Screw criminal's rights

We hear so much about human rights. More specifically, the rights of criminals. To me, this really gets my back up.
Somebody violates somebody else's rights, and then still lawyers and organizations fighting to protect his precious rights. Funny how there is no Legal groups or Organizations who fight for or support the victims of crime.

For example, somebody breaks into your house, with a weapon, and you shoot him. If your life is not in immediate danger, you are suddenly the guilty party in terms of the law in most cases. Screw the fact that he was in your house, your private space, with the intention to destroy your rights. That seems to be the minor issue here. Also, the point of waiting until your life is threatened to defend yourself, may be too late. Events unfold quickly, and waiting for that second that you may be justified to defend yourself, may just be too late. In my view, he is in your house, that already is a threat. It should be the resident's right, to deal with the threat as you feel fit.

And this should extend to any circumstances where your rights or property is threatened.  In South Africa, the 'right to life' is so valued, that technically somebody can walk off with your possessions, and you cannot use maximum force to stop them. That is reserved ONLY when life is threatened.

Then, in a crime situation, if there are casualties,the criminal goes to a private hospital, for the best treatment the state (read the taxpayer) can afford, while the poor innocent victim, goes to one of our rat infested, dirty and useless public hospitals, if he does not have medical aid. Again, this makes absolutely no sense to me. So, the person who abides by the law and pays taxes, goes to a crummy, incompetent hospital, where his life is in further danger, whilst the no good, non tax paying criminal, gets the best care at a private hospital. Ironically the poor guy in the ruins that is the state hospital, lies on soiled sheets, whilst he is in part paying for the criminal's luxury hospital stay. Brilliant.

Then comes the sentencing. South Africa has abolished the death sentence. Well, a bunch of old, well educated guys from the constitutional court, found it 'unconstitutional' to sentence people to death. This is despite huge public support for the system. But then, our government has proved that in a democracy, you don't really have to listen to the tax payer, despite the fact that both their money and votes are pretty important. I say, have a referendum, allow the public to decide. We are the ones who pay for their stay at their stay at the prison, so it should be our say how best to deal with the worst of the worst.

The reality is that people who rape or murder are sentence to between 10-25 years. A life is not really life. And the sentences always seem to run concurrently. So, whether you kill 1 or 300 people, you will serve roughly the same time. Always makes good headlines though....'Killer sentenced to 200 years for murder'....and the reality- he serves 15-20, is released on parole or some common administrative slip up and he is roaming the streets again. Most criminals are rearrested within a couple of months of release, usually for a worse crime than they were previously convicted for.

The bail system must also be mention. There have been a number of cases where the accused is released of R500, despite having numerous other charges and/or convictions against him. Many of these criminals, have committed and been arrested for, similar crimes while out on bail.

Not that it will happen with the bunch of greedy and power hungry bunch who are pretending to run our country, but a decent review, with lots of public input, needs to be conducted on how best to alter the system so that criminals are treated as criminals and the innocent victims, enjoy more rights than those who take yours on a regular basis.