Page 4 of 4 [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

18 Aug 2007, 1:56 pm

Hadron wrote:
...You just want to shoot burgulars, face it.

If someone steals my property, yes, I'd probably like to kill them. Naturally, I wouldn't as the law forbids it and I value my liberty. I guess you're young, and have not yet had to work for what you have. When you're older, you may understand why I feel that way.
Hadron wrote:
....And when a kid who is innocently having a run down the street is shot, what will you say then? Acceptable losses. You are so clinical.

Maybe I am. But that's a lot better than this touchy-feely lefty-liberal crap we get fed.

Hadron wrote:
...As an aside, would you bone Mrs T, or do you just w*k over her picture?

Hmm... I have to say that did appeal to my sense of humour. And I do have a copy of her biography! :wink:



rideforever
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 246
Location: Brighton, UK

18 Aug 2007, 2:02 pm

ascan wrote:
The law abiding majority don't, however


If there is one phrase I hate it is this one. It's a disgrace.

Firstly the majority is not law abiding : you can see this from the ecstacy takers, the private equity people in the City (avoiding tax), paying your plumber in cash, downloading songs, lending CDs to your friends ... all crimes ! !!

It's also a coercive phrase to make you think that if you break laws this is a bad thing - wrong ... many of the rights we enjoy exist because people fought for them - fought who ? Fought the government - as in broke the laws.

The law is just a representation of the will of the powerful created to further their ends, at the expense of the weak.

This phrase is all about stopping people changing the government changing the country. And (in the UK) the entire nation moans about this and that all bloody year long and does nothing - protest and congregation is now illegal ! Ha !

Also, in these days of meaningless jobs/relationships/culture and widespread depression and mental illness, the lynchmob attitude is back and makes people feel better about their worthless lives for 5 minutes.



Hadron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: IntensitySquared or Zomg

18 Aug 2007, 2:11 pm

ascan wrote:
Hadron wrote:
...You just want to shoot burgulars, face it.

If someone steals my property, yes, I'd probably like to kill them. Naturally, I wouldn't as the law forbids it and I value my liberty. I guess you're young, and have not yet had to work for what you have. When you're older, you may understand why I feel that way.
Hadron wrote:
....And when a kid who is innocently having a run down the street is shot, what will you say then? Acceptable losses. You are so clinical.

Maybe I am. But that's a lot better than this touchy-feely lefty-liberal crap we get fed.

Hadron wrote:
...As an aside, would you bone Mrs T, or do you just w*k over her picture?

Hmm... I have to say that did appeal to my sense of humour. And I do have a copy of her biography! :wink:

1. I have communist leanings so maybe not. Asides, i secure my stuff properly and am insured, so it doesnt matter too much.
2. I totally disagree with you on that one.
3. You over value your property i believe.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

18 Aug 2007, 2:13 pm

How about exempting those in the act of commiting a crime from a) claiming damages or b) the whole human rights act? Would help stop them criminalising the victims some.

Most of it is straightforward. We have plenty of laws already, and funnily enough, most criminals are breaking the.. without having to make them more illegal. Burglary has always been a crime. You dont have to criminalize it more. The only thing we need is a judiciary process that hands down realistic sentences, and for the police to patrol the streets more. Few more coppers would probably help in that regard.

People who have been attacked spend more time healing than the attackers do in the nick. Thats just f*cking stupid. police do not attend for shoplifting less than £100 pounds in value. Thats also f*cking stupid. Criminals in prison sometimes have a higher standard of living than their victims (I dont have a ps2 ffs, but someone doing a ten stretch gets one???). that would be f*cking stupid right there. We dont have enough prison space, so they let criminals out early.. guess what that is?

Easy answer.. build more prisons. In fact, there are premises that can easily be converted to prisons without much effort. Decommissioned warships perhaps? Nothing like a decent stretch of water to cut down on escapes.

So the easy steps:

1: More frontline officers.
2: Expanded prison capacity
3: Realistic sentencing
4: Removal of compensation culture from those engaged in criminal acts.

That should see a drop in crime, and I havent shot anyone, or executed them, or gone all Big Brother with the cameras, or invented any new crimes.

(anecdote time: two fully loaded firearms were found just off a doncaster roundabout. citizen involved handed them in. turns out they had been left on the roof of a police car by the trained specialist firearms officers, who then forgot about them and drove away...and people want to give then to standard beat plods? The highly trained elite firearms squad can't look after the ones theyve got.)


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

18 Aug 2007, 2:16 pm

rideforever wrote:
ascan wrote:
The law abiding majority don't, however


If there is one phrase I hate it is this one. It's a disgrace.

Firstly the majority is not law abiding : you can see this from the ecstacy takers, the private equity people in the City (avoiding tax), paying your plumber in cash, downloading songs, lending CDs to your friends ... all crimes ! !!

Well, yes, I see your point. I do agree, have posted something similar to what you've just said, previously, and perhaps I should have been more careful with my words. More accurately, the majority of people don't go around stealing directly from their neighbours. They don't go forcing their way into an old persons house in the dead of night to steal their life savings, and they don't carry weapons with intent to intimidate others into giving them money. Of course, neither are they morally perfect. Indeed, any man who says he's completely law abiding is a liar. In some respects this is a reflection on the way government insists on passing more and more ridiculous legislation, in others it really is a case of people acting unethically.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

18 Aug 2007, 2:18 pm

Hadron wrote:
... You over value your property i believe.


And you undervalue yours as it's been handed to you on a plate for the last 20 years, or so.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

18 Aug 2007, 2:24 pm

Macbeth wrote:
How about exempting those in the act of commiting a crime from a) claiming damages or b) the whole human rights act? Would help stop them criminalising the victims some.

Most of it is straightforward. We have plenty of laws already, and funnily enough, most criminals are breaking the.. without having to make them more illegal. Burglary has always been a crime. You dont have to criminalize it more. The only thing we need is a judiciary process that hands down realistic sentences, and for the police to patrol the streets more. Few more coppers would probably help in that regard.

Very sensible. It does seem straightforward, too. Unfortunately it costs money, and so it's unlikely the government will change things whilst they have the bottomless pits of education and health to pour money into.



Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 136
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

18 Aug 2007, 2:24 pm

Hadron wrote:
Anubis wrote:

I agree with my views still Hadron, you are placing tough law enforcement on par with totalitarianism. There need to be safeguards to ensure that the vast police resources cannot be used against the population by a loony government. Perhaps the Swiss way of arming the populace might just do the trick. Oh, and screw "he who is willing to sacrifice freedom for security will have neither", it really isn't a general rule. The way that the UK government- this is something I'm going to give Blair's government credit for, despise such an administration though I did, took on terrorism and prevented all the terrorist plots is comforting. All of the plots after 7/7 failed, including the Glasgow airport bombings.
Some people feel distrustful of the police in general because most British politicians today are clowns and not statesmen, and don't know how to tackle most problems.

Oh, you seem to want very tough law enforcement, dont you? Tough law enforcement is what normally leads to a totallitarian dictatorship, look at the nazis. As for 7/7, that was probably allowed to happen delibrately, given that echelon monitors most phone calls. As for the other plots, something is very amiss in the recent stories.


Oh come on, that's a conspiracy theory. There's a line between tough on laws and police state, and that line needs to be drawn. Cameras on every street to react to crimes, convict people, monitor suspects, good idea. Would you rather have a camera on the streets watching out for trouble, and sending out response teams when trouble brews up, or would you have none?


_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!


rideforever
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 10 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 246
Location: Brighton, UK

18 Aug 2007, 2:47 pm

Anubis wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Anubis wrote:
..
Oh come on, that's a conspiracy theory. There's a line between tough on laws and police state, and that line needs to be drawn. Cameras on every street to react to crimes, convict people, monitor suspects, good idea. Would you rather have a camera on the streets watching out for trouble, and sending out response teams when trouble brews up, or would you have none?


There is a difference between dealing with today's problems (what you are talking about) and creating a situation where tomorrow will be better.

At the present time in the UK (IMO) the line between police and government has been lost, and politicians + government + the media benefit from increasing talk of crime. Crime crime crime, sells newspapers, it scares people into no change at the ballott office (I almost wrote box office there ha) and it gives the police high status.

Crime crime crime, crackdown, tsar, Police On The Streets, asbos, 3 strikes and you're out, tougher sentences etc... All buzwords that slide off our politicians lips so effortlessly.

Our rights are disappearing - how will they ever be got back ? It's harder to reverse this trend with modern technology because it's harder to protest anonymously, and if you have anything to lose at all you don't want yourself filmed by the police protesting in front of the House of Commons - which is illegal anyway without permission from the police - which isn't really the point is it.

It's a worsening situation in the UK.



Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

18 Aug 2007, 2:49 pm

ascan wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
How about exempting those in the act of commiting a crime from a) claiming damages or b) the whole human rights act? Would help stop them criminalising the victims some.

Most of it is straightforward. We have plenty of laws already, and funnily enough, most criminals are breaking the.. without having to make them more illegal. Burglary has always been a crime. You dont have to criminalize it more. The only thing we need is a judiciary process that hands down realistic sentences, and for the police to patrol the streets more. Few more coppers would probably help in that regard.

Very sensible. It does seem straightforward, too. Unfortunately it costs money, and so it's unlikely the government will change things whilst they have the bottomless pits of education and health to pour money into.


Granted. i did note one money-saving device though. If we need more prisons built we have an untapped labour force for it. The prisoners. Hell, we can even pay them (at a reduced rate, to signify the fact they are being punished.) With decent supervision, i see no reason why a lot of the basic unskilled work couldnt be completed that way, perhaps even the skilled labour. (IE a brickie who got banged up for council tax evasion is still a skilled builder.) Given that many prisoners are effectively unskilled yobs, it roughly equates to the tedious training programs that law-abiding jobseekers get put on. It doesnt even infringe their human rights, because they are doing the same jobs under the same conditions, as those sent on compulsory training schemes.

Another saving: These second rate not actually coppers in the high vis vests that give you grief for smoking in the wrong place.. stop hiring them, use it to pay real coppers?

A third one: stop building useless s**t no-one wants like that bloody dome. Or buying "art". Or redesigning logos that dont need redesigning for ludicrous amounts. Or corporate branding for towns.

Actually, when you start looking, theres lots of ways to gather cash. Apparently it costs more per year to locate and deport illegal immigrants than it does to completely man our borders.. but better manned borders = less escapees. Buy one less box of pens per desk at all government offices? Turn the f*cking lights off in government offices at night? TBH anything that saves money at home could probably be used as a microcosm of how to save money country-wide.


_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]


Hadron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: IntensitySquared or Zomg

18 Aug 2007, 5:13 pm

ascan wrote:
Hadron wrote:
... You over value your property i believe.


And you undervalue yours as it's been handed to you on a plate for the last 20 years, or so.

*chuckles* I dont think I want a copy of Mrs T's biography thank you very much, unless I was looking for firewood. Asides, most tories dont really earn their wealth.



Hadron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Aug 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 957
Location: IntensitySquared or Zomg

18 Aug 2007, 5:17 pm

Anubis wrote:
Hadron wrote:
Anubis wrote:

I agree with my views still Hadron, you are placing tough law enforcement on par with totalitarianism. There need to be safeguards to ensure that the vast police resources cannot be used against the population by a loony government. Perhaps the Swiss way of arming the populace might just do the trick. Oh, and screw "he who is willing to sacrifice freedom for security will have neither", it really isn't a general rule. The way that the UK government- this is something I'm going to give Blair's government credit for, despise such an administration though I did, took on terrorism and prevented all the terrorist plots is comforting. All of the plots after 7/7 failed, including the Glasgow airport bombings.
Some people feel distrustful of the police in general because most British politicians today are clowns and not statesmen, and don't know how to tackle most problems.

Oh, you seem to want very tough law enforcement, dont you? Tough law enforcement is what normally leads to a totallitarian dictatorship, look at the nazis. As for 7/7, that was probably allowed to happen delibrately, given that echelon monitors most phone calls. As for the other plots, something is very amiss in the recent stories.


Oh come on, that's a conspiracy theory. There's a line between tough on laws and police state, and that line needs to be drawn. Cameras on every street to react to crimes, convict people, monitor suspects, good idea. Would you rather have a camera on the streets watching out for trouble, and sending out response teams when trouble brews up, or would you have none?

A line you so evidently want to cross. Asides, i savor what little privacy I have from the state as it is, I certainly dont want my liberties eroded away further. Now, go and read that book I recommended.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

18 Aug 2007, 9:03 pm

jail should be like school instead of just boredom.


history and sociology classes should be taught.


i think it'd work better.

for those who are illiterate, reading classes first then history and sociology after they can read.


it'd be a better use of jail time and funds than what's currently just a system of locking up criminals and releasing animals.