Shocking

[GhostOfDixie]

You can blame it on the boy racers or the idiots who drive excessley over the speed limit, but their should be a blame given to people who drive WELL UNDER the speed limit.

The [Poor language removed] idiots are to blame for many accidents too.

And people who aren't confident on the road, being too cautious causes alot of accidents.

I'm pretty sure its far less. Being too cautious on the road doesn't cause a lot of accidents.

 

[Nebbiolo]

You can blame it on the boy racers or the idiots who drive excessley over the speed limit, but their should be a blame given to people who drive WELL UNDER the speed limit.

The [Poor language removed] idiots are to blame for many accidents too.

And people who aren't confident on the road, being too cautious causes alot of accidents.

You're right in that over-cautious drivers can cause others to get pissed off, which might lead onto an accident (e.g. overtaking in the wrong place or similar). But I doubt very much that it can be said to be an equal cause of accidents as speeding motorists. Some of the speeds I see, out here in the countryside, are breathtakingly dangerous. Icy roads, wet roads, foggy roads, yet they still drive along at ridiculous speeds. If these people want to kill themselves, then fine. But they put everyone at risk with their behaviour. The police need to become more pro-active in cutting speeds. But you never see them where I live. I suppose they're too busy catching murderers and the like

 

[Slight_Return]

He was responding to me, yet I'm not featured in the thread that you link. So what was your point, SR? Remember, not everyone is privy to your private thoughts. So spell it out in simple terms.

you appear more than once. my point? aren't you quick for the jugular - make a good police officer you!.

 

[Slight_Return]

Yep, maybe he confused me with someone else?

Back to the justice thing. No doubt the victims of many vigilantes deserve the treatment they get. But the law cannot recognise that as fact. It must treat everyone as equal under its remit. Otherwise what is the point of law? If some of us are not provided with its protection, we're going down a very slippery slope indeed. Plus I do believe that the average vigilante is not sound of mind, and is probably criminally inclined himself. Obviously I do not intend this to mean revenge attacks by family members which are more than understandable. These people are not vigilantes at all in my book.

Justice thing, everyone equally?

That cannot be correct, as the individuals paid by the state to uphold and enforce the law should always abide by same said law!

agreed?

Hence:- when they break the law their punishment should be a hundred times more severe than for any other member of society.

agreed?

 

[Slight_Return]

Yep, maybe he confused me with someone else?

Also, it appears I did confuse you, so im sorry, I apologise (you still did appear though)

 

[Slight_Return]

My issue is with the vigilante mentality; that is, those individuals that go around meting out justice to all and sundry. But like you show, it is hardly surprising that victims of crime and their families seek revenge.

So how do you feel about the vigilantes in uniform that meted out a severe battering to the kid in the other thread then lied about his and their actions in a court of law?

Where is your disdain? im a real cold fish all said and done, why so easily judge me yet not them? me for a few words on a forum, them for endangering someones life and then hiding behind the immunity their uniform wrongly provides all police?

 

[Slight_Return]

Last Friday two innocent people were killed just outside Mold by a lad who, allegedly, was racing with a mate in another vehicle. Witnesses have said, allegedly, that they were driving well above the speed limit. The Corsa hit a Focus coming the other way, two elderly people going shopping died at the scene and the young passenger of the lads car is still in a critical condition. The lad himself got a broken leg and was arrested for causing death by dangerous driving.
He may get 7 years if he's found guilty. People who know him say that he's been driving like a pillock since he started and it was only a matter of time before he killed someone.
As far as I'm concerned driving at an inappropriate speed and like a wally is like wandering the streets with a loaded gun.
Oops, sorry Mrs, didnt mean to kill you, I was just having a laugh with me mates.


chuck the book at him.

with the greatest of respect, f@#k the book, lets pray his leg gets gangrene and has to be amputated, so when the families of those he has killed run after him he is easier to catch and 'tell off'.

 

[Nebbiolo]

So how do you feel about the vigilantes in uniform that meted out a severe battering to the kid in the other thread then lied about his and their actions in a court of law?

Where is your disdain? im a real cold fish all said and done, why so easily judge me yet not them? me for a few words on a forum, them for endangering someones life and then hiding behind the immunity their uniform wrongly provides all police?

The uniform doesn't provide immunity. So they can not hide behind its "immunity".

SR, I don't know what happened in the case you refer to, but assuming that your appraisal of it is correct, then those men would be guilty of assault, ABH or GBH. In other words, they should be dismissed from the force and face criminal charges. When have I ever given the impression that I believe the police are beyond reproach?

Last, you're becoming paranoid if you think that I've easily judged you. Sometimes you can be a bit childish, but other times you strike me quite a nice person. I'm just not gonna sit here and suck up to you when you go off on one. Because when you do that, it usually involves personal attacks, accusations of nazism or fascism and a number of unsubstantiated assertions. I just think you need to chill out a bit.

 

[Slight_Return]

I dont want or expect anyone to 'suck up to me'. So far as my personal attacks go, usually they are attacks I feel are warranted and also usually against individuals that do not frequent this forum. Your opinion of my perceived 'unsubstantiated assertions' is all well and good, we are each entitled to voice what we choose - sometimes some topics are a little more difficult to chill than others.

And good for you for clearing this up..."they should be dismissed from the force and face criminal charges." Its not strong enough for my taste, but its a fine start.

 

[Nebbiolo]

I dont want or expect anyone to 'suck up to me'. So far as my personal attacks go, usually they are attacks I feel are warranted and also usually against individuals that do not frequent this forum. Your opinion of my perceived 'unsubstantiated assertions' is all well and good, we are each entitled to voice what we choose - sometimes some topics are a little more difficult to chill than others.

And good for you for clearing this up..."they should be dismissed from the force and face criminal charges." Its not strong enough for my taste, but its a fine start.

Describe the justice system in your world, SR (preferably in less than 100 words). It seems to me that you believe in leaving people to be lynched? Or am I wrong?

 

[Cal]

I'm pretty sure its far less. Being too cautious on the road doesn't cause a lot of accidents.

My Dad's a paramedic and he says that it's usually old people who cause ALOT of accidents by being way too cautious.

 

[gordonjblair]

My Dad's a paramedic and he says that it's usually old people who cause ALOT of accidents by being way too cautious.

but if the road users around them are competent and on their game, they should be able to account for Sid and Doris on their Sunday constitutional.

Besides, even if they caused the lion's share of accidents, they'd all be impacts at 13.6mph or below and so would do a lot less harm than some pillock doing 120 while whacking off in his SUV on the motorway

 

[Slight_Return]

Describe the justice system in your world, SR (preferably in less than 100 words). It seems to me that you believe in leaving people to be lynched? Or am I wrong?

1 - a
2 - hundred
3 - percent
4 - guilty
5 - individuals
6 - that
7 - have
8 - commit
9 - serious
10 - heinous
11 - crime
12 - should
13 - be
14 - executed
15 - by
16 - the
17 - state

Personally I am a big believer in the organ harvesting china operate when dealing with their criminals. Though I dont necessarily agree with how certain individuals are found guilty (blood type and whos paying for the appropriate organs) I still believe the system has a lot of merit.

I cannot think of one good reason why brady and hindley were kept alive on the tax payer. two individuals that werent just guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but were 100% guilty without doubt.

Why should committing serious crime and then being caught entitle the criminal to what is effectively a lottery win?

I am too stupid to be able to reconcile that. Can you help me see why that should be (and actually is) the case please?

 

[Nebbiolo]

1

I cannot think of one good reason why brady and hindley were kept alive on the tax payer. two individuals that werent just guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but were 100% guilty without doubt.

Why should committing serious crime and then being caught entitle the criminal to what is effectively a lottery win?

I am too stupid to be able to reconcile that. Can you help me see why that should be (and actually is) the case please?

Well it shouldn't be seen as a lottery win. And if it is the case that prisons are too cosy and comfortable, then we need to look at making conditions harsher. Create places where criminals are made to repay their debt via hard work. After that, when we are confident that there is some kind of repentance, we can seek to rehabilitate. Clearly in some cases rehabilitation is not really an option (child killers, rapists and the like). For those I would recommend life imprisonment without parole.

But i wouldn't go around killing them. To me that is sinking to a level depravity that a civilised state ought to be beyond. In saying that, and like I have pointed out elsewhere, I certainly wouldn't blame, for example, the parents or relatives of a murdered child from seeking to kill his or her murderer. That is wholly understandable given the circumstances.

But the state needs to be wholly neutral on affairs of this nature, acting as a fair and honest judge, not as an executioner.

 

[Slight_Return]

You pay to keep the likes of brady, hindley, the yorkshire ripper, venables and thompson then.

Because I dont want too, i'd rather monies went towards the victoria climbies and baby P's of this world and ensuring their safety and the safety and care of thousands of others instead of one bunk hiltons, legal aid that could raise the bismark, and new lives and protection when released.

No sorry, not for me. Rabid dogs are put down.