OPINION: Why only GBH and not attempted murder?

I realise I risk sounding like a Daily Mail editorial, but when, last March, three men shot a gun into a shop surely they were intending to murder?

Thusha Kamaleswaran, 5, was shot in the chest and is crippled for life, and Roshan Selvakumar, 35, was shot in the face at Stockwell Food and Wine shop in Brixton but, of course, they or anyone else in that shop could easily have been killed.

And yet, somehow, a court has found the guilty of grievious bodily harm but not attempted murder.

I studied A-level law. I understand about mens rea etc. and yet I thoroughly disagree with the court's decision.

Surely, by firing a gun you intend to kill, even if the target isn't specific? If you don't want to kill you shouldn't be firing a weapon.

COMMENT: It's been three months since the riots... have any lessons been learnt?

Three months ago riots erupted in London and spread across the country causing millions of pounds of damage and many injuries to people, but, in that time, what has really happened?

Sure, politicians have expressed concern at the fact the riots have happened, they've pointed fingers, blaming one group or another, hundreds have been up in court and many have received punishments - but what has been done to prevent a repetition next week, next month or next year?

To me it seems like the government (and opposition) have virtually forgotten about the riots. They may well be inquiries happening but, let's be honest, by the time that reports, the riots will be history, last week's chip wrappers.

I know it's difficult to do anything about the riots without establishing the causes but why not act on some of the suggestions?

Many rioters already had criminal records - let's make crime less attractive, increase sentences, stop releasing prisoners who are considered likely to re-offend. I'd hold that no-one should be released if they are considered to be at risk of re-offending.

I'd support the Tory policy of three strikes and you're out. I'd make it two.

Many argued that the riots were a result of poverty or unemployment. Personally, I think this is a minor factor, it's an excuse. yes, they may be poor and they might not have work but how many are genuinely doing something to try to rectify that? How many are doing voluntary work or getting work experience?

Let's not forget that the trigger for the riots was a march about the death of a known drug dealer and criminal. Is there simply a criminal underclass who refuse to take part in society? Is there a completely feral strata of society?

It's scary how quickly, when looking a the riots, you get back to people who are opting out of mainstream society, operating for themselves by any means and the involvement of organised crime underpinning this class of society.

Drink and drugs are also a major factor in the poor behaviour of many in our society. This needs urgent action and a significant increase in resources for the authorities to clamp down on the illegal trade.

I'm sure some rioters simply joined in because it seemed fun, they didn't think ant the effect of their actions.

Three months might not be long but I am concerned that, in Westminster, those running our society are being ostriches and hoping that the problems will just go away.

If nothing is done soon 2012's riots could well be worse. 2012 could be the year of total anarchy.