Another classic case of double standards

[anonymous-user]

Greendubber said:

xjay1337 said:

La Liga said:

Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?

Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.

Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!

Grow up all of you FFS.

Pathetic arguing? I saw it as correcting people who clearly didn't understand what they were getting angry about.

Nothing wrong with that.

Agree, nothing wrong with a good argument. What was in the deleted posts? Unless it was something pretty strong it seems a bit pathetic to remove them.

[anonymous-user]

popeyewhite said:

"...prompting Judge Simon Berkson to interject saying: “They were playing a game that I’m afraid teenagers have been playing in this country [for decades"."

I think there was probably a good deal more menace involved than the Judge has considered. Possibly read Enid Blyton or Tom Brown during his childhood, didn't grow up on an estate near Chester. Two positives out of this though - the woman will think twice before using her car as a dangerous weapon, and the lad and his mates might be deterred from making life miserable for people who live near them.

I think the nativity is on your part if you think a criminal crown court judge isn’t well aware of how people commit crimes behave and think.

[anonymous-user]

dunc_sx said:

Graveworm said:

6 months custody is the same whether it is suspended or not. That's what seems to be being disregarded by those who need this to be unfair.

That doesn't seem quite right though does it? If someone asked me whether I wanted to be put in jail for 6 months or stay at home with famliy/friends etc then (obviously) I'd take the latter. As would anyone else, that's why the two punishments are not like for like. In fact if I were offered 2 years suspended or 6 months in jail I'd pick the 2 years suspended in a blink of an eye.

Dunc.

As you say, practically suspension is a more favorable outcome vs serving is immediately.


Suspension is either available or not. The criteria are either met or not. In order to suggest there are some double standards the individual circumstances of cases would need to be assessed to see if there are differing outcomes based on the criteria presented by males and females.

I'm having to fill in the blanks as expecting the OP to present anything half-intelligent or reasonably cohesive is clearly too-high-an-expectation.

The debate has evolved into a severity comparison between the respective offences and sentencing, but that's not a double standards argument.

[anonymous-user]

popeyewhite said:

La Liga said:

think the nativity is on your part if you think a criminal crown court judge isn’t well aware of how people commit crimes behave and think.

Do you mean naivete? I didn't mention anything about the virgin birth

1-0 to autocorrect.

[anonymous-user]

xjay1337 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Greendubber said:

xjay1337 said:

La Liga said:

Why has a mod removed one of Yonex’s posts and edited it out from mine and VH’s replie?

Unless PH has a new ‘stupid’ threshold, it didn’t appear to break any rules.

Probably fed up of your pathetic arguing!

Grow up all of you FFS.

Pathetic arguing? I saw it as correcting people who clearly didn't understand what they were getting angry about.

Nothing wrong with that.

Agree, nothing wrong with a good argument. What was in the deleted posts? Unless it was something pretty strong it seems a bit pathetic to remove them.

I don't think it was a good argument. Started to get personal and bhy.
Also, sometimes when you clearly aren't getting through to someone, you may as well leave it.
But heaven forbid, this is PH.
Postcount matters.

Physician, heal thyself!

[anonymous-user]

The irony of having a jab at post count whilst having a higher post / time ratio than most along with two posts in the topic that add nothing.

OP appears to have cut his losses which is surprisingly smart for him.

In terms of suspended sentences. They do help to reduce prison numbers (we run nearly fill all the time) and, without looking it up, I expect the reoffending rates are less than a short immediate sentence.

[anonymous-user]

dunc_sx said:

Graveworm said:

6 months custody is the same whether it is suspended or not. That's what seems to be being disregarded by those who need this to be unfair.

That doesn't seem quite right though does it? If someone asked me whether I wanted to be put in jail for 6 months or stay at home with famliy/friends etc then (obviously) I'd take the latter. As would anyone else, that's why the two punishments are not like for like. In fact if I were offered 2 years suspended or 6 months in jail I'd pick the 2 years suspended in a blink of an eye.

Dunc.

Yeah to say they are the same, while perhaps technically true, isn't actually equal in terms of outcome or effect because one person ends up in jail, which I suspect as the poster above says is a far worse punishment than a longer period of suspended sentence during which their life effectively carries on as normal providing they don't re-offend.

2 years where you mustn't commit another crime is not in the same league as 6 months in prison, after all that's just a completely normal 2 years for most people.