Taking the law into your own hands
Discussion
esxste said:
Something very wrong with someone who resorts to violence to resolve their frustrations.
A dose of violence is near enough the only thing some of the thickos are worried about, they certainly aren't worried about run-of-the-mill laws the rest of us have to obey because the implications of not doing so could have massive impact on our respectable and responsible lifestyles (a CCJ or Common Assault charge really isn't a badge of honour when it stops a mortgage application or crops up at job interview).I do my best to avoid the thickos, but it's not hard to accept that they drag you down to their level if you spend too much time with them. On Public Transport, perhaps?
The parents are the real problem.
TooMany2cvs said:
A grown adult decides that the appropriate response to a random sprog being a little turd is to physically assault them?
And people are defending this...?
Have you actually read the article? 10-11 year old asked to take feet off seat, refuses and/or acts cocky and leaves them there (respect for elders ffs), gets a poke in the ribs by a 70 year old then held in an arm lock. If you and others label this as "physical assault" then we are well and truly screwed.And people are defending this...?
Hopefully no one is defending his actions however no need to go off on one either.
Imho it is actions with no consequences that gives rise to some children turning out like complete t
ts as adults.TX.
Terminator X said:
Have you actually read the article? 10-11 year old asked to take feet off seat, refuses and/or acts cocky and leaves them there (respect for elders ffs), gets a poke in the ribs by a 70 year old then held in an arm lock. If you and others label this as "physical assault" then we are well and truly screwed.
ITYF it's the law which deems that assault.Rovinghawk said:
"Law, without force, is impotent."
(Pascal)
This. (Pascal)
I'll illustrate with an example from my son's school. Son is now 13, he's fecking huge for his age (5'9" already), did karate for 5 years, so remarkably handy, but actually very gentle.
So this little gang of s
ts was tormenting him at school, mostly verbal, but some physical. A random kick or a thump, usually in a situation where any response would be visible to staff. And to be fair to him, he sucked it up for about 9 months. We got pretty medieval on the school and the little sods were made to apologise, promise not to do it again, made to think about the consequences of their actions - which lasted for about 30 seconds before normal service resumed. Last winter term, he cracked. The ringleader had just kicked him in the shins, and was giving him a load of verbal. Outside the staffroom (not the best place...) Son 1 just whacks this kid in the chops. Kid goes down and stays down, out cold. Thankfully Son 1 resists the temptation to give the prostrate kid a proper kicking, and walks off. Cue much hand wringing from the school,.which calmed down a bit when I produced the emails that I had sent to them warning them of precisely this issue if they didn't do something.
Anyway, with a point application of violence, the problem was permanently solved. They left him alone, and he left them alone. The tormentors knew that the staff would do nothing, but they now knew that he was perfectly capable of doing something.
The kids with their feet on the seats know they are untouchable. The general public can't legally do anything, the train guard can't do anything, the police can't do anything. If they lived in fear of a random member of the public giving them a clattering, then they wouldn't do it.
rxe said:
Rovinghawk said:
"Law, without force, is impotent."
(Pascal)
This. (Pascal)
I'll illustrate with an example from my son's school. Son is now 13, he's fecking huge for his age (5'9" already), did karate for 5 years, so remarkably handy, but actually very gentle.
So this little gang of s
ts was tormenting him at school, mostly verbal, but some physical. A random kick or a thump, usually in a situation where any response would be visible to staff. And to be fair to him, he sucked it up for about 9 months. We got pretty medieval on the school and the little sods were made to apologise, promise not to do it again, made to think about the consequences of their actions - which lasted for about 30 seconds before normal service resumed. Last winter term, he cracked. The ringleader had just kicked him in the shins, and was giving him a load of verbal. Outside the staffroom (not the best place...) Son 1 just whacks this kid in the chops. Kid goes down and stays down, out cold. Thankfully Son 1 resists the temptation to give the prostrate kid a proper kicking, and walks off. Cue much hand wringing from the school,.which calmed down a bit when I produced the emails that I had sent to them warning them of precisely this issue if they didn't do something.
Anyway, with a point application of violence, the problem was permanently solved. They left him alone, and he left them alone. The tormentors knew that the staff would do nothing, but they now knew that he was perfectly capable of doing something.
The kids with their feet on the seats know they are untouchable. The general public can't legally do anything, the train guard can't do anything, the police can't do anything. If they lived in fear of a random member of the public giving them a clattering, then they wouldn't do it.
Rovinghawk said:
esxste said:
Something very wrong with someone who resorts to violence to resolve their frustrations.
"Law, without force, is impotent."(Pascal)
i suspect you also support the 2nd amendment mis-readers in the US as well ?
Terminator X said:
Imho it is actions with no consequences that gives rise to some children turning out like complete tts as adults.
TX.
I respect your opinion and can sympathise but I find that in a lot of cases the people who turn out like tts as adults.TX.
ts are precisely the ones that are taught that violence is the solution to problems. In this case, words from 8-11 year olds.Edit: I do not mean to say that this is a dichotomy.
rxe said:
The kids with their feet on the seats know they are untouchable. The general public can't legally do anything, the train guard can't do anything, the police can't do anything.
Its totally maddening. Human Rights Act, various laws were brought in, with totally unforeseen consequences. Its analogous to the welfare state: fantastic idea to get the nation out of poverty & care for the genuinely needy, & now look at it - swarms of teenage single mothers, chavs/thickos, lawlessness, sink estates, k all about it......rxe said:
This.
I'll illustrate with an example from my son's school. Son is now 13, he's fecking huge for his age (5'9" already), did karate for 5 years, so remarkably handy, but actually very gentle.
So this little gang of sts was tormenting him at school, mostly verbal, but some physical. A random kick or a thump, usually in a situation where any response would be visible to staff. And to be fair to him, he sucked it up for about 9 months. We got pretty medieval on the school and the little sods were made to apologise, promise not to do it again, made to think about the consequences of their actions - which lasted for about 30 seconds before normal service resumed.
Last winter term, he cracked. The ringleader had just kicked him in the shins, and was giving him a load of verbal. Outside the staffroom (not the best place...) Son 1 just whacks this kid in the chops. Kid goes down and stays down, out cold. Thankfully Son 1 resists the temptation to give the prostrate kid a proper kicking, and walks off. Cue much hand wringing from the school,.which calmed down a bit when I produced the emails that I had sent to them warning them of precisely this issue if they didn't do something.
Anyway, with a point application of violence, the problem was permanently solved. They left him alone, and he left them alone. The tormentors knew that the staff would do nothing, but they now knew that he was perfectly capable of doing something.
The kids with their feet on the seats know they are untouchable. The general public can't legally do anything, the train guard can't do anything, the police can't do anything. If they lived in fear of a random member of the public giving them a clattering, then they wouldn't do it.
He should have reacted a lot quicker to the bullying.I don't like it when you mention a proper kicking that is the act of a coward.One kick to head could be fatal don't teach him that. I'll illustrate with an example from my son's school. Son is now 13, he's fecking huge for his age (5'9" already), did karate for 5 years, so remarkably handy, but actually very gentle.
So this little gang of s
ts was tormenting him at school, mostly verbal, but some physical. A random kick or a thump, usually in a situation where any response would be visible to staff. And to be fair to him, he sucked it up for about 9 months. We got pretty medieval on the school and the little sods were made to apologise, promise not to do it again, made to think about the consequences of their actions - which lasted for about 30 seconds before normal service resumed. Last winter term, he cracked. The ringleader had just kicked him in the shins, and was giving him a load of verbal. Outside the staffroom (not the best place...) Son 1 just whacks this kid in the chops. Kid goes down and stays down, out cold. Thankfully Son 1 resists the temptation to give the prostrate kid a proper kicking, and walks off. Cue much hand wringing from the school,.which calmed down a bit when I produced the emails that I had sent to them warning them of precisely this issue if they didn't do something.
Anyway, with a point application of violence, the problem was permanently solved. They left him alone, and he left them alone. The tormentors knew that the staff would do nothing, but they now knew that he was perfectly capable of doing something.
The kids with their feet on the seats know they are untouchable. The general public can't legally do anything, the train guard can't do anything, the police can't do anything. If they lived in fear of a random member of the public giving them a clattering, then they wouldn't do it.
Biker 1 said:
Its totally maddening. Human Rights Act ... with totally unforeseen consequences.
Step away from the Daily Mail.All the Human Rights Act does is allow UK courts to prosecute breaches (by the UK government) of the European Convention of Human Rights.
The UK has been a signatory of, and legally bound by, the EConvHR since September 1953, having been key in setting up the convention and the European Court of Human Rights.
Now, which articles of the convention do you object to?
http://rightsinfo.org/the-rights-in-the-european-c...
http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.p...
TooMany2cvs said:
Digby said:
So in the example I gave above, you would go hunting for a guard or simply stand for the entire journey?
Yeh, that's an absolutely cram-full train. Not a single empty seat on it.
I'm genuinely curious to know what you and those who think like you would do.
Digby said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Digby said:
So in the example I gave above, you would go hunting for a guard or simply stand for the entire journey?
Yeh, that's an absolutely cram-full train. Not a single empty seat on it.
I'm genuinely curious to know what you and those who think like you would do.
But - if you really want an answer, then - no, I would not physically assault a child, and I'd be ensuring that anybody who I did see physically assault a child was reported to the police for it at the first opportunity. No matter how loathsome the child.
TooMany2cvs said:
Digby said:
TooMany2cvs said:
Digby said:
So in the example I gave above, you would go hunting for a guard or simply stand for the entire journey?
Yeh, that's an absolutely cram-full train. Not a single empty seat on it.
I'm genuinely curious to know what you and those who think like you would do.
But - if you really want an answer, then - no, I would not physically assault a child, and I'd be ensuring that anybody who I did see physically assault a child was reported to the police for it at the first opportunity. No matter how loathsome the child.
Well done.
dudleybloke said:
Old git is old enough to know better.
Old git is lucky the feral kids didn't turn on him.The kids were bang out order but you see adults refusing to move briefcases/coats off spare seats does this mean if your bigger it's ok to just throw there stuff on the floor to make the seat available?
Always worth remembering before being the hero just run thru the possible outcomes .
Digby said:
Right. So if a relation of yours couldn't get a seat and was being abused and someone stepped in and provided that seat and stopped the abuse, you would report the person who intervened and would rather stand all the way and let the abuse continue.
Yes, I would report a grown adult who physically assaulted a child. Wouldn't you?I'm really not sure how much clearer I can answer that. Yet, still, you seem to have difficulty grasping it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff