Following on form Daves harrowing account in the Lounge...
-
These are the kind of people he encountered: Man dragged off scooter by mob in Croydon riot [^] I can hear ll the usual shouts fomr the liberals of 'oh, poor them, they are underprivaledged, society is unequal' and all that crap. Here is the proof it is crap: An aspiring ballerina was among a group of girls caught on CCTV standing outside an electrical store deciding what to steal. [^] Underpriviledged is she? Deprived in some way? And those scum terrorising people with impunity in the first link? Underprivaledged are they? To live in one of the worlds richest cities? In one of the worlds most advanced and tolerant countries, where equal oppportunity is the law, and possibilities to improve ones life abound. Disenfranchised are they? They are thieving violent scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
These are the kind of people he encountered: Man dragged off scooter by mob in Croydon riot [^] I can hear ll the usual shouts fomr the liberals of 'oh, poor them, they are underprivaledged, society is unequal' and all that crap. Here is the proof it is crap: An aspiring ballerina was among a group of girls caught on CCTV standing outside an electrical store deciding what to steal. [^] Underpriviledged is she? Deprived in some way? And those scum terrorising people with impunity in the first link? Underprivaledged are they? To live in one of the worlds richest cities? In one of the worlds most advanced and tolerant countries, where equal oppportunity is the law, and possibilities to improve ones life abound. Disenfranchised are they? They are thieving violent scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
============================== Nothing to say.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
They are scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
Quite the change-of-tone. What happened to "oh, it'll be good for the economy"? You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
-
These are the kind of people he encountered: Man dragged off scooter by mob in Croydon riot [^] I can hear ll the usual shouts fomr the liberals of 'oh, poor them, they are underprivaledged, society is unequal' and all that crap. Here is the proof it is crap: An aspiring ballerina was among a group of girls caught on CCTV standing outside an electrical store deciding what to steal. [^] Underpriviledged is she? Deprived in some way? And those scum terrorising people with impunity in the first link? Underprivaledged are they? To live in one of the worlds richest cities? In one of the worlds most advanced and tolerant countries, where equal oppportunity is the law, and possibilities to improve ones life abound. Disenfranchised are they? They are thieving violent scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
============================== Nothing to say.
Picking and choosing to suit your argument, that's not like you at all. You cannot solve anything without understanding the cause of it, and trying to simply eradicate it very, very rarely works.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
They are scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
Quite the change-of-tone. What happened to "oh, it'll be good for the economy"? You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
You really got a 10 for this trite drivel? :omg:
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
"oh, it'll be good for the economy"?
That hasnt changed, and it is the case, as with any disaster, the money spent rebuilding stimulates the economy.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
How in the remotest sense is that in anyway relevant to the first video I posted? Did you even watch it?
============================== Nothing to say.
-
You really got a 10 for this trite drivel? :omg:
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
"oh, it'll be good for the economy"?
That hasnt changed, and it is the case, as with any disaster, the money spent rebuilding stimulates the economy.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
How in the remotest sense is that in anyway relevant to the first video I posted? Did you even watch it?
============================== Nothing to say.
I got two, dumbass.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
How in the remotest sense is that in anyway relevant to the first video I posted? Did you even watch it?
Yes, I did. It was directed towards the statement of yours that I quoted.
-
Picking and choosing to suit your argument, that's not like you at all. You cannot solve anything without understanding the cause of it, and trying to simply eradicate it very, very rarely works.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
You cannot solve anything without understanding the cause of it
So, lets see. After the abolition of effective sentencing for under 16s, they become uncontrolable... Thats the cause,. Right there. Reintroduce effective sentencing and you reintroduce law and order.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
ChrisElston wrote:
You cannot solve anything without understanding the cause of it
So, lets see. After the abolition of effective sentencing for under 16s, they become uncontrolable... Thats the cause,. Right there. Reintroduce effective sentencing and you reintroduce law and order.
============================== Nothing to say.
I always love the argument on phone in programs "They should bring back the cane, I was caned all the time at school, never did me any harm". Well it obviously never did you any good either then did it you daft cunt.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
I got two, dumbass.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
How in the remotest sense is that in anyway relevant to the first video I posted? Did you even watch it?
Yes, I did. It was directed towards the statement of yours that I quoted.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I got two, dumbass.
I changed my post, nuptynuts.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
It was directed towards the statement of yours that I quoted.
So your Russian theaters and gasing statement was only relevant to my previous statement that destruction is good for the economy? OK, so moving on, and hopefully address my comments in this post, and not some old one... You dont think that an armed response is valid when peoples lives are threatened?
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I got two, dumbass.
I changed my post, nuptynuts.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
It was directed towards the statement of yours that I quoted.
So your Russian theaters and gasing statement was only relevant to my previous statement that destruction is good for the economy? OK, so moving on, and hopefully address my comments in this post, and not some old one... You dont think that an armed response is valid when peoples lives are threatened?
============================== Nothing to say.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
I changed my post, nuptynuts.
I responded before you did.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
So your Russian theaters and gasing statement was only relevant to my previous statement that destruction is good for the economy?
What? When I said, "the statement of yours that I quoted", I meant, y'know, the part that I quoted.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
You dont think that an armed response is valid when peoples lives are threatened?
Funnily enough, I actually said that at the time and you scoffed at it.
-
I always love the argument on phone in programs "They should bring back the cane, I was caned all the time at school, never did me any harm". Well it obviously never did you any good either then did it you daft cunt.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
I am not suggesting the cane, but the situation today in the UK is untenable, as I am sure you know: When you have under 16s beyond the control of any law then you have the results you see today. Quite clearly the touchy feely approach hasn't worked. If it had, then number crimes committed annulally by this age group would have declined since the abolition of institutions designed to handle them. Here is a sample of what is easilly available infor on youth crime stastics: More under 16s are behind violent crime [^] Whatever the change of tactic there has been since the 1970s is clearly not effective. Actually the reason is quite simple. It is based on th emistaken belief that all people are inherently good and only do bad things when driven to do so because of boredom, or adveertising or some such. What this point of view totally fails to take into account is that some people are actually violent thieving twats and need locking up.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
I changed my post, nuptynuts.
I responded before you did.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
So your Russian theaters and gasing statement was only relevant to my previous statement that destruction is good for the economy?
What? When I said, "the statement of yours that I quoted", I meant, y'know, the part that I quoted.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
You dont think that an armed response is valid when peoples lives are threatened?
Funnily enough, I actually said that at the time and you scoffed at it.
Damn, I just wrote a long reply and it got lost in the post. Anyway, so fuck em basically. Who gives a toss about a load of scum kids terrorising the country. Either kill them or lock them up, because quite frankly, they are wothless.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
I am not suggesting the cane, but the situation today in the UK is untenable, as I am sure you know: When you have under 16s beyond the control of any law then you have the results you see today. Quite clearly the touchy feely approach hasn't worked. If it had, then number crimes committed annulally by this age group would have declined since the abolition of institutions designed to handle them. Here is a sample of what is easilly available infor on youth crime stastics: More under 16s are behind violent crime [^] Whatever the change of tactic there has been since the 1970s is clearly not effective. Actually the reason is quite simple. It is based on th emistaken belief that all people are inherently good and only do bad things when driven to do so because of boredom, or adveertising or some such. What this point of view totally fails to take into account is that some people are actually violent thieving twats and need locking up.
============================== Nothing to say.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
What this point of view totally fails to take into account is that some people are actually violent thieving twats and need locking up.
They are yes, but by nature they are very much in the minority. It is not only the change of tactic since 70s, but the there is a change in population size, population demographic, community makeup, perception of the nation, of entitlement, of expectation, of share of wealth, education, jobs, and so on and so on and so on. Your argument that the only thing that needs reversing is the way we punish children is simplistic and massively flawed. It may be part of the answer in some way, but it is not in itself the answer.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
What this point of view totally fails to take into account is that some people are actually violent thieving twats and need locking up.
They are yes, but by nature they are very much in the minority. It is not only the change of tactic since 70s, but the there is a change in population size, population demographic, community makeup, perception of the nation, of entitlement, of expectation, of share of wealth, education, jobs, and so on and so on and so on. Your argument that the only thing that needs reversing is the way we punish children is simplistic and massively flawed. It may be part of the answer in some way, but it is not in itself the answer.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
They are yes, but by nature they are very much in the minority.
A minority that create havoc in society.
ChrisElston wrote:
It may be part of the answer in some way, but it is not in itself the answer.
There isnt 'an answer', a 'silver bullet'. It was searching for this kind of magic cure that took us down the pointless road we took with child crime. Now, to your points in detail: Population size: This hasnt changed appreciably since the 70s. Population demographic: Again, has there been a significant change that can account for the increase in crime? (Since the crime is not exclusive to racial sub groups any change in this is not going to be relevant). As for age. Well the population has got older, but it is kids we are talking about, so again, how is this relevant? Commuhnity makeup: Same as demographics. Perception of the nation: Percentage of crimes reported and sentenced has reduced over the decades. Yet still they are increasing. Entitlement, expectation, wealth, education: All of this has become more avaiolable over the last 40 years. Jobs: In London, where the rioting took place, there is plenty of work o clearly this isnt a factor. So when your list is analysed in detail it is clear that none of those are factors, and that the reason why these kids are violent criminals is because they chose to be. Therefore treat them as such.
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
They are scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
Quite the change-of-tone. What happened to "oh, it'll be good for the economy"? You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
You sound like you want a Russian approach, as in gassing an entire theatre full of hostages and refusing to tell the medical personnel trying to save the innocents what gas you used.
Complete rubbish. Most of the terrorist were wrapped with explosives and nails. If even one has goes off it would have been a massacre. But I’m sure you have a better idea how the Special Forces have to react in such situation. The hesitation and “mild approach” during the other terrorist attack in Beslan’s school resulted in far more causalities. If I was in that fricking theater I would have prefer the Special Forces to do exactly what they did. At least this will gives me some fair chance of survival. And the civilian causalities was result from inability to bring enough ambulances in the narrow area in time, not the attack. And they manage to kill all of the 30 bastards! Every single one of them.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet! Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
These are the kind of people he encountered: Man dragged off scooter by mob in Croydon riot [^] I can hear ll the usual shouts fomr the liberals of 'oh, poor them, they are underprivaledged, society is unequal' and all that crap. Here is the proof it is crap: An aspiring ballerina was among a group of girls caught on CCTV standing outside an electrical store deciding what to steal. [^] Underpriviledged is she? Deprived in some way? And those scum terrorising people with impunity in the first link? Underprivaledged are they? To live in one of the worlds richest cities? In one of the worlds most advanced and tolerant countries, where equal oppportunity is the law, and possibilities to improve ones life abound. Disenfranchised are they? They are thieving violent scum. The army should have gone in and shot the lot of them. They dont deserve to live in the same society as the rest of us.
============================== Nothing to say.
If that happened in Chicago that car would've been full of dead punks in seconds. I'm happy our officers use deadly force without a flinch when faced with motorists using cars as weapons. The husband of my friend was actually hit by a criminal, survived fine, unfortunately his partner wasn't as accurate with his shooting as he should have been and the crook survived. This is not the exact case, but it happens all the time: http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/officer-struck-by-a-vehicle-in-south-chicago-neighborhood.html[^]
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson My comedy.
-
I got two, dumbass.
Erudite__Eric wrote:
How in the remotest sense is that in anyway relevant to the first video I posted? Did you even watch it?
Yes, I did. It was directed towards the statement of yours that I quoted.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
I got two, dumbass.
Watch the name calling Ravel. Nothing wrong with a good argument but the name calling has to go. gets off soapbox.
Just along for the ride. "the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011) -
I always love the argument on phone in programs "They should bring back the cane, I was caned all the time at school, never did me any harm". Well it obviously never did you any good either then did it you daft cunt.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
ChrisElston wrote:
I always love the argument on phone in programs "They should bring back the cane, I was caned all the time at school, never did me any harm".
Every instance of that I've heard of (or experienced myself) was more along the lines of: "I was caned, and holey fuck did I never do that again." There will always be some outliers but a good dose of the cane will make model citizens out of the majority of miscreants. Kids need to know that actions have consequences. Even if that consequence is trouble sitting for a day or two.
Kill some time, play my game Hop Cheops[^]
-
Picking and choosing to suit your argument, that's not like you at all. You cannot solve anything without understanding the cause of it, and trying to simply eradicate it very, very rarely works.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
Does "War on Terrorism" sound familiar. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Well, who doesn't release stuff like that ? Microsoft software is just as bad. Christian Graus That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
Erudite__Eric wrote:
What this point of view totally fails to take into account is that some people are actually violent thieving twats and need locking up.
They are yes, but by nature they are very much in the minority. It is not only the change of tactic since 70s, but the there is a change in population size, population demographic, community makeup, perception of the nation, of entitlement, of expectation, of share of wealth, education, jobs, and so on and so on and so on. Your argument that the only thing that needs reversing is the way we punish children is simplistic and massively flawed. It may be part of the answer in some way, but it is not in itself the answer.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.
I agree - I am not a parent but living in Cambridge I see lot's of young people around the place - not all of them university students. Many of them are friendly, polite, helpful and kind - this argument that young people are worse nowadays existed back in the 70's when I was a kid. Taking this to its logical conclusion kids must be psychopaths if they have continued to get worse since the 70's and earlier... The looting was about people getting caught in a group frenzie(whatever you want to call it) - it's not so difficult to understand if I try and put myself in their shoes...
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
-
I agree - I am not a parent but living in Cambridge I see lot's of young people around the place - not all of them university students. Many of them are friendly, polite, helpful and kind - this argument that young people are worse nowadays existed back in the 70's when I was a kid. Taking this to its logical conclusion kids must be psychopaths if they have continued to get worse since the 70's and earlier... The looting was about people getting caught in a group frenzie(whatever you want to call it) - it's not so difficult to understand if I try and put myself in their shoes...
Continuous effort - not strength or intelligence - is the key to unlocking our potential.(Winston Churchill)
It wasn't like this when my parents were kids, going off to seaside towns to have running street battles with the Rockers. Or their older brothers the Teddy Boys rioting all over the country. Of course by the time their younger brothers were teenagers in the seventies they were much better behaved with organised football hooliganism.
Every man can tell how many goats or sheep he possesses, but not how many friends.