and please use their services
Scum
- Thread starter Flash In The Pan
- Start date
- Messages
- 8,561
- Name
- See above
- Edit My Images
- No
which is exactly why i didnt want to see it before eating my dinner
OP
Flash In The Pan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 16,680
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's not the point of this thread though. The issue isn't what the weapon was, it's the mentality of the individual causing the damage. Give somebody with the wrong mentality a paperclip and they could be dangerous.
Edit: and nobody, as far as I can see, has said we should ban fireworks.
- Messages
- 8,561
- Name
- See above
- Edit My Images
- No
sportysnaps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,309
- Name
- martin
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 34,670
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Fireworks are explosives! They should only be handled by people qualified to do so in an official capacity. Or do you think that guns should be made available over the counter in the corner shop.
- Messages
- 16,680
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I went to recheck and was just about to say, sorry, I missed that one Sporty
There are also a couple of other posts in which imply people they would prefer fireworks weren't on sale to the public. Personally I wouldn't punish the majority and ban them because of the actions of a small number of idiots. I'd far rather see the idiots taken out of the equation.
Monkey
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,254
- Name
- Craig Denton
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Its not an insult, its a concern.
People with that frame of mind need help, end of....
If they dont get it there WILL be more headlines like the one the OP posted.
If i think someone is off their rocker i will say so, theres no point being namby pamby about it, that gets us no where.
sportysnaps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,309
- Name
- martin
- Edit My Images
- No
ok fair point but how do you take the idiots out... clearly many of the under 18's are getting hold of the fireworks - how do stop that?
I think a step in the right direction is that when you have an age limit for the sale of goods (fags, booze fireworks) it should be that you MUST prove age not only if you look young - this would make it easier for the shopkeepers who do at least try to obey the law...
but guns only serve the purpose of killing or hurting people, fireworks are for looking pretty.
You could say that matches should only be sold to fireman on your logic. Go back to your bubble wrap.
RichardC27
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,839
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What if it's an ornamental gun? 
What if it's an ornamental gun?
It's still a gun, so unless it's not in working order same rules apply.
- Messages
- 34,670
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well it was a debate until your last sentence, so I'll bow out and leave you to suck on your dummy (until you spit it out again.)
- Messages
- 16,680
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I honestly don't know how to stop the acquisition side of things. Even with the minimum ages for drinking, smoking etc people underage still get access to cigs and booze.
Beyond that I'm more and more coming down on the side of harsh treatment for offenders, especially those demonstrated in the OP.
- Messages
- 16,680
- Name
- Ebenezer McScrooge III
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No they don't. Clay pigeon shooting is just one example, target shooting is another. In the wrong hands guns are lethal. We've already been through this, any item in the wrong hands is a potentially lethal weapon, it's the person that's the issue.
And fireworks were/are simply a derivative of explosives which were invented to inflict damage. Using your own arguments you would logically ban explosives.
Splog
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,257
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
So are you saying any ****head should be able to carry a gun???
I think anyone should be able to own one if there over 18, and don't have a criminal record etc. Carry one no, but I don't think that people should be able to walk down the street with fireworks out the box either, they should still be able to buy them though.
OP
Flash In The Pan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You're an eejit. End of debate.
Banning fireworks is not a sensible idea. Yes, they are explosives, and yes, they can do damage. But the same is true of any object. If handled responsibly, they are perfectly safe. Granted in the case where this doesn't happen, there is a problem, but if it is a major issue then it can be addressed by a series of educational campaigns. Probably one of the most effective ways would be to show some nice images of fireworks-related injuries such as the one posted in this thread to mid-teenagers.
If anything, it would promote the sale of black market goods (for example, those from China and elsewhere) which are manufactured to a far lesser standard than those on general sale in the UK. It is a well-known fact that some of these fireworks are highly volatile and extremely dangerous; I believe a TV campaign was aired a few years ago highlighting some of the risks.
On a side-note, Yantorsen has had to put up with an awful lot of abuse in this thread. In particular, I do not believe in the death penalty. Why? Mainly because the justice system cannot ever be perfect, and with this type of punishment there is no room for error. There have been a number of cases (123 in the period of 1973-2006) in the US where defendants have been released from death row after having been cleared of all charges. Odds are that at least one innocent person has probably been wrongfully executed. I don't know about you, but I would much rather that I let all of them live than know that an innocent man has been killed. That is simply unacceptable to me.
Similar things have happened in the UK: do not forget about the Birmingham Six, released after 16 years of wrongful imprisonment. It is likely that under a death penalty, they would have been executed long before this, with the average time of an inmate being on death row about 147 months (12.25 years) in 2006.
This leads me conveniently onto another point; it is often the case that it is more expensive (in general about 70% per year moreso) to keep somebody on death row and subsequently execute them than it is to imprison them. Then there is the morality. I just don't see a place for capital punishment in this day and age. The "burn them at the stake" attitude should have died a long time ago.
Anyway, sorry for the rant, but I thought someone, at least, should defend the guy.
If anything, it would promote the sale of black market goods (for example, those from China and elsewhere) which are manufactured to a far lesser standard than those on general sale in the UK. It is a well-known fact that some of these fireworks are highly volatile and extremely dangerous; I believe a TV campaign was aired a few years ago highlighting some of the risks.
On a side-note, Yantorsen has had to put up with an awful lot of abuse in this thread. In particular, I do not believe in the death penalty. Why? Mainly because the justice system cannot ever be perfect, and with this type of punishment there is no room for error. There have been a number of cases (123 in the period of 1973-2006) in the US where defendants have been released from death row after having been cleared of all charges. Odds are that at least one innocent person has probably been wrongfully executed. I don't know about you, but I would much rather that I let all of them live than know that an innocent man has been killed. That is simply unacceptable to me.
Similar things have happened in the UK: do not forget about the Birmingham Six, released after 16 years of wrongful imprisonment. It is likely that under a death penalty, they would have been executed long before this, with the average time of an inmate being on death row about 147 months (12.25 years) in 2006.
This leads me conveniently onto another point; it is often the case that it is more expensive (in general about 70% per year moreso) to keep somebody on death row and subsequently execute them than it is to imprison them. Then there is the morality. I just don't see a place for capital punishment in this day and age. The "burn them at the stake" attitude should have died a long time ago.
Anyway, sorry for the rant, but I thought someone, at least, should defend the guy.
Splog
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,257
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Another lets defend the offender post :thumbsdown: OK so someone innocent may be executed, but what do you think all the murderers are doing anyway
I doubt that before they decide to kick someone's head in they give them the right of appeal, but back to the OP what right did these scumbags have to throw a firework into a pram? and how would you deal with them?
Splog
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,257
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Actually, I sort of agree with this or at least some of it
but if I owned a gun (legally) would I be able to use it against some 13 year old little **** trying to rob me or blow my baby's head off with a firework?typical mature answer I've come to expect from you.
Another lets defend the offender post :thumbsdown: OK so someone innocent may be executed, but what do you think all the murderers are doing anyway
I'm not defending people who commit murder; that much should have been clear. My opinion is that any person, no matter the crime, should have the right not to die, and not only that but it is far more sensible from many standpoints for this to happen. If you don't agree with that, fine, but don't go putting words into my mouth.
Obviously, the person(s) responsible for the crime in the OP have committed a serious offence, and if/when they are arrested and if they are found guilty, then they should be jailed.
Splog
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,257
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think I put words into your mouth :shrug: I simply pointed out that murderers don't offer the same rights to their victims you are advocating for them. Why is it that this country seems to have a body of people paid by the tax payers to defend offenders and no one to stand up for the rights of victims and family? It's time this country put money into protecting people instead of defending criminals / offenders :bang:
I heard it was called legal system, and the right to a fair trial :shrug:
OP
Flash In The Pan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's also factual. If you believe allowing the right to bear arms in this country is a good idea then you've either the thickest person I've ever come across or a troll.
Pick one. Either way you're still an eejit.
sportysnaps
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,309
- Name
- martin
- Edit My Images
- No
nice idea - would possibly work but is not going to happen is it? - the images got pulled from here - this is a privately run forum and if the the mods here do not think they can leave an image of a finger with no skin left on it (the photos were pulled) - do you think the photos will be shown in schools? - it's not going to happen... as the left wing - protect the "poor little darlings" powers will prevent the kids at school from being scared by the photos.
true....
crooks hurt and kill innocent people, why should we care if the occasional crook gets done for something he did not do (this time)
no being able to convict someone based on the evidence available is not the same as saying that they are innocent...
if the boys in the OP were seen buying firworks and seen at the baby's pram and found to have traces of gunpowder on them indicating they had let of a firework does that prove they did it(in a court of law) - no
does it mean they did not do it though....?
Last edited:
Seems like the YOU are the eejit to me, with all respect, that's just the impression I get.
I said everyone should have the right to bare arms providing they meet the requirements, age/suitable/not got a criminal record, basically how it is now.
So what if they don't offer the same rights to their victims? In a civilised society, shouldn't we take the moral high ground and not return to the days when we burned people alive or hung people we didn't like?
Because, as far as I am aware, you are still offered the right to a fair trial under this country, and if you cannot afford representation for yourself then it is offered for you. As I'm sure you're aware, that requires money. If you are suggesting that this shouldn't be the case, then maybe there's no hope for this country after all.
OP
Flash In The Pan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Remember, up here we have a different legal system from you, in addition to guilty or not guilty we have the "not proven" verdict...
Splog
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 6,257
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Maybe I'm missing something from your posts? but it seems to me that you are advocating the right of anyone to do whatever they want and whatever the consequences as long as they are dealt with by the legal system after the event
Maybe I'm missing something from your posts? but it seems to me that you are advocating the right of anyone to do whatever they want and whatever the consequences as long as they are dealt with by the legal system after the event
I think you missing more than that, when did I say this?
That is a very blasé attitude to life, of course we should ****** care if an innocent person is killed. Also it wouldn't woad well for the trust in the legal system.
OP
Flash In The Pan
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 27,793
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I agree everyone should have the right to bare arms, but not to bear arms.
Do you think the killer of that boy in Derby was within his rights, he was over 18 and may well not " have a criminal record etc"
Last edited:
