Bear with me on this, I'm practicing some writing, and this seemed a good subject to practice on, given the newsfeed the last few days. The Philpotts - The Welfare Death Sentence On the morning of 11 May 2012 Jade Philpott, 10, John, nine, Jack, eight, Jesse, six, and Jayden, five, died in a fire, started by Mick Philpott, Over the last few days, I have read some emotive responses to the above tragedy, 'hang them' 'burn them alive' etc and to a degree I understand that initial response, to such a horrific crime, especially, if, like myself, you're a parent. Regarding the death sentence/torture angle, you often read a lot of provocative statements about how evil Shariah Law is, or how awful Chinas Human Rights are, and how we should stop trading, for example, with Saudi Arabia, because of their human rights records for torturing criminals, whilst also condemning Russia for their suppression of free speech, and also to a degree, general suspicions around Muslims/Islam, due to excessively negative tabloid representation, they in particular receive. In papers such as the Daily Mail and the Daily Star, its outright Islamophobia, and very much unwarranted. My point being, they print this stuff, because its designed to make the reader feel better, more civilised, than a culture we don't know. It also helps with their anti-immigration rhetoric. We condemn it in other cultures for a reason, China, USA (although we don't seem to mind if they do it), Thailand, Saudi Arabia, Iran, because its not the way most of us see human beings as behaving, the UK has a different culture now, but we only completely abolished the death penalty law in 2004, although the last hanging was 1964, but if we start killing people for crimes they commit, we open ourselves up to a vigilante society, where by innocent people can get entangled, additionally, people, I think, should be made to live with the crimes they do commit, plus we can't have any margins for error on guilt, when there's a death penalty. Secondly - The fact he was on welfare/benefits seemingly has a bearing on some of us, as to why he did what he did. Its like saying ' well Harold Shipman did it, lets get the Doctors'. Mick Philpot was a soldier, should we blame the Army? No. There is no reason to suggest that is why he was capable of what he did, just as in the same way, him being on welfare doesn't. The story has been turned into a class war, and I can bet my last pound, if it was an aristocratic, rich, good standing in the community 'Lord' Philpott, the ire wouldn't be as vitriolic. Mick Philpott was a greedy, misogynistic, controlling bully, he committed manslaughter because a woman defied him, and his sexual and monetary needs were going to be impacted. Nothing to do with being on welfare, nothing to do with being a soldier, all to do with being an inherently selfish bully. Even people with jobs can and do behave like that.
