I don't understand...

someone-on-the-internet-is-wrong.jpg
 
simon ess said:
Sorry, can't take these threads seriously. It's like trying to discuss evolution with a religious fundamentalist - surreal and pointless.
Click to expand...

Tried that once with a Jehovah.... was a most entertaining 45 mins with him on the doorstep getting soaked. My point about lightning conductors and kingdom hall's seemed to be misunderstood though..... however, the "your f**king crackpot ideas would mean that my wife would have died after labour and my 18 month old twins would be motherless, kind of hit home...." - I wasn't that polite but needed to dumb it down for Marcel's sweary filter
 
Lynton said:
Tried that once with a Jehovah.... was a most entertaining 45 mins with him on the doorstep getting soaked. My point about lightning conductors and kingdom hall's seemed to be misunderstood though..... however, the "your f**king crackpot ideas would mean that my wife would have died after labour and my 18 month old twins would be motherless, kind of hit home...." - I wasn't that polite but needed to dumb it down for Marcel's sweary filter
Click to expand...

Did you send an email to his CEO to complain ;)
 
viv1969 said:
You seem a little unnaturally fixated on this.
Where was it said?
Click to expand...


Why.. it was said here....

viv1969 said:
Six by six cell...bucket to go in and an hour out of the cell daily. Far fewer would choose to return I suspect.
Click to expand...


Does that refresh your memory Viv?

I do apologise however... I painted you out to be a radical... I forgot you gave them an hour per day.. not 30 minutes. I do apologise :)
 
See Pooks, I asked because you got it wrong again. And so once again half the above statement is incorrect before a weak correction.
It's really not that difficult to read back and check prior to posting....is it? :thinking:
 
viv1969 said:
See Pooks, I asked because you got it wrong again. And so once again half the above statement is incorrect before a weak correction.
It's really not that difficult to read back and check prior to posting....is it? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Oooh... I got it wrong... you granted them 1 hour out of their cell instead of 30 minutes. LOL

That changes everything of course. :)
 
I think from this we can establish that you've run out of meaningful things to contribute to the argument, and have now resorted to pedantry.

Put as much spin on it as you want Viv, but you advocate locking them in a 6x6 cell with a bucket for 23 hours. Whether I suggested you said 23 hours, or 23.5 hours is pretty much irrelevant. The fact you are attaching so much importance on that 30 minutes is pretty desperate.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I think from this we can establish that you've run out of meaningful things to contribute to the argument, and have now resorted to pedantry.

Put as much spin on it as you want Viv, but you advocate locking them in a 6x6 cell with a bucket for 23 hours. Whether I suggested you said 23 hours, or 23.5 hours is pretty much irrelevant. The fact you are attaching so much importance on that 30 minutes is pretty desperate.
Click to expand...

Sense of humour bypass anyone?
 
Make light of the fact that you pestered me to quote whoever said it... only for me to quote you, because you forgot you said it. :) Humour bypass? I'm laughing quite hard actually.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Make light of the fact that you pestered me to quote whoever said it... only for me to quote you, because you forgot you said it. :) Humour bypass? I'm laughing quite hard actually.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't forget...I just knew you got what I said wrong because you couldn't be arsed to check. :-)
Lighten up, you'll give yourself a turn. :lol:
 
You made all that fuss over the fact that I quoted your 23 hours as 23.5 hours?

Suuuure you did Viv :)
 
Oh wait, I forgot...you're always right.
Forgive me. :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Let's just agree to differ and get on with life, shall we?
 
Cobra said:
:D

Hardly "love all" though is it? :D

(Well I know that's big person's tennis, but a little poetic licence used)
Click to expand...

Oy....Stop interfering in our jovial game of Wiff Waff :lol:
 
viv1969 said:
And don't point that thing at me :LOL:
Click to expand...
There are far worse things I could wave in your direction.
Just be grateful it wasn't one of those :D
 
Cobra said:
There are far worse things I could wave in your direction.
Just be grateful it wasn't one of those :D
Click to expand...

Ruth doesn't let the little things in life worry her
 
big soft moose said:
Ruth doesn't let the little things in life worry her
Click to expand...
But you have never seen the size of the ban hammer,
so how could you possibly know (or indeed think) that its small?
 
Cobra said:
But you have never seen the size of the ban hammer,
so how could you possibly know (or indeed think) that its small?
Click to expand...

Pete? Think?...Wait... :thinking:
Oh......Hey Pete!! :wave:
 
I'm sorry but both sides of the discussion are wrong about crime.

Firstly prison is not a deterrent to most criminals, simply because to get a sentence and actually serve it, you are too far down the path to change. Hence why rehabilitation isn't something that works very well.

So, going back to the beginning. Why start off in crime? Simply because it's the easy way. It's money (and goods) for old rope. Why do 40 hours a week, when you can earn far more in a couple of hours? Even if caught for the first 20 times, all that's going to happen is slapped wrists, no prison, no fine you have to pay, besides, it's easy to pay, just go and do another couple of burglaries/theft person/robberies. In any case, plenty of people who are paid,. by us, the law abiding, to talk absolute cobblers and offer excuses. Most of those people, social workers being the main offenders, have never been nearer the realities of life than the Queen. Uneducated? Really? I've lost count of the robbers I've nicked with A Levels and beyond. On drugs? Please...Thats so well known nowadays as a way of getting a reduced sentence, it's simply funny now. Most of those I've nicked don't even smoke, let alone take any form of drugs. Yet I used to watch thier representatives go on and on about the problems they have with drugs, and how they only commit crime to pay for them..And then watch them leave and laugh at the naivety of social workers/Solicitors/Barristers/Juries and Judges.

So there is no deterrent. Even when (eventually) they get to the prison sentence stage, the sentence is a month, maybe 2. Again, not a deterrent, ok, not exactly Bulins, but not too bad, and only 1/3 of the sentence to serve! Bargain!

It's time the professional excuse makers bowed out. The reality is that the excuses are more of a cause of the problem than anything else. What's needed is a meaningful punishment at the start, with the message it will only get worse.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Make light of the fact that you pestered me to quote whoever said it... only for me to quote you, because you forgot you said it. :) Humour bypass? I'm laughing quite hard actually.
Click to expand...

Except for one VERY IMPORTANT fact, she did not FORGET that she said it - because she never said it.
 
Bernie174 said:
I'm sorry but both sides of the discussion are wrong about crime.

Firstly prison is not a deterrent to most criminals, simply because to get a sentence and actually serve it, you are too far down the path to change. Hence why rehabilitation isn't something that works very well.

So, going back to the beginning. Why start off in crime? Simply because it's the easy way. It's money (and goods) for old rope. Why do 40 hours a week, when you can earn far more in a couple of hours? Even if caught for the first 20 times, all that's going to happen is slapped wrists, no prison, no fine you have to pay, besides, it's easy to pay, just go and do another couple of burglaries/theft person/robberies. In any case, plenty of people who are paid,. by us, the law abiding, to talk absolute cobblers and offer excuses. Most of those people, social workers being the main offenders, have never been nearer the realities of life than the Queen. Uneducated? Really? I've lost count of the robbers I've nicked with A Levels and beyond. On drugs? Please...Thats so well known nowadays as a way of getting a reduced sentence, it's simply funny now. Most of those I've nicked don't even smoke, let alone take any form of drugs. Yet I used to watch thier representatives go on and on about the problems they have with drugs, and how they only commit crime to pay for them..And then watch them leave and laugh at the naivety of social workers/Solicitors/Barristers/Juries and Judges.

So there is no deterrent. Even when (eventually) they get to the prison sentence stage, the sentence is a month, maybe 2. Again, not a deterrent, ok, not exactly Bulins, but not too bad, and only 1/3 of the sentence to serve! Bargain!

It's time the professional excuse makers bowed out. The reality is that the excuses are more of a cause of the problem than anything else. What's needed is a meaningful punishment at the start, with the message it will only get worse.
Click to expand...


All fair points, but we're drifting a little. This started by looking at serious serial killers and child murderers. I still think we need to learn from them, not execute them.


As for the lesser crimes you refer to, your argument doesn't really offer a solution though, so is as "useless" as anyone else's. Can you define the "meaningful" punishment you refer to? Once we know what that would look like, we can discuss it.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I still think we need to learn from them, not execute them.


As for the lesser crimes you refer to, your argument doesn't really offer a solution though, so is as "useless" as anyone else's. Can you define the "meaningful" punishment you refer to? Once we know what that would look like, we can discuss it.
Click to expand...

First of all, what on earth can ordinary, law abiding, gentile members of society "learn" from scumbag criminals who make the rest of our lives a misery?
It is the criminals who SHOULD be learning how to fit in to society.
The fact is, that not all people are the same, they do not think the same, they do not act the same, and there are extremes, from very nice people who would not say boo to a goose, to very nasty people, who would not think twice about hurting others, simply to achieve what they want.

As you do not seem to think more discilpline, less privileges in prison would work - what would you do?

We have said what we would do, so it is time for you to nail your colours to the mast.
 
andy700 said:
For violent crimes, I would suggest that prison is very like solitary confinement, for the entire prison term - no visitors, one hour exercise a day, one phone call per week, no television or other distractions.
Click to expand...

and then what happens when they are released from prison into society - clearly you have no idea what that kind of treatment will do to someone.
 
andy700 said:
First of all, what on earth can ordinary, law abiding, gentile members of society "learn" from scumbag criminals who make the rest of our lives a misery?
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to ordinary members of society. Read the thread. I'm talking about serious academic research into what makes certain people lose the inhibitions that makes them killers. I've spoken about it previously... not repeating myself.
 
POAH said:
and then what happens when they are released from prison into society - clearly you have no idea what that kind of treatment will do to someone.
Click to expand...


So how do you suggest we treat violent prisoners?

I am not really happy with a situation, which allows the perpetrators of violent crime, to enjoy a life of relative comfort (no work, free accomodation, free food, music, TV, internet access etc), whilst the victims of the criminals, plus their relatives and friends are sometimes scarred for life.
I do not really care what effect the "treatment" will have on a criminal, because they are the guilty ones, not the victims or society as a whole.
I also know that reoffending rates amongst certain criminals are very high - despite our "softly, softly" approach to "justice".
 
Pookeyhead said:
I'm not referring to ordinary members of society. Read the thread. I'm talking about serious academic research into what makes certain people lose the inhibitions that makes them killers. I've spoken about it previously... not repeating myself.
Click to expand...

Loving the irony in this post :-)
 
andy700 said:
So how do you suggest we treat violent prisoners?

I am not really happy with a situation, which allows the perpetrators of violent crime, to enjoy a life of relative comfort (no work, free accomodation, free food, music, TV, internet access etc), whilst the victims of the criminals, plus their relatives and friends are sometimes scarred for life.
I do not really care what effect the "treatment" will have on a criminal, because they are the guilty ones, not the victims or society as a whole.
I also know that reoffending rates amongst certain criminals are very high - despite our "softly, softly" approach to "justice".
Click to expand...

out of interest where are you getting the information about life in prison - I personally would not like it.

The fact that you don't care makes your argument pointless - being kept in solitary with little communication will make people go insane.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I'm not referring to ordinary members of society. Read the thread. I'm talking about serious academic research into what makes certain people lose the inhibitions that makes them killers. I've spoken about it previously... not repeating myself.
Click to expand...

Thing is the great proportion of killing is accidental or unintended - I didnt mean to hit him that hard, for him to go through a window/fall down stairs/hit his head on the curb tc

and the majority of deliberate murder/man slaughter is heat of the moment stuff where the loss of control is caused by loss of temper fueled by alcohol and drugs - husband stabs wife, best freinds fall out about a girl, that sort of thing

and of whats left the majority is either in commision of , or as a result of other crime - e.g one gang member knifes another over money/turf/respect

so the proportion of killings that are actualy related to the people who've lost control of themselves for psychologival reasons is tiny
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
Thing is the great proportion of killing is accidental or unintended - I didnt mean to hit him that hard, for him to go through a window/fall down stairs/hit his head on the curb tc
Click to expand...

I know... and that probably wouldn't be murder either. Murder is premeditated.

big soft moose said:
and the majority of deliberate murder/man slaughter is heat of the moment stuff where the loss of control is caused by loss of temper fueled by alcohol and drugs - husband stabs wife, best freinds fall out about a girl, that sort of thing
Click to expand...

Same again... if it can't be proven to be premeditated, then it probably won't be murder.

I'm talking about serial killers, child killers, serial paedophiles and those that clearly live in a disillusion, fantasy world and have clearly become unhinged.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top