The Children's Society purports to represent children, although as far I can tell, actual children are about as numerous as they would be at a Gary Glitter concert, today they are upset over a proposal to allow more child offenders (or to be precise teenage thugs who are old enough to get married or join the army) to be named in the press. Strangely they appear to arguing simultaneously that it's a bad idea because it violates the child's rights and that it would be a badge of honour for them to be so named. Pick one or the other please or at least pretend to respect the public's intelligence enough not to use both arguments together.
On the subject of criminals and justice John East has a couple of very good posts up, as does Laban.
Victory for decency in Alabama
1 hour ago