Lee Rigby's killer wants compo
Discussion
Jinx said:
So if we have a differing opinion that Justice has not been served by his merely serving a prison sentence we are now all racists? He chopped the head off a person he didn't know in the street, boasted about it and threatened others. Justice has not yet been served. A couple of teeth doesn't cover it either.
Justice is served by him being imprisoned. If you don't like that, reform the system, rather than encourage vigilante justice.''Daily Mail Racist Rage'' is one statement. Not saying you are racist, only that people buy into their extremism and racism, particularly around this (continually dragged up issue).
The Beast of Codfin said:
Hackney said:
Wow, looks like a lot of people are actually pro-ISIS after all given their version of "justice" and opposition to human rights.
Just because people breath through their nose and can speak without swearing, it doesn't mean they're pro-ISIS you Neanderthal. If the terrorists mean that you want to change our system to punish them on a more medieval level then I'd argue that you're more like ISIS than a good British man. Scum!
Calletrece said:
Justice is served by him being imprisoned. If you don't like that, reform the system, rather than encourage vigilante justice.
''Daily Mail Racist Rage'' is one statement. Not saying you are racist, only that people buy into their extremism and racism, particularly around this (continually dragged up issue).
Legal justice in the UK may have been but morality and legality are not equivalent. You may have noticed that there is a lot of pushback against the convention on human rights in the UK. Actions by convicted murderers such as this (claiming compo) helps fuel this dissatisfaction.''Daily Mail Racist Rage'' is one statement. Not saying you are racist, only that people buy into their extremism and racism, particularly around this (continually dragged up issue).
The Beast of Codfin said:
The Beast of Codfin said:
Hackney said:
Wow, looks like a lot of people are actually pro-ISIS after all given their version of "justice" and opposition to human rights.
Just because people breath through their nose and can speak without swearing, it doesn't mean they're pro-ISIS you Neanderthal. If the terrorists mean that you want to change our system to punish them on a more medieval level then I'd argue that you're more like ISIS than a good British man. Scum!
If he believes he was assaulted he has a right to seek redress. As does anyone in custody.
I can hold that opinion and abhor his crimes and beliefs.
can't eat properly.
WinstonWolf said:
Collectingbrass said:
So a public employee may have been negligent in the course of their duties and may have injured someone. Because that someone was previously a scumbag (for which they are already being punished) they deserve no recompense or restitution for the result of the alleged negligence?
Where's the cut off? Any particular religions we should single out? Any racial groups? How much of a scumbag do you need to be? Do we not pay out to 3.14lockopeners? What about "promising footballers" & "Aintree Ladies"?
What you're talking about is double jeopardy, and that's not how we do things, nor if we start doing it is it a country I want to be part of.
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather he'd committed suicide by cop but he didn't and we prosecuted him as required by our laws and culture. He was properly (as in in accordance with that process) found guilty by a jury of his peers and he is serving his time. That doesn't mean any screw can give him a shoeing and expect to get away with it, nor does it mean that we shouldn't treat him the same as we treat any other subject of the crown. Because if it did we would be no worse than ISIS.
I actually think the Home Office / Prison Service doubt that they can win a civil case and are raising the prospect of a payout to poison the jury. If so, shame on them, we need to be better than ISIS to win the moral war.
Utter balderdash, if he hadn't kicked off he'd still have his teeth.Where's the cut off? Any particular religions we should single out? Any racial groups? How much of a scumbag do you need to be? Do we not pay out to 3.14lockopeners? What about "promising footballers" & "Aintree Ladies"?
What you're talking about is double jeopardy, and that's not how we do things, nor if we start doing it is it a country I want to be part of.
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather he'd committed suicide by cop but he didn't and we prosecuted him as required by our laws and culture. He was properly (as in in accordance with that process) found guilty by a jury of his peers and he is serving his time. That doesn't mean any screw can give him a shoeing and expect to get away with it, nor does it mean that we shouldn't treat him the same as we treat any other subject of the crown. Because if it did we would be no worse than ISIS.
I actually think the Home Office / Prison Service doubt that they can win a civil case and are raising the prospect of a payout to poison the jury. If so, shame on them, we need to be better than ISIS to win the moral war.
The 'scum still have ooman rights' attitude is wrong and needs to be put back in it's box.
If you can't do the time don't do the crime.
Jinx said:
Calletrece said:
Prisoners shouldn't have their teeth knocked out by staff. He is perfectly entitled to expect compensation.
Just because you may be filled with Daily Mail racist rage about this, what he's there for and how he is treated whilst he is there are two different things.
He should serve his sentence, with his teeth intact, and if people want to provide vigilante justice, then he should expect for be compensated for it.
So if we have a differing opinion that Justice has not been served by his merely serving a prison sentence we are now all racists? He chopped the head off a person he didn't know in the street, boasted about it and threatened others. Justice has not yet been served. A couple of teeth doesn't cover it either.Just because you may be filled with Daily Mail racist rage about this, what he's there for and how he is treated whilst he is there are two different things.
He should serve his sentence, with his teeth intact, and if people want to provide vigilante justice, then he should expect for be compensated for it.
KrazyIvan said:
The issue is the perceived hypocrisy, the scumbag hates the western world so much he brutally murdered a man in the streets, yet is happy enough to run the comp claim allowed by such a world he hates. Aside from the small point of him only losing his teeth due to his own actions.
In his trial he also said that he does not recognise British law. He does when it suits him by the look of it.Calletrece said:
Not anyone, a 'soldier'.
Anyway, besides that, an eye for an eye makes the whole blind. If you disagree with beheading, you should disagree with punishments from the stone age.
You can't have it both ways.
It isn't both ways we wouldn't be murdering an innocent man off the street like he did. We would be executing a murderer completely different Anyway, besides that, an eye for an eye makes the whole blind. If you disagree with beheading, you should disagree with punishments from the stone age.
You can't have it both ways.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff