Discussion
Pan Pan Pan said:
blueg33 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
eldar said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
his is fine if it is applied equally to all who conduct riots, The problem is, that at the moment, it only seems to be aimed at far right thugs.
Thats because rioters are all far right thugs. Convictions prove that.Simple, innit.
https://youtu.be/teSPN8sVbFU?si=mBJC_7zGB1Df5e3R
The convictions only prove Starmer's left wing bias, in how he deals with issues. We wait to see if far left violent thug Amesbury, is dealt with in the same way.
If not, why would you expect him to be treated in the same way as those involved in a riot?
In the recent past how have Tory governments dealt with rioters?
In 2011 Ministry of Justice figures show a total of 1,292 offenders were jailed for their part in the riots.
Edited by blueg33 on Sunday 10th November 11:48
Given the choice, what would YOU prefer to receive, An offensive tweet online. or a punch in the face sufficiently hard to knock you to the ground, followed by a beating around the head once you were down there?
Please try to give an `honest' answer.
I dont think the comparison is valid - one is an offence against one person whereas the other potentially affects a large number of people. Especially if people are encouraged to start fires. (And having checked "preview", I think my quoting will go wrong as well.)
Randy Winkman said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
blueg33 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
eldar said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
his is fine if it is applied equally to all who conduct riots, The problem is, that at the moment, it only seems to be aimed at far right thugs.
Thats because rioters are all far right thugs. Convictions prove that.Simple, innit.
https://youtu.be/teSPN8sVbFU?si=mBJC_7zGB1Df5e3R
The convictions only prove Starmer's left wing bias, in how he deals with issues. We wait to see if far left violent thug Amesbury, is dealt with in the same way.
If not, why would you expect him to be treated in the same way as those involved in a riot?
In the recent past how have Tory governments dealt with rioters?
In 2011 Ministry of Justice figures show a total of 1,292 offenders were jailed for their part in the riots.
Edited by blueg33 on Sunday 10th November 11:48
Given the choice, what would YOU prefer to receive, An offensive tweet online. or a punch in the face sufficiently hard to knock you to the ground, followed by a beating around the head once you were down there?
Please try to give an `honest' answer.
I dont think the comparison is valid - one is an offence against one person whereas the other potentially affects a large number of people. Especially if people are encouraged to start fires. (And having checked "preview", I think my quoting will go wrong as well.)
If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Pan Pan Pan said:
I don't believe it is any good jailing people for what their actions `might' have caused. They should only be jailed for what they have actually have been proven to have done..
If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
So people locked up for plotting terrorism should be released?If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Pan Pan Pan said:
I don't believe it is any good jailing people for what their actions `might' have caused. They should only be jailed for what they have actually have been proven to have done..
If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Insane. If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Surely the goal is to prevent crime rather than shut the stable door after the horse has bolted.
By your logic the killer of Sarah Everard was fine until he killed her, and terrorists plotting to blow up a stadium with 30,000 people in it should be left alone until hundreds are dead.
blueg33 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
I don't believe it is any good jailing people for what their actions `might' have caused. They should only be jailed for what they have actually have been proven to have done..
If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Insane. If we did jail people for what their actions `might' have gone on to cause, they could then equally jail Amesbury, because his punch `might' have killed the person he hit.
Surely the goal is to prevent crime rather than shut the stable door after the horse has bolted.
By your logic the killer of Sarah Everard was fine until he killed her, and terrorists plotting to blow up a stadium with 30,000 people in it should be left alone until hundreds are dead.
Never thought I'd see PanPanPan wanting Anjem Choudhury released.
Six years after pleading guilty to violent disorder and arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered.
'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: Six years after pleading guilty to violent disorder and arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered.
'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
I can’t believe the judge’s comment that the offender is clearly racist because he was wearing a hat with the St George’s flag. 'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Six years after pleading guilty to violent disorder and arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered.
'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
I wonder if it will be played down as just an episode of 'offensive wood burning' by PanPanPan?'Racist' hotel rioter jailed for six years
MYOB said:
I can’t believe the judge’s comment that the offender is clearly racist because he was wearing a hat with the St George’s flag.
You zoom in on that and ignore this.Judge Richardson ruled that Greenwood, who has made 44 previous court appearances covering 103 separate offences, was "dangerous" and would therefore be subject to an extended sentence.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Well the generator was in the hotel car park so I'm not sure he meant to hurt anyone he was probably just frustrated.
We really do need to understand the reasons he did it.
Does this explain it for you or do you need further elaboration? (rhetorical)We really do need to understand the reasons he did it.
Rufus Stone said:
Judge Richardson ruled that Greenwood, who has made 44 previous court appearances covering 103 separate offences, was "dangerous" and would therefore be subject to an extended sentence.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Well the generator was in the hotel car park so I'm not sure he meant to hurt anyone he was probably just frustrated.
We really do need to understand the reasons he did it.
You are ****ing mental.We really do need to understand the reasons he did it.
First you were simping for Thomas Birley over his arson with intent to endanger life now you're all over another arsonist.
What kind of ****ed up moral compass do you live by? "Killing people with fire is good, s
t posting on twitter is bad." The only two rioters you've chosen to defend are among the absolute worst ones.I'm taking the piss out of some of the attitudes on this thread.
We've literally had people saying we need to understand what motivated the rioters and we've had people saying all those people did was set fire to a building and we've had people saying all those people on Twitter did was post hurty words and we can't prove any of it influenced the people with the matches.
Didn't notice you picking them up.
Let's not mention your contribution to that big long love-in thread about poor hard done by Lucy Connolly inciting a bit of racial hatred eh.
We've literally had people saying we need to understand what motivated the rioters and we've had people saying all those people did was set fire to a building and we've had people saying all those people on Twitter did was post hurty words and we can't prove any of it influenced the people with the matches.
Didn't notice you picking them up.
Let's not mention your contribution to that big long love-in thread about poor hard done by Lucy Connolly inciting a bit of racial hatred eh.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff