Acid Attacks!

The Homebrew Forum

Help Support The Homebrew Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
8,520
Reaction score
5,496
Location
Sleaford - Lincolnshire
Just watching BBC News and the banner headline is ...

"Sentences for people who carry out acid attacks in England and Wales
could be increased as part of a "wide ranging" review,
following a rise in incidents."


What a load of cobblers! :doh:

Yet another knee-jerk reaction from a weak government that needs to show that it is doing "something" after the media has raised hue and cry.

Throwing acid at someone is a pure and simple Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) and the only "increase" available to the current sentence of "Life Imprisonment" is to hang the buggers; and I doubt that they will introduce that sentence!

Rather than yet again increasing our laws, all the Police and Judiciary have to do is to apply the ones that we already have in force ...

... and hand maximum sentences to the evil bustards that commit this type of offence.

http://www.grayandcosolicitors.co.uk/section-20-assault-and-section-18-assault-grievous-bodily-harm/
 
But the law needs to be changed...thugs know that possession of acid has no penalty as it is not classed as a weapon whereas possession of a knife does. Therefore they are switching.

However the press are currently reporting every attack as it is the new version of a dangerous dog attack.

And I agree, once used as a weapon it's GBH so should be prosecuted as such
 
With a bit of imagination a cucumber could be used as a dangerous weapon. Would an outbreak of cucumber attacks result in legislation against said fruit? Any attack upon the person should be treated for what it is, not the weapon used. I suppose any acid can be bought over the internet. Last time I bought a battery for me motorbike it came with 750ml of sulphuric...
 
I'm with gunge and dutto on this. We have sufficient laws to prosecute people for this kind of thing. The politicians are just reacting to the media's agenda. After the battering (about all kinds of things, Grenfell, election, brexit, terrorist attack etc) they've taken they just seem to be wanting to be seen as proactive rather than re-active which is an accusation being levelled at them lately
 
I think the reaction is to the sharp rise in attacks. Last year there where over 500 attacks reported in 32 police force areas.
 
So one can buy sulphuric, nitric, hydrochloric acids etc online, but when I go to Wilko's for brewing sundries there's a little label on the shelf saying that you've got to ask for citric acid at the service desk! Apparently one of its uses is to cut heroin and **** like that. The assistant gives you the once-over and makes a snap judgement based upon your appearance and demeanour before deciding whether to let you have it or not. I've got to send the missus or kid in to get it for me lol. I have no problem buying kitchen knives/Stanley blades etc. WTF?!?
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately the number of acid attack has been rising significantly over the last few years, but we have not heard much about it.
Now levels are so high that they have become news worthy and the government feels it needs to been to be doing something.
Anything to make this crime more unacceptable with bigger punishment must be a positive.
 
So one can buy sulphuric, nitric, hydrochloric acids etc online, but when I go to Wilko's for brewing sundries there's a little label on the shelf saying that you've got to ask for citric acid at the service desk! Apparently one of its uses is to cut heroin and **** like that. The assistant gives you the once-over and makes a snap judgement based upon your appearance and demeanour before deciding whether to let you have it or not. I've got to send the missus or kid in to get it for me lol. I have no problem buying kitchen knives/Stanley blades etc. WTF?!?

Must be where you live :lol: . You can just pick citric acid up off the shelf at the wilko near here I work
 
It needs a small change to make carrying corrosive/noxious substances without lawful excuse a crime (same as a knife), Oh and put them on the poisons register so they has to be signed for.

There is no fear of the law, no significant deterrent if your a chav at the bottom that needs to change. Any suggestions?


aamcle
 
It needs a small change to make carrying corrosive/noxious substances without lawful excuse a crime (same as a knife), Oh and put them on the poisons register so they has to be signed for.

There is no fear of the law, no significant deterrent if your a chav at the bottom that needs to change. Any suggestions?


aamcle

Putting them on the poison list seems a sensible move but lots of people use acid legitimately. Just for a start I (we HBers) use it to strip alkalinity out of brewing liquor. I normally buy CRS on the internet. How would I sign for it if it was put on a poisons list?
 
Good point, paying by credit/debit card is probably good enough ID it's at least as good an illegible signature that when deciphered turns out to be A Blair.

aamcle
 
But the law needs to be changed...thugs know that possession of acid has no penalty as it is not classed as a weapon whereas possession of a knife does. Therefore they are switching.

However the press are currently reporting every attack as it is the new version of a dangerous dog attack.

And I agree, once used as a weapon it's GBH so should be prosecuted as such


The law DOES NOT need to be changed; just applied.

The Prevention of Crime Act of 1953 defined an Offensive Weapon as ...

"An offensive weapon is a tool made or adapted for the purpose of
inflicting either mental or physical injury upon another person."


The people who are throwing acid at other people are "adapting" a substance for use as an offensive weapon.

If I walk across a garage with a motorbike chain in my hand it isn't an "Offensive Weapon" if I intend to fit it to a motorbike; but if I intend to cream a fellow mechanic with it, it becomes and offensive weapon because I am adapting its use.

I agree entirely with the "Dangerous Dogs" analogy. Another knee-jerk reaction to a media frenzy!

Statistically, the breed of dog that puts most people into hospital in the UK is the Jack Russell; but it isn't classed as a "Dangerous Dog"! :whistle: :whistle:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offensive_weapon
 
...........

There is no fear of the law, no significant deterrent if your a chav at the bottom that needs to change. Any suggestions?

......

A mate of mine once pointed out to me ...

"If you are prepared to pay the price then the law does not exist."

... and he was 100% correct be it for murdering your next door neighbour or for parking in a "No Parking" zone.

At the moment, it appears that the punishments are so light that more and more of our population are "prepared to pay the price".

I don't think that the laws themselves need to be reviewed but sure as hell we need to have a re-think on how the level of punishments are set and how such punishments are applied.

It may be okay to fine someone a hundred quid but not if they then get away with not paying it. Ditto with all the other punishments which the offenders then avoid or have reduced.

The mate that pointed the above saying out to me, lived with a Social Worker who supervised people on Community Service. One day we were out working in the piddling rain, gassing rabbits with Cymag (a powder that gives off cyanide gas when it gets wet) when he pointed out that, due to the adverse weather, all Community Service work in town had been suspended for the day! :doh: :doh:

Happy Days! :whistle: :whistle:
 
The law DOES NOT need to be changed; just applied.

The Prevention of Crime Act of 1953 defined an Offensive Weapon as ...

"An offensive weapon is a tool made or adapted for the purpose of
inflicting either mental or physical injury upon another person."


The people who are throwing acid at other people are "adapting" a substance for use as an offensive weapon.

I agree its knee jerk reaction, however a clever Barrister could argue, acid or other noxious substances do not meet the definition of a tool hence I guess this is why they cannot currently be prosecuted for possesion of an offensive weapon. If they could I am sure the CPS would be doing so. Changing the law to make it an offencsive weapon makes sense.

There was a lady on the Jeremy Vine show this week who was attacked with acid. Her ex paid someone to do it, the person who threw the acid got 2 years and was out in half the time. Stronger sentences on par with knifing or shooting someone makes sense. Having said all that if someone did it to any of my family I would wait for them to come out of jail and exact some biblical revenge on them,
 
I get the feeling that if you're the type of person to throw acid in someone's face, you're not too bothered about whether a sentence is 5 years, 20 years, life etc. I seriously doubt the risk of being in jail for an arbitrary period of time crosses the mind of someone who has it in them to throw acid in someone's face.
 
The idea of stiffer penalties for acid attacks is stupid. What matters here is that people are assaulting others with the specific intent of causing permanent facial scarring. What method they use to do that is irrelevant, corrosive substances just happen to be a cheap and easy way of doing it. If you have a harsh penalty for those and a less harsh penalty for, say, a Stanley knife, people will just use Stanley knives.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, people are most commonly using things like drain cleaner (which are alkali), so why are they talking about restrictions on sulphuric acid?
 
Or Adapted

Duto you have to at least demonstrate intent to use corrosive as a weapon, with a knife it's the other way around the person carrying has to provide an acceptable reason to have it on them.

Much easier to get them off the street.


aamcle
 
I agree its knee jerk reaction, however a clever Barrister could argue, acid or other noxious substances do not meet the definition of a tool hence I guess this is why they cannot currently be prosecuted for possesion of an offensive weapon. .........

The Law in the UK is ultimately governed by Case Law.

A judge makes a decision that sets a precedent not previously seen. In many cases, the judge's decision is accepted by all parties and the Case will be quoted in future trials; but many of these situations are appealed.

The appeals process may take the situation all the way to the House of Lords where a final decision is made and the decision is final and again the Case may be quoted in future trials.

I can find no Case Law that answers the question "Is acid a tool within the meaning of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953?"; but the very first time a Barrister put forward a defence based on the argument that acid was not a tool should have resulted in a decision by a judge.

If this hasn't occurred then either the judiciary consider acid to be a tool and this is not a defence or Barristers have been using it as a defence and the Crown Prosecution Service has been at fault for over 60 years by not challenging the situation.

In either case, there is no need to change the law but there may be a need to clarify it. :thumb:
 
Back
Top