it's fairly obvious you will still be under the influence of the drink. There is NO excuse for what he did and you should be ashamed at yourself for thinking there is too!
The fact that he was over the limit was a contributory factor, no doubt. But he'd already driven safely for more than 100 miles before he fell asleep at the wheel.
He wasn't blindingly drunk - but he was over the limit.
Also, he made clear that he holds himself 100% responsible for the deaths in that family.
The fatal crash was caused by McCormick falling asleep at the wheel. Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before. Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough. He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept, and then drove to work in the morning?
Pouso said the crash was at 5.45am. There's a difference between inoccently not knowing your still over the limit and it being blindingly obvious that you are.
What a load of rubbish! There is NO difference between the two. If you are out drinking the night before then go out at 5.45 it's fairly obvious you will still be under the influence of the drink. There is NO excuse for what he did and you should be ashamed at yourself for thinking there is too!
what are you on about?! I know there is no excuse, I wasn't saying either is right was I you prat.
He made a terrible mistake for which he got punished, and he will live with it for the rest of his life. People leave prison and get jobs again, if he got a job as a toilet cleaner would we criticise his employers for having no morals?
3 and half years is no punishment for what he has done.
Sad situation is that most footballers need to be brought down a peg or two, they earn too much money and think they are dons! (Terry, Defoe etc)
Most Footballers?
I can't help but think that it's a percentage game and compared to people other than Footballers the percentage of Arseholes to good people is fairly evenly spread in most professions.
I think the percentage of Arseholes that go to football is higher than most, if not all, spectating sports .....
He made a terrible mistake for which he got punished, and he will live with it for the rest of his life. People leave prison and get jobs again, if he got a job as a toilet cleaner would we criticise his employers for having no morals?
3 and half years is no punishment for what he has done.
Sad situation is that most footballers need to be brought down a peg or two, they earn too much money and think they are dons! (Terry, Defoe etc)
Most Footballers?
I can't help but think that it's a percentage game and compared to people other than Footballers the percentage of Arseholes to good people is fairly evenly spread in most professions.
I think the percentage of Arseholes that go to football is higher than most, if not all, spectating sports .....
I am not defending the bloke at all, I'm in the he shouldn't be playing football again camp.
All I was saying was, there is a difference between driving straight home from the pub or after a few hours and / waking up at about 10 in the morning and unknowingly still being over the limit. The time indicates McCormick in the former.
The fatal crash was caused by McCormick falling asleep at the wheel. Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before. Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough. He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept, and then drove to work in the morning?
Pouso said the crash was at 5.45am. There's a difference between inoccently not knowing your still over the limit and it being blindingly obvious that you are.
What a load of rubbish! There is NO difference between the two. If you are out drinking the night before then go out at 5.45 it's fairly obvious you will still be under the influence of the drink. There is NO excuse for what he did and you should be ashamed at yourself for thinking there is too!
what are you on about?! I know there is no excuse, I wasn't saying either is right was I you prat.
First of all, you claimed there is a difference, and NO there is no difference. If you have been drinking, the night before then you know you shouldn't be driving. There has been enough adverts, government complains etc to know you shouldn't drive. Anyone who claims they were not aware they still had alcohol in their system is stupid. There is no such thing as innocently claiming you don't know is not a defense, and if you are slightly over the limit or being blindlingly obviously drunk, you are still drunk end of!
Fairplay, personally whilst both are legally wrong, I'd claim that someone who comes straight out the pub and starts driving to be worse than someone who drives about 15 hours after their last drink but that's just me.
Didn't Tony Adams serve 3 months in prison, driving when steaming pissed? He was lucky in that he crashed into a wall at high speed not a pedestrian...
billy went out with his pals for a couple of pints after work and it ended in a session 6-8 pints , as it easily can but he got home about 11 and had to be in work at 6 the next morning he would be over limit wouldnt he
Yes he would
how many Billys are there on this forum be honest dont post the standard response,
i will admit it and go first
I have done that in bed at 00.00am up at 5am in work at 6
Thats the risk you or any other Billy's take, and the day it's judged wrong is the day innocent people get killed. Yes people do it all the time and 99% of the time are ok, but it's simply not worth the risk.
In very general terms you eliminate the alcohol from a half pint of beer every hour (obviously there is a period it tales to get into the bloodstream.) The present limit is (again very general) about 2.5 pints in your bloodstream (more generous that in other parts of Europe). Therefore anyone who is over the limit has NO excuse whatsoever.
I must say that the standard of responsibility shown in this thread is pretty good. I recall an earlier thread on a similar topic which was not quite as responsible. Please remember, by the time a drunk driver has killed someone, it is too late for saying 'I'm sorry'.
There will be mixed views on this this. He now has a 4 year old son, which some will say is unfair after what happened. I just think the whole thing is very sad and McCormick will have to live with his actions for the rest of his life.
That video should be the anti drink driving advert - way more powerful than most of the rubbish the gov't no doubt pay an add company a fortune to come up with
That video should be the anti drink driving advert - way more powerful than most of the rubbish the gov't no doubt pay an add company a fortune to come up with
First time i've seen it and it truly is unbelievable
of course I know you wasn't saying it's right, like you said it's too easily done so there needs to be stricter rules like no drinking 8 hours before you get into a car to drive. I dont beleive men and women should have different limits to how much they can drink as alcohol affects everyone differently I just think people shouldn't be allowed to drive even if they had one pint.
Comments
Whether a club would want to hire them after they come out is another matter all together. I know if I ran a company I'm not sure I'd want to hire a rapist, or thief, or someone convicted of any violent offence. I guess in this particular case it comes down to whether you think it was a callous act, carried out without concern for the victims and without remorse. Or is it a solitary error of judgement that had the worse possible outcome that the perpetrator is truly sorry for and, you would hope, has learned from.
If it's the latter, should we ruin yet another life in some sort of vengeance for a past event that now cannot be changed, or should he be allowed to try and build a new life post prison?
It comes down to what we see the role of prison to be. Is it purely punishment, or does it have a role in education and rehabilitation? If we think that those leaving prison are permanently tainted by their crimes, that they shouldn't be allowed to have jobs or any role in our society then surely the only option is to bring back the death penalty.
Alternatively, we have to believe that people are capable of learning and changing, that they won't make the same mistakes again and can rejoin society and make a healthy contribution. The argument then is purely whether the prison term served is enough to meter out the amount of punish society deems fit, whilst also rehabilitating the criminal to the point where they are ready to be released.
Unfortunately the re-offender rates in this country (and most of the western world it seems) indicate the prison doesn't achieve any of it's goals, the punishment dealt is not enough to be a deterrent, and the education/rehabilitation isn't enough to allow many criminals to (re)join society in a productive manner. However, our own attitudes and treatment of past offenders may (and probably does) prevent this from happening, meaning more crime is the only solution they see.
If I was a Swindon fan, I would not be happy, and bloody sure I let the board know how I felt too.
Shame on you SWINDON, shame on you!
The problem people have with this is the fact he's a footballer and people are bitter because he is doing a well paid job that we all would love to do, if he was coming back out to work for mcdonalds nobody would be complaining
Excatly that and yet the crime would still have been the same ,
we all have done things i am sure that we are ashamed of and i know i have dsone some downright ridiculous stuff that looking back on i am very lucky that things never went wrong.
most of them in my late teens and early 20's , i have learnt without it ending in tradegy
I can't help but think that it's a percentage game and compared to people other than Footballers the percentage of Arseholes to good people is fairly evenly spread in most professions.
Sleep deprivation was as much to blame as drink.
He admits he had been drinking at his friend's wedding reception the evening before.
Tests showed he was over the limit, even after some hours had passed.
He hadn't been out clubbing like Lee Hughes, who had made the decision to drive immediately after drinking.
McCormick had actually gone to bed and slept....but for not long enough.
He hadn't appreciated that alcohol was still in his system in the morning.
How many of us have gone out the night before, gone home and slept,
and then drove to work in the morning?
The fact that he was over the limit was a contributory factor, no doubt.
But he'd already driven safely for more than 100 miles before he fell asleep at the wheel.
He wasn't blindingly drunk - but he was over the limit.
Also, he made clear that he holds himself 100% responsible for the deaths in that family.
All I was saying was, there is a difference between driving straight home from the pub or after a few hours and / waking up at about 10 in the morning and unknowingly still being over the limit. The time indicates McCormick in the former.
billy went out with his pals for a couple of pints after work and it ended in a session 6-8 pints , as it easily can but he got home about 11 and had to be in work at 6 the next morning he would be over limit wouldnt he
Yes he would
how many Billys are there on this forum be honest dont post the standard response,
i will admit it and go first
I have done that in bed at 00.00am up at 5am in work at 6
I must say that the standard of responsibility shown in this thread is pretty good. I recall an earlier thread on a similar topic which was not quite as responsible. Please remember, by the time a drunk driver has killed someone, it is too late for saying 'I'm sorry'.