FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Protection for our War Heroes
Protection for our War Heroes
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are......." Labour MPs agreeing with their Tory counterparts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Labour MPs agreeing with their Tory counterparts " As good governance should  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are......." Other than the fact it was passed by a previous government... And that the judiciary are independent, Don't let the facts get in the way of your view. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535" 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are......." Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Other than the fact it was passed by a previous government... And that the judiciary are independent, Don't let the facts get in the way of your view. "  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing " no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk...." # But you do accept that Actually the Sexual Offences Act was set in 2003 by the Blair Labour Government. ?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535" Jesus Christ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial "Wow what a crappy comment to make. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i don't care who is what set up by.... if you potentially could more for scribbling on something than a sexual assault... that says to me your priorities are in the wrong place..... thats why this is warped and kneejerk.... if you want to bring this in... get rid of contenious statues first... then think about the consequence... who gets to decide what is contenious? " Jumping on a bandwagon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk...." Like the gun control laws? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? " The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. " 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial "Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country. My grandfather would be turning in his grave. What a shocking thing to say . How dare you . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order" Both Conservative and Labour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order Both Conservative and Labour. " Im not discriminating | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Other than the fact it was passed by a previous government... And that the judiciary are independent, Don't let the facts get in the way of your view. " Or indeed your ignorance of the role of the Sentencing Council, which is part of the Ministry of Justice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. " okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i don't care who is what set up by.... if you potentially could more for scribbling on something than a sexual assault... that says to me your priorities are in the wrong place..... thats why this is warped and kneejerk.... if you want to bring this in... get rid of contenious statues first... then think about the consequence... who gets to decide what is contenious? " In your first post you mentioned Tory mp's now you have been shown it was Labour that set it up all of a sudden you don't care | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order Both Conservative and Labour. Im not discriminating "The problem is that because of what is happening now they have to deal with it now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country.
My grandfather would be turning in his grave.
What a shocking thing to say .
How dare you
." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order Both Conservative and Labour. Im not discriminating
The problem is that because of what is happening now they have to deal with it now.
"They have to deal with it because the likes of the mail are having a full on meltdown. 10 years is utterly ridiculous. Most sensible gmnts would be trying to put less strain on an underfunded over stretched prison service | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk...." So for we memorials the law will say 10 years but reality will be loser to 10 days | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country.
My grandfather would be turning in his grave.
What a shocking thing to say .
How dare you ." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? " No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country.
My grandfather would be turning in his grave.
What a shocking thing to say .
How dare you ."my grandad also fought in WW2..... i am betting my grandad experience as a black soldier was different to your grandads... during the war, and after the war!!!! mine then wanted better rights for his children and grandchildren! so how dare you use that card...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? " Na they should get a pat on the back for dumping that piece of shit in the harbour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? " Yes ... two wrongs don’t make a right. It is still vandalism. There are other ways to deal with it crime is not the way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. " okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. " People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go?" It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? Na they should get a pat on the back for dumping that piece of shit in the harbour " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go?" Why not put them all in museusms then the people who want to go and look at them, for whatever reasons, can still do so. And those who don't wish to be forced to look at them everyday as they go about their business don't have to either. Win win surely?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way." Isnt this about vandalism? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? Why not put them all in museusms then the people who want to go and look at them, for whatever reasons, can still do so. And those who don't wish to be forced to look at them everyday as they go about their business don't have to either. Win win surely??" Think that's The most sensible option | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. " Indeed If we allow vandalism like this to go unpunished where will it end. We have laws for a reason. I have no problem with people being angered by certain people from history but it does not give them the right to break the law. Why has it happened now? The statues have been up for ages why was they not angry then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go?" While we can have the luxury of a leisure time debate on a forum like this - vandalism is taking place right now - and that is what Government (both sides is dealing with right now). One can't argue a point of violence while practicing violence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. Indeed If we allow vandalism like this to go unpunished where will it end. We have laws for a reason. I have no problem with people being angered by certain people from history but it does not give them the right to break the law. Why has it happened now? The statues have been up for ages why was they not angry then" If you write on a wall you get told off If you write on a statue you get 10 years Perfectly logical | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535" I'd give them a medal instead! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire " With that logic all crime is permissible by everyone. Laws being broken somewhere is no excuse to break more laws | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. Indeed If we allow vandalism like this to go unpunished where will it end. We have laws for a reason. I have no problem with people being angered by certain people from history but it does not give them the right to break the law. Why has it happened now? The statues have been up for ages why was they not angry then If you write on a wall you get told off If you write on a statue you get 10 years Perfectly logical" The difference is the significance behind the statue especially when it comes to a war memorial and the lives that they represent. A wall is just a wall a war memorial represents so much more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 I'd give them a medal instead! " A medal for the desecration of the memory of millions of souls that gave their today for our tomorrows? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down?" UP until its is democratically and peacefully decided to be removed | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down?" Yet again you distract from the point at hand - this is not about not having discussions about the removal of statues in public spaces it’s about not having them removed by vandalism and illegal action. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down?" Get them all down and stick them in a museum Fucking ugly things anyway  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down?" lets try and knock the chip off your shoulder then. nelson mandela mahatma ghandi they both have "dodgy" back grounds. are you suggesting that those statues should also be taken down? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down?" Removed to The World Museum in Liverpool. I don't know of one in Shropshire. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire With that logic all crime is permissible by everyone. Laws being broken somewhere is no excuse to break more laws" No..you are seriously suggesting 10 years for a bit of graffiti is proportionate? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down? lets try and knock the chip off your shoulder then. nelson mandela mahatma ghandi they both have "dodgy" back grounds. are you suggesting that those statues should also be taken down? " Nelson was a saint compared to his vile wife | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. Indeed If we allow vandalism like this to go unpunished where will it end. We have laws for a reason. I have no problem with people being angered by certain people from history but it does not give them the right to break the law. Why has it happened now? The statues have been up for ages why was they not angry then If you write on a wall you get told off If you write on a statue you get 10 years Perfectly logical The difference is the significance behind the statue especially when it comes to a war memorial and the lives that they represent. A wall is just a wall a war memorial represents so much more. " Well there is a whole debate there about the hypocrisy of a gmnt building monuments to the war dead whilst still starting pointless wars and selling arms to murderous regimes. However I agree vandalism a monument is wrong 10 years imprisonment is pandering to the mail. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire With that logic all crime is permissible by everyone. Laws being broken somewhere is no excuse to break more laws No..you are seriously suggesting 10 years for a bit of graffiti is proportionate?" Where did I say that? I replied to your post where the previous poster had clearly said they should not get 10 years. The punishment will be decided by the court's using the law introduced by labour ages ago I can't understand how people think that because crime happens somewhere it ok to happen again | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire With that logic all crime is permissible by everyone. Laws being broken somewhere is no excuse to break more laws No..you are seriously suggesting 10 years for a bit of graffiti is proportionate? Where did I say that? I replied to your post where the previous poster had clearly said they should not get 10 years. The punishment will be decided by the court's using the law introduced by labour ages ago I can't understand how people think that because crime happens somewhere it ok to happen again" I didn't say that.Crike occurs every day and when they are caught They are punished. My point was a Tiny no of minor crimes have generated hysterical headlines and had not been accompanied by ridiculous sentences. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down? lets try and knock the chip off your shoulder then. nelson mandela mahatma ghandi they both have "dodgy" back grounds. are you suggesting that those statues should also be taken down? " why would those be "problematic" to me in particular???? just curious as to your assumption.... any reason why??? go on.... you know you want to say it so don't just infer it!!! me, i predominately believe that statues are basically for museums..... history is taught in books, not statues! there are mainly there as a big FU to the oppressed..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country.
My grandfather would be turning in his grave.
What a shocking thing to say .
How dare you ."Would he not be sick to the stomach to see people British people sieg heiling at the cenotaph?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"10 years is not enough mmillions died to make this country what it is a good place to live" A lot of black people died so it could get rich... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? " that wasnt a war memorial was it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Tell that to the millions who have lost their lives in wars for this country.
My grandfather would be turning in his grave.
What a shocking thing to say .
How dare you .
Would he not be sick to the stomach to see people British people sieg heiling at the cenotaph??"Beat me to it! Bit rich talking about legacy and history when we see those scenes in 2020.Let's sort THAT out first before we start puffing out our chests, shall we? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire With that logic all crime is permissible by everyone. Laws being broken somewhere is no excuse to break more laws No..you are seriously suggesting 10 years for a bit of graffiti is proportionate? Where did I say that? I replied to your post where the previous poster had clearly said they should not get 10 years. The punishment will be decided by the court's using the law introduced by labour ages ago I can't understand how people think that because crime happens somewhere it ok to happen again I didn't say that.Crike occurs every day and when they are caught They are punished. My point was a Tiny no of minor crimes have generated hysterical headlines and had not been accompanied by ridiculous sentences." Yes when caught they are punished so same should be applied to the mobs pulling down statues and defacing them. What ever the punishment turns out to be is up to the court's. There is one way these mobs can avoid punishment and that's don't break the law in the first place | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour?" NO slaves came into Bristol, not one | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour?" The people of Bristol have the right to vote in there council elections so either they have not exhausted legal avenues or not enough people in area agree with them. The fact that they did not achieve their goals by peaceful means is not an excuse to break the law | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down? lets try and knock the chip off your shoulder then. nelson mandela mahatma ghandi they both have "dodgy" back grounds. are you suggesting that those statues should also be taken down? why would those be "problematic" to me in particular???? just curious as to your assumption.... any reason why??? go on.... you know you want to say it so don't just infer it!!! me, i predominately believe that statues are basically for museums..... history is taught in books, not statues! there are mainly there as a big FU to the oppressed....." Simply using your own argument against you and giving you examples of your own bias | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one" Erm...ok | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"okay... lets use an example of someone you may never have heard of...... just for fun..... There is a statue of Robert Clive, the former mayor of Shrewsbury and first British governor of Bengal, in the Shropshire town’s main square. Clive, a military officer and East India Company official, amassed a huge personal fortune by seizing control of a vast swathe of India and surrounding parts of Asia. He oversaw atrocities including famines caused by disastrous crop production policies, and has been described by historian William Dalrymple as an “unstable sociopath”. so.... statue up.... or statue down? lets try and knock the chip off your shoulder then. nelson mandela mahatma ghandi they both have "dodgy" back grounds. are you suggesting that those statues should also be taken down? " There's already a campaign in Leicester to get rid of their Ghandi statue. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are......." Nice Classic whataboutery ! Thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Nice Classic whataboutery ! Thanks" Indeed and turned out to be false concerning the Tory np's as others pointed out it was Labour that introduced it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"i don't care who is what set up by.... if you potentially could more for scribbling on something than a sexual assault... that says to me your priorities are in the wrong place..... thats why this is warped and kneejerk.... if you want to bring this in... get rid of contenious statues first... then think about the consequence... who gets to decide what is contenious? " The question wasn't "Do you care who set it up" ! To refresh your memory the actual question was; "But you do accept that Actually the Sexual Offences Act was set in 2003 by the Blair Labour Government. ??" Really not a difficult one to answer is it ? Lol. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one" A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. " Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How many ww2 war hero's did Boris kill off with his ineptitude and he's still in office,nevermind prison sentence" Well said sir. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way." And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released" So what? Plenty of Brits amassed fortunes from the slave trade. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released" I'm not sure many made it here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released I'm not sure many made it here" A few did. Mainly as valets, footmen and servants to the wealthy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released I'm not sure many made it here A few did. Mainly as valets, footmen and servants to the wealthy. " Not as slaves | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should be 10years in jail for those nazi scum attacking the police in London the other day. Protecting statues my arse, low life knuckle dragging scum." No idea what punishment will be handed down but hope they apply the law to ALL that broke it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white...." It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule" Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle." Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y " Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. " Law abiding people over criminals | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk...." Agree that it does seem a little kneejerk but, in the same way while the maximum sentence for r8pe is life the actual sentence is often a lot less, same so with this. The maximum penalty may be 10 years but in most cases the actual sentence will be less. I'm not against tougher sentences for any who defaces monuments to the dead but often this sort of kneejerk legislation is badly formed, ineffective and fails to achieve the results desired. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order" I don't think you get or understand just how upset and annoyed many people feel at thought of monuments dedicated to those who died defending this country and out freedoms. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals" I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots...." It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 I'd give them a medal instead! A medal for the desecration of the memory of millions of souls that gave their today for our tomorrows?" No. A medal for vandalising an inanimate object. The memory would still exist. (That's a very romantic idealised perception of those who die in war, btw.) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go?" Stay. And I'm Catholic. Despite the wrong he did, and those wrongs should definitely be told more in history, he layed the very foundation of our current parliamentary democracy (although he was no democrat himself) and as such is an extremely important person in English and British history. Yet another very flawed British hero, like many others. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law" I support people who I believe are right. I don't believe that all laws are just, sorry. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Do you think gay people up until that point should have abstained from sex or relationships because they were illegal? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law" Suffragette's.........  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire " It's not the 1 statue that was pulled down that's the problem. It's the other status people want to pull down like Gladstone (founder of modern liberalism) because not him but his father had owned slaved, or Churchill, or Robert Peel who reformed this country into a Constitutional Democracy, or Baden-Powell who founded modern Scouting, or Drake who saved this country from the Spanish Armada. All these people where and still are British heroes. Did they have flaws? Yes. Did they do no wrong? No. But, for good or bad, they all helped to make this country what it is and are not just who we were but very much who we still are. Warts and all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law I support people who I believe are right. I don't believe that all laws are just, sorry. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Do you think gay people up until that point should have abstained from sex or relationships because they were illegal?" And in this case you are supporting criminals. Just because you do not agree with a law does not give you the right to break it. If you do you should be prepared to face punishment. I will stick to the law and leave the criminality to you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"just for the sake of a comparison... do you know what the average sentence is for ra pe its 8 yrs.... nice to know what tory mps priorities actually are....... Actually it's life. I'm guessing you're not a lawyer? https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-19-sentencing no.... the guidence says life, the actually statistics of the home office website says 8 years.... I will not accept any legislation that is kneejerk... this is kneejerk...." Aren't the judiciary independent? It's not the government that hands the sentences out...it's the judges. I think you're ire may be pointed in the wrong direction. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law I support people who I believe are right. I don't believe that all laws are just, sorry. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Do you think gay people up until that point should have abstained from sex or relationships because they were illegal? And in this case you are supporting criminals. Just because you do not agree with a law does not give you the right to break it. If you do you should be prepared to face punishment. I will stick to the law and leave the criminality to you" So you do think that gay people prior to 1967 should not have had sex or relationships because it was illegal? Or would you just like to completely ignore the question? As Fabio mentioned, the suffragettes broke the law. Do you think women should abstain from voting because of it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour?" Not to detract from the second part of your post but the first part of the post is historically inaccurate. Slaves were never landed at any port in England and, if they had been, under English law at the time they would have immediately become free men. Slaves were traffic between Africa and the Americas on what became known as the "Middle Passage". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
". I will stick to the law and leave the criminality to you" What about when the law is immoral? Do you not have any ethics of your own, other than obeying laws? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released" I don't know about the legal status of imported slaves across the whole of Britain, Irish and Scottish jurisdictions may have had different laws, but you are absolutely correct that slavery was never legal in England and any slave arriving in England immediately became a free man. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should be 10years in jail for those nazi scum attacking the police in London the other day. Protecting statues my arse, low life knuckle dragging scum." Totally agree! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Bristol statue.... residents had campaigned legally for years asking for just a supplementary plaque describing the man's role in the slave trade. They were denied many many times through by the council. The statue came down and was thrown in the same harbour where the guy would have bought in his human cargo. They exhausted the legal channels, George Floyd was murdered and took the thing down. As somebody else said, if you were black and lived in the area, how would you explain to your children why a man is commemorated by a statue, a man who treated his horse better than black people. How do you then explain that the council will not even put a plaque up to contextualise his abhorrent behaviour? NO slaves came into Bristol, not one A few did but the vast majority were transported direct from Africa to the Americas direct. Ships financed by Bristol merchants, took goods to Africa, slaves from Africa to The Americas, and then returned to Bristol with goods: the Triangular Trade. Slavery was illegal in Britain any coming here would have been released So what? Plenty of Brits amassed fortunes from the slave trade. " And I'm sure there are many people not just in Britain but around the world who are amassing a tidy amount of wealth even today from various forms of indentured Labour and slavery with even knowing it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know about the legal status of imported slaves across the whole of Britain, Irish and Scottish jurisdictions may have had different laws, but you are absolutely correct that slavery was never legal in England and any slave arriving in England immediately became a free man." This is incorrect. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't know about the legal status of imported slaves across the whole of Britain, Irish and Scottish jurisdictions may have had different laws, but you are absolutely correct that slavery was never legal in England and any slave arriving in England immediately became a free man. This is incorrect. " I agree. Slavery didn't need to be legal in England because as many have explained earlier in the thread, British slave owners owned and kept Afrikan slaves in the Caribbean. Slavery was legal until the Abolition Act of 1833, where approx 46,000 British slave owners received about £16-17billion(in todays amount) in compensation from the British government for losing their property. This has been the largest gov bailout until the 2009 bank bailout. The Abolition Act also had a stipulation that these "freed" slaves had to periodically work for free over a certain no. Of years to repay their former masters. You'll also find that records on British slave ownership was also more hidden than that of the US. I don't understand why people get so defensive about history. It's not a personal attack, it's what actually happened, no matter how much some try to sanitize it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It should be 10years in jail for those nazi scum attacking the police in London the other day. Protecting statues my arse, low life knuckle dragging scum." yep knucle dragging scum same as the ones attacking shit last weekend | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order" I would not bother witht eh 10 years for graffiti I would just go for public flogging and humiliation
Everytime they build something new some low IQ cunt comes along and sqribbles some inane shit that looks fucking awaful on it 
called tagging or something.
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. 10 years?for a bit of graffiti? Nice to see they have their priorities in order I don't think you get or understand just how upset and annoyed many people feel at thought of monuments dedicated to those who died defending this country and out freedoms." No I think it if you get more time for defacing a memorial than for r### say,we need to look at our priorities. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 I'd give them a medal instead! A medal for the desecration of the memory of millions of souls that gave their today for our tomorrows? No. A medal for vandalising an inanimate object. The memory would still exist. (That's a very romantic idealised perception of those who die in war, btw.)" People are more angry about a vandal than the people who literally treated soldiers like cattle between 1914-18 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. People shouldnt be doing lots of things. 1 statue gets toppled and the country goes haywire It's not the 1 statue that was pulled down that's the problem. It's the other status people want to pull down like Gladstone (founder of modern liberalism) because not him but his father had owned slaved, or Churchill, or Robert Peel who reformed this country into a Constitutional Democracy, or Baden-Powell who founded modern Scouting, or Drake who saved this country from the Spanish Armada. All these people where and still are British heroes. Did they have flaws? Yes. Did they do no wrong? No. But, for good or bad, they all helped to make this country what it is and are not just who we were but very much who we still are. Warts and all." Upto now we have never even had a debate about such things. The fact that we are doing now should be a good thing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law I support people who I believe are right. I don't believe that all laws are just, sorry. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Do you think gay people up until that point should have abstained from sex or relationships because they were illegal? And in this case you are supporting criminals. Just because you do not agree with a law does not give you the right to break it. If you do you should be prepared to face punishment. I will stick to the law and leave the criminality to you So you do think that gay people prior to 1967 should not have had sex or relationships because it was illegal? Or would you just like to completely ignore the question? As Fabio mentioned, the suffragettes broke the law. Do you think women should abstain from voting because of it?" It's an excellent point. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" who gets to decide what is contenious? The elected government of the day perhaps? And with the support of the Opposition by the sounds of it. It's Democracy. We vote for who we want and live with those consequences until the next Election. okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? " no because that's not the law at the time of the offence . If it was and they did it yes give them the sentence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's......... "Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
"Too right....bloody women wanting the vote.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
"And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women. So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality."While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later. "I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here. You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause...."You dont know what I'm thinking | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking "Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
"Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing...."And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing....
And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests.
"What If peaceful protests are ignored? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing....
And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests.
What If peaceful protests are ignored?"The suffragettes eventually got the vote by the pressures they put on Parliament and gathering a consensus of the british public to their cause. It was brought to Parliament it was debated in Parliament and eventually The Equal Franchise Act 1928 was passed. Had they not gathered enough by way of consensus (democracy) then it would not of happened in the time it did. The most important word in all of this is Parliamentary Democracy coupled to a rule of Law that we accept. If we don't accept it then Democracy allows us to 'vote it out' and try again. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing....
And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests.
What If peaceful protests are ignored?"Imagine if people had just stopped with peaceful protest on various issues. How different our world would be. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing....
And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests.
"But it does. Entirely peaceful protests have achieved very little. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Suffragette's.........
Is actually a really good analogy to use as an example of what should be done to protestors when they engage in criminal behaviour as nearly thousand Suffragette's were sent to prison for bombing - setting fires and all other types of criminal behaviour.
And as such, these "criminals" helped to achieve the vote for women.
So it does indeed show that direct action can ultimately change society for the better and that laws do not always have a basis in morality.
While still locking people up for criminal behaviour - The vote didn't come until 10 years later.
I don't think you are quite making the point that you think you are making here.
You've essentially just justified "criminal" direct action to further a just cause....
You dont know what I'm thinking
Direct Action in the form of Protest should be sacrosanct to any Democracy and one which I support without question. Criminal behaviour while doing so isn't a part that any of us should support.
Except, of course that the two are often one and the same thing....
And that is the sadness, that some can't think with enough brains to work out that violence doesn't get you what you want. Those who do understand that don't want such people in their protests.
What If peaceful protests are ignored?
The suffragettes eventually got the vote by the pressures they put on Parliament and gathering a consensus of the british public to their cause. It was brought to Parliament it was debated in Parliament and eventually The Equal Franchise Act 1928 was passed.
Had they not gathered enough by way of consensus (democracy) then it would not of happened in the time it did.
The most important word in all of this is Parliamentary Democracy coupled to a rule of Law that we accept. If we don't accept it then Democracy allows us to 'vote it out' and try again.
"I thought the lady who threw herself under the horse was the turning point?(though I'm mainly going off the film) They also used violent actions aswell didnt they? I think it's a lot easier to ignore peaceful protests and its violence that ultimately gets results (poll tax,ireland) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Russian revolution,Berlin wall,the riots here in the 80s..all violent..but all got results." Exactly, I suppose these people should of all just gone home | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Russian revolution,Berlin wall,the riots here in the 80s..all violent..but all got results." The ruling classes concede nothing without fear. The post war period is a good example. A conscript population trained to fight in total war, a massive over demand for workers, emboldened, militant unions, the "Red threat" after the apparent success of Bolshevism in Russia.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose you could also argue that big chunks of the civil rights movement in America,which has been going on since the 60s,has been peaceful (Martin Luther king,)yet in 2020 they have an out and out racist in the White House." There were plenty of riots associated with the civil rights movement, plus organisations like the Black Panthers etc... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Russian revolution,Berlin wall,the riots here in the 80s..all violent..but all got results. The ruling classes concede nothing without fear. The post war period is a good example. A conscript population trained to fight in total war, a massive over demand for workers, emboldened, militant unions, the "Red threat" after the apparent success of Bolshevism in Russia...." I think in this country we have a deference to our "betters'which the likes of the French and the Russians dont have. I think that even exists until today with the current incumbent of no 10. He speaks Latin and went to Eton..he must be as great pm. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I suppose you could also argue that big chunks of the civil rights movement in America,which has been going on since the 60s,has been peaceful (Martin Luther king,)yet in 2020 they have an out and out racist in the White House. There were plenty of riots associated with the civil rights movement, plus organisations like the Black Panthers etc..." I know but there has also been peaceful elements aswell. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But yes, Donald Trump may yet get his race war." And on that we agree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests." They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism "They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism
They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced.
"Oh and with the cooperation of both the East and Western Authorities. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But then again, most of us speak from the position of never being oppressed in any way. Depends who is making the laws and how they effect you before you know how you would react in similar situations." I think there is probably an imbalance in the type of people making the decisions and those that the decisions affect. Maybe a more diverse group/leadership would lead to equality? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I think there is probably an imbalance in the type of people making the decisions and those that the decisions affect. Maybe a more diverse group/leadership would lead to equality? " Absolutely. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism
They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced.
Oh and with the cooperation of both the East and Western Authorities. "But that only came after weeks of civil unrest | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism
They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced.
Oh and with the cooperation of both the East and Western Authorities.
But that only came after weeks of civil unrest"It came after years of unrest in West Berlin NON of which was violent or criminal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism
They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced.
Oh and with the cooperation of both the East and Western Authorities. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What kind of vandalism are we talking here... and from who exactly? " Go to the top lol. ^^^ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Berlin Wall came down amidst Peaceful non violent protests. They tore down a wall Hardly peaceful Sheer vandalism
They didn't tear it down while the East Germans remained in political control of East Berlin - they tore it down once the reunification had been announced.
Oh and with the cooperation of both the East and Western Authorities.
But that only came after weeks of civil unrest
It came after years of unrest in West Berlin NON of which was violent or criminal. "To be fair East Germany was not the most liberal of countries. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" To be fair East Germany was not the most liberal of countries. " What? It was an illegally Annexed part of Berlin by the Soviet Bloc that wasn't repatriated when the Allied Powers returned their sectors to Greater Germany. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" To be fair East Germany was not the most liberal of countries. What? It was an illegally Annexed part of Berlin by the Soviet Bloc that wasn't repatriated when the Allied Powers returned their sectors to Greater Germany. " That's what I meant. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" okay then... so use a real life example? Edward Colston.... (him of the statue dumped in bristol) Problematic for all sorts of reasons.... So should "someone" get 10 years for doing what they did? No. Actually I don't think that they should get 10 years - but there should be some legal penalty - but then people shouldn't be tearing down statues, or anything else in a Democracy. okay then.... lets use someone else...... Oliver Cromwell..... Statues in england, very questionable record when it comes to things "ireland" related...... again.... statues stay or go? It’s not about whether they should stay or go it’s about the matter in which they are removed. Illegally is never the right way. And there we have it, more concerned with order than justice. Never mind Britain's proud tradition of civil unrest from Wat Tyler, the Diggers, Chartists, Peterloo, the general strikes.... But of course, those people were white.... It's about living in a country that is governed by law not mob rule. I prefer the order of law. Maybe you prefer mob rule Just think, if everyone had your attitude, we'd never have: Universal suffrage, paid time off, social security, socialised healthcare, LBTQ rights etc etc. Nothing was ever achieved without a struggle. Well to your credit your the first I have come a cross that actually admits they support people breaking the law and endorse mob rule. I hope you remember that if your unfortunate enough to be on the wrong end of a law breaker. I prefer rule of law Y Order over justice once again. Laws don't necessarily have a moral imperative. Law abiding people over criminals I'm afraid that if everyone thought like that, youd enjoy almost none of the freedoms you enjoy today. Gay rights, for example, followed the stonewall riots.... It's very clear you support criminals and mob rule. I prefer to be law abiding and live with the rule of law I support people who I believe are right. I don't believe that all laws are just, sorry. Homosexuality was illegal until 1967. Do you think gay people up until that point should have abstained from sex or relationships because they were illegal? And in this case you are supporting criminals. Just because you do not agree with a law does not give you the right to break it. If you do you should be prepared to face punishment. I will stick to the law and leave the criminality to you So you do think that gay people prior to 1967 should not have had sex or relationships because it was illegal? Or would you just like to completely ignore the question? As Fabio mentioned, the suffragettes broke the law. Do you think women should abstain from voting because of it?" I believe people should live within the law at the time. I'm all for protests but peaceful protests. Maybe on here I'm in the minority but that does not change my mind. I feel mob rule is very dangerous to everyone. When a mob is doing something you like you may well think its fine. But what about when another mob comes along and acts against you? Would you be ok with a mob attacking you in the street because they think its right and want the law changed to allow it?. You won't be able to complain because you want to live this way.Terrorists use the same logic. My fear of the criminality is it detracts from the actual cause. Several of you disagree which obviously is your right. As someone who is new to the idea of breaking the law may I ask how many are you prepared to let die? If the police loose control and protesters get killed either by the police or rival protesters will you support that?. If people who are just going about their lawful business get caught up and killed will you support that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial "Wow. Just wow. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There is a brilliant picture of these 3 ballons "protecting'the statue of George eliot " What are ballons ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There is a brilliant picture of these 3 ballons "protecting'the statue of George eliot What are ballons ?" Idiots. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial "Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap. "Very few wars are faught to protect 'freedom' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap.
Very few wars are faught to protect 'freedom'"WW1, WW2. Enough said. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap.
Very few wars are faught to protect 'freedom'"Yet still fought. Millions lost. Should we just forget about it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap.
Very few wars are faught to protect 'freedom'
Yet still fought. Millions lost.
Should we just forget about it?"Faught even. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" . . . Love your Country. Support your Troops . . . Racism should be a thing of the past . . . https://news.sky.com/story/labour-to-support-10-year-jail-sentences-for-war-memorial-vandals-12006535 10yrs ! For crappy war memorial
Yeh, so crappy they died do you could insult them by calling their memorials crappy. What an insult to them and their families and to those currently serving as well to protect your freedom to post crap.
Very few wars are faught to protect 'freedom'WW1, WW2. Enough said.
"American war of independence and the wars fought by ex British empire countries for independence can be added I think | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
