View previous topic | View next topic

E-Petitions and the Death Penalty

Page 3 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

suze
837482.  Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:07 am Reply with quote

bob, I don't think I really need a shadow. So instead, I'll just provide you with six comments which have been made to my second Facebook page* within the last 24 hours.

"these peoplel are no better than the 7/7 bombers and the government are mainly to blame because of all their stupid rules and laws such as parents being arrested if they discipline their children and police not being allowed to do their jobs properly due to being accused of their acts being racist"

"It is exactly people like yourself that has caused this situation to brew up. People like you, who make excuses for them and convince them that they are hard done by."

"Send in the army and shoot on sight."

"Please Mr under privileged bored rioter don't come running to me complaining a big man with a stick has twatted you round the head."

"Get our soldiers back here and send these fuckers to die abroad where they belong."

"Call in the military and stop these parasites running riot around London."

All made by people who live in either Medway or the London Borough of Bromley. All made by people of university education. All bar one made by people whom I believe to vote Labour.


* I have two. Most of my friends on one of them are people I know online, while the comments reproduced here are from the page for people I know IRL.

 
samivel
837485.  Tue Aug 09, 2011 11:20 am Reply with quote

Ever feel like swapping your friends over?

;)

 
Ion Zone
837714.  Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:08 pm Reply with quote

It's fun how absolutely totalitarian even quite mild people become online. Almost every problem seems solvable by indiscriminate gunfire.

 
Spud McLaren
837715.  Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:09 pm Reply with quote

Ion Zone wrote:
Almost every problem seems solvable by indiscriminate gunfire.
Will it unblock my drains?

 
Ion Zone
837716.  Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:15 pm Reply with quote

You certainly won't have a problem with them backing up, I can tell you that. Flooding may be a minor issue however.


Be sure to use rounds tipped with Harpic or Drano.

 
bobwilson
837785.  Wed Aug 10, 2011 10:01 pm Reply with quote

suze wrote:
bob, I don't think I really need a shadow. So instead, I'll just provide you with six comments which have been made to my second Facebook page* within the last 24 hours.

"these peoplel are no better than the 7/7 bombers and the government are mainly to blame because of all their stupid rules and laws such as parents being arrested if they discipline their children and police not being allowed to do their jobs properly due to being accused of their acts being racist"

"It is exactly people like yourself that has caused this situation to brew up. People like you, who make excuses for them and convince them that they are hard done by."

"Send in the army and shoot on sight."

"Please Mr under privileged bored rioter don't come running to me complaining a big man with a stick has twatted you round the head."

"Get our soldiers back here and send these fuckers to die abroad where they belong."

"Call in the military and stop these parasites running riot around London."

All made by people who live in either Medway or the London Borough of Bromley. All made by people of university education. All bar one made by people whom I believe to vote Labour.


* I have two. Most of my friends on one of them are people I know online, while the comments reproduced here are from the page for people I know IRL.


My apologies suze. I thought when you said

Quote:
But when I'm at home in Kent, I hear it every day (and from people who would be horribly offended if you accused them of being racist).

you meant that you heard this randomly directly. I didn't realise that you meant that you'd heard this from people randomly distributed around the world when you happened to be in Kent.

I see that you state that the comments come from "facebook friends" who reside in the relevant area and given the typo's these are obviously real quotes.

That doesn't alter the fact that the impression you originally gave was that these were comments overheard or offered by "the man on the Clapham Omnibus". The reality is that these are the opinions proffered by some acquaintances of yours.

You can dress it up in any way you want - the fact remains that the impression you gave (and intended to give) was that this was the general tenor of conversation in Kent. That wasn't true - it was deliberately untrue. Frankly, I don't care whether the originators are Labour supporters - or New Labour supporters - I'm more concerned with the deliberate distortion of the facts. (I'm not a fan of either Labour or New Labour but I draw the line at using fiction to challenge either).

I can be accused of many things - being a twat for instance - but I am not deceitful and I won't be tricked into being deceitful by an artful deception, irrespective of the provenance.

 
samivel
837839.  Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:11 am Reply with quote

You may not think you're deceitful, but it's not likely to be an opinion shared by many people when you accuse suze of giving you quotes 'from people randomly distributed around the world' when she explicitly states that all the quote come from people who live in Medway or Bromley. The impression you gave (and intended to give) was that this was a group of highly disparate isolated quotes from across the globe. That wasn't true - it was deliberately untrue.

If it isn't deceitful to accuse someone of something you yourself do whilst professing not to, I think you need to look up the definition of 'deceit' in the dictionary.

 
swot
837963.  Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:51 pm Reply with quote

At least one of the e-petitions has garnered the required number of signatures: Remove benefits from rioters. I'm not sure if that's a good or bad idea.

 
samivel
837971.  Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:07 pm Reply with quote

What's the suggested punishment for those rioters who aren't in receipt of benefits?

 
suze
837990.  Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:06 pm Reply with quote

I have to say that I think that is a very bad idea.

For a start, laws are not usually retrospective. As regards the criminal law, the European Convention on Human Rights does not allow the creation of laws which are to apply ex post facto. The War Crimes Act 1991 is one of the few which does, and it will be in trouble if it is ever challenged in Europe. It's not quite so difficult to introduce civil law with retrospective effect, but the House of Lords never likes it.

So the chances are that any such law, even if it received Royal Assent tomorrow, could only be used against those who take part in possible future riots.

But OK, suppose we can clear that hurdle and exclude all of those who have taken part in the recent riots from benefits. What do those people do now?

Those who currently have jobs must be at some risk of losing them after they are convicted, and won't find new jobs easy to come by. Those who are already out of work are likely to stay that way.

Most of these people probably don't have much money, so before very long they'll run out of cash for food and for paying the bills. Then what? They throw themselves upon charity, or else they resort to crime as a source of income. Or OK, we shoot them all so that they are no longer a burden on the taxpayer.

I'm not really liking any of those options.

 
Jenny
838087.  Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:19 pm Reply with quote

Kneejerk response.

 
djgordy
838120.  Fri Aug 12, 2011 3:17 pm Reply with quote

Spud McLaren wrote:
Ion Zone wrote:
Almost every problem seems solvable by indiscriminate gunfire.
Will it unblock my drains?


Ion Zone wrote:
You certainly won't have a problem with them backing up, I can tell you that. Flooding may be a minor issue however.


Be sure to use rounds tipped with Harpic or Drano.


I would have thought Cillit BANG!

 
bobwilson
838168.  Fri Aug 12, 2011 9:29 pm Reply with quote

It might be helpful if you’d bother to read the posts samivel (get a grip - either ignore me or at least read what I've said)

As you say

samivel wrote:
You (ie bobwilson) may not think you're deceitful, but it's not likely to be an opinion shared by many people when you accuse suze of giving you quotes 'from people randomly distributed around the world'

If you could upgrade your attention span a jot you’d be able to access the sentence which immediately follows this which is:

bobwilson wrote:
I see that you state that the comments come from "facebook friends" who reside in the relevant area and given the typo's these are obviously real quotes.


(added empasis)

I believe suze is more than capable of responding to anything I might post without your well-meaning assistance - and I have it on good authority that she can manage to read more than one sentence.

But, to get back to the original point of the thread – which is headed “e-petitions and the Death Penalty” – I read a line in an article in a magazine today (it has to have been in either the Spectator or The Week – can’t remember which) which casually threw away the remark that Parliament is prohibited from discussing the death penalty under European Law. I’ll dig out the exact quote and source later. I didn’t know that (assuming it’s true) – but it sounds plausible.

 
suze
838187.  Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:00 am Reply with quote

I don't think that can be right - Parliament can discuss anything it chooses to. What it cannot practically do is to bring capital punishment back into use - that would be in conflict with membership of both the EU and the Council of Europe. And I suppose it would be pretty pointless for Parliament to discuss a thing that it couldn't really do even if it wanted to. Mind you, it's by no means unknown for Congress in the USA to hold symbolic votes with no real intention of acting on them, and I suppose the British Parliament could do a comparable thing.

Then again, we say that the UK couldn't reintroduce capital punishment even if it wanted to. But could it? The protocols would suggest that the UK ought formally to leave those European bodies before taking an action that they wouldn't allow. But is that actually necessary? If that action were to be taken, the UK would be suspended from them in any case.

It seems unlikely that the UK would choose this road - the only European nations not in membership of the C of E are Belarus (which has the death penalty) and the Vatican (which doesn't) - but it's not actually impossible.

Or there is a middle way. Latvia and Russia both have capital punishment on their statute books, but on the understanding that they'll never actually use it. The European bodies wouldn't be very pleased if the UK tried to take the same position, but I don't know that they could actually forbid it to happen.

 
Neotenic
838204.  Sat Aug 13, 2011 4:16 am Reply with quote

I am quite pleased to see that even after the events of the past week, the counter-petition to retain the ban on capital punishment still has more signatures.

 

Page 3 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group