PDA

View Full Version : The lunatics are still running the asylum!


makintw
27th Jul 2006, 12:05
Anyone hear the Jeremy Vine show today?

Shopkeeper in Bournemouth told by plod that he may be infringing the human rights of shoplifters by publicly displaying CCTV pictures of them “on the job”

None prosecuted

:ugh:

AcroChik
27th Jul 2006, 13:46
I think that, here in the States, we would call this a civil rights issue.

The rationale would, I believe, work this way:

A person has been accused yet not been tried and convicted of a crime. Due process of law has, thus, not been exercised. The public display of them in the supposed act would be seen as a defamation of character (and other stuff ~ I'm not a lawyer). Until due process of law has been followed, the accused may be innocent.

G-CPTN
27th Jul 2006, 13:50
In addition, in the UK, the display of 'evidence' prior to a trial can be seen as prejudicial. Cases have been dismissed as "the accused is being denied a fair trial".

Chesty Morgan
27th Jul 2006, 13:59
But if people had more faith in the legal system here there wouldn't be any need for a pre trial public shaming.

I think this is a case of the shop owner serving up his own kind of justice as he probably believes that a succesful trial, read 'in his favour', wouldn't happen.

Don't even get me started on human/civil rights. This has probably come up on here before but did Tony Martin have any human rights when he was nicked for defending his home.

If these criminals are willing to put themselves in danger, agreed an unquantifiable outcome, they should be willing to reap the consequences. After all they quite happily reap the rewards!

An Englishmans home/caravan/shop is his castle.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 14:20
Don't even get me started on human/civil rights.Then why don't you go and live in Iran or North Korea or Soviet Russia?

Are you really Sadaam Hussein?

Chesty Morgan
27th Jul 2006, 14:52
Are you really Sadaam Hussein?

No I'm not! :p

To clarify.

Human/civil rights for innocent people is a god given right.

But, why should those who violate human rights be allowed to hide behind them? That is the failing in the system, it's always weighted towards the bad guys. The Tony Martin case is my point in question.

As far as I'm concerned, if you violate my rights, you leave yourself open to any necessary action I may take. You have willingly put yourself in harms way, for selfish means, and I will defend myself. That is my god given human right.

Llademos
27th Jul 2006, 15:05
Tony Martin shot a burglar, in the back, as he (the burglar) was running out of the door. Unless you agree with capital punishment for theft, this cannot be right in a civilised society. I would add, however, that if the burglar was going remotely in Martin's direction, he would have deserved all he got, and I would think the police would take the same view.

On this particular thread, what if the shopkeeper got it wrong? How often have you picked something up from a shop, wandered around, decided you didn't want to buy it and returned it? What if the camera didn't catch the goods being put back on the shelf? I know, it is highly likely that they were thieves, but that doesn't make it right to pronounce them guilty before they are tried.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 15:35
I didn't really think you were :)

but

No they're not god given rights, they're rights that were won for us by countless thousands of people who couldn't help but say no or just couldn't abide to see injustice done, even though the result of them standing up for something was certainly going to be a dark dungeon and a hot poker or a stake and a fire or a rope and a tree.

Sometimes I think we take the comfort of our hard won world too much for granted and we seem all too eager to give it up.


btw, I'm not singling you out and I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiments.

AcroChik
27th Jul 2006, 15:36
Human/civil rights for innocent people is a god given right.

In the States, at least, rights are not seen to be granted by or given by anyone or anything. They are seen as inalienable to the person. That is, one literally embodies such rights and they cannot be abridged by an outside authority such as, let's say, a government or another individual.

In fact, the Bill of Rights decribes what the government may not do, not what rights a person has:

Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

I'd venture that history is repleate with examples of authorities (governmental or otherwise) abridging the rights of people willy nilly for their own benefit.

In recognition of both these things, we've adopted as system (imperfect though it may be) for assuming an accused person innocent until proven guilty. Once guilt has been proven according to this system, certain rights are removed, ie, the guilty party is incarcerated (in some jurisidictions executed if the crime is a capital one).

Currently, some people in the US say our country is in the midst of a constitutional crisis with the inalienable rights of people being abridged willy nilly. But, that's another discussion.

Chesty Morgan
27th Jul 2006, 15:37
Michael Wolkind, QC, who heads Mr Martin's new legal team, tells the Court of Appeal that his trial lawyers had not presented Mr Martin's own account of what happened.

He said there was "compelling" evidence to show that the farmer acted in self-defence and under provocation or diminished responsibility.

Agreed Llademos. Shooting somebody as he ran away is way over the top.

Bear in mind that Martin had been burgled several times in the preceeding few months and this elicited little or no response from local law enforcement.

Martin must have been compelled to protect and defend himself and his property. As I would, not with a pump action shotgun, but a good clonk on the kneecaps with a nine iron.

I admit this case is a little extreme for proving my point!

I know, it is highly likely that they were thieves, but that doesn't make it right to pronounce them guilty before they are tried.

Again I agree, but I can see his point.

Ace Rimmer
27th Jul 2006, 15:52
Chesty: Nah not enough club...I'd give em a close encounter with an old ISI-K 3- iron kept expressly for this purpose

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 15:54
Currently, some people in the US say our country is in the midst of a constitutional crisis with the inalienable rights of people being abridged willy nilly.some might say they are being abridged georgy porgy. :p

Llademos
27th Jul 2006, 15:58
Bear in mind that Martin had been burgled several times in the preceeding few months and this elicited little or no response from local law enforcement.

And therein lies the problem. If the general public feels that they are not being supported by the police they will take the law into their own hands. Of course, if the police were given the means to actually police, rather than chase Bliar's targets, we might get a better service.

Chesty Morgan
27th Jul 2006, 16:07
I didn't really think you were :)

Thank the lord! I was cowering behind my desk waiting for a thousand pounder to come through my window:eek:

tony draper
27th Jul 2006, 16:12
I wudda locked Tony Martin up for not finishing the job, aim higher next time tone,
Scum like that should be decalred outlaw,no rights or protecton under law civil or otherwise whatsoever,.
:suspect:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 16:16
I think I can look past the grammar of that post and detect the intended sentiment :8

Standard Noise
27th Jul 2006, 16:24
Good grammar or no, I like the cut of that man's jib.

Krystal n chips
27th Jul 2006, 16:44
Not quite on the same thread---but still concerning the issue of lunatics and taking over the UK--have a look at this little "gem" :mad: from up here in the N.West. It was profiled extensively on last nights news hence the "U" turn that would make any chav envious :rolleyes: ---but the bit I really like :yuk: is the nice observation concerning how Social Workers have a challenging job and how they so carefully ration public money !!!!!!:mad:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/5220894.stm

A bit nearer home re the lunatics----father died in February this year----sister does the admin side re the death certificate etc--and this week duly gets a letter, incorrectly addressed, from the DWP er, asking for a refund of my father's pension for the week he died---that's a whole £100.28p that the State is desperate to reclaim. :mad: Reasons I am cynical No 372 !

AcroChik
27th Jul 2006, 17:04
In one of my favorite UK-produced television series a character asks, "If social workers hung up a shingle on High Street and charged for their services, would the public pay for what they do?"

[The quote might not be word for word but the sense is accurate.]

Krystal n chips...

I'm sorry to hear your father passed away. There were lots of administrative complications about my own father's passing, but at least no one sent my mother an INVOICE! It must have felt like a slap in the face.

frostbite
27th Jul 2006, 17:06
Krystal, your sister is also likely to get a letter and form from the delightful 'asset recovery' (or somesuch) department which snoops to discover if a few quid can be reclaimed from an estate which might have been overpaid by a few pennies.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 17:33
"If social workers hung up a shingle on High Street and charged for their services, would the public pay for what they do?"
But then again, how many people's services WOULD the public pay for? teachers? police? traffic wardens?


I hear if you die intestate in Lacashire, the Queen gets it all :{

planeenglish
27th Jul 2006, 17:50
English justice....
Anyone hear the Jeremy Vine show today?
Shopkeeper in Bournemouth told by plod that he may be infringing the human rights of shoplifters by publicly displaying CCTV pictures of them “on the job”
None prosecuted
:ugh:
Texan justice...:Ehttp://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i262/planeenglish/wedontdial.jpg

G-CPTN
27th Jul 2006, 19:00
A bit nearer home re the lunatics----father died in February this year----sister does the admin side re the death certificate etc--and this week duly gets a letter, incorrectly addressed, from the DWP er, asking for a refund of my father's pension for the week he died---that's a whole £100.28p that the State is desperate to reclaim. :mad: Reasons I am cynical No 372 !
Send the letter back, marked 'Deceased'. Some of these charities NEVER give up :O Alternatively, tell them he 'spent it' before he died! :E
MY father had a company pension (from the Prudential). The Pensions Administrator turned-up at the funeral to 'cut-off' the payments.

AcroChik
27th Jul 2006, 19:07
The corporate logo of Prudential is the rock of Gibralter.

There's a book about Prudential titled, Serpent on the Rock.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 21:16
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i262/planeenglish/wedontdial.jpg

what is that? a four shot revolver?

G-CPTN
27th Jul 2006, 21:21
Shirley knot? ONE in-line with the barrel, and one opposite (or don't they lie like that?). Never spent much time looking at THAT end of a shooter.
All MY full-bore pistol shooting was with the gun pointing AWAY from myself. Range rules . . .

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
27th Jul 2006, 22:10
...not when the chambers are 90 degrees apart :8

planeenglish
28th Jul 2006, 06:16
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i262/planeenglish/wedontdial.jpg

what is that? a four shot revolver?
It's three more than needed...:E

Erwin Schroedinger
28th Jul 2006, 06:21
I hear if you die intestate in Lacashire, the Queen gets it all
Please use your spellchecker in future.

In't t'estate. (tr. In the estate).

ORAC
28th Jul 2006, 06:34
Torygraph:

A woman has been told by police that she must remove a sign on her garden gate that reads "Our dogs are fed on Jehovah's Witnesses" because it is "distressing, offensive and inappropriate". Jean Grove, a pensioner, has displayed the sign for 32 years. Her late husband, Gordon, put it up after members of the Church banged on their door on Christmas Day 1974.

Mrs Grove, from Bursledon, Hants, said that police officers had taken her details and insisted that she remove the sign. Once they had left, she put it back. :ok:

She said the sign was not intended to cause offence and that no one had complained to her about it, not even Jehovah's Witnesses. It was merely a way of showing that she did not welcome their calls. "It was just a bit of a lark," she said, pointing out that the only dog she had now was a Jack Russell pup called Rabbit, which was too small to savage callers of any religion.

Mrs Grove, 77, said: "If someone had told me they were offended, I would have taken it down. Why should it suddenly be a problem?" She said she kept the sign as a memorial to her husband, who died two years ago after 52 years of marriage. "I couldn't believe it," she said. "The police put my name and address in their little black book and everything."......

Diana Sneezum, the chairman of Bursledon parish council, said the police should be concentrating on the bigger problems in the village. "I find it quite surprising that they are concerned with this. "We don't have the same responses to what many people feel are more pressing matters in the village, such as vandalism and trouble with yobs."

A spokesman for Hampshire police said: "We were informed by a member of the public who found the sign to be distressing, offensive and inappropriate. "Officers attended the address and the sign was taken down."

A spokesman for the Jehovah's Witness movement in Hampshire accepted that the sign was a joke. He said: "If we see signs like that we turn around and walk away.".......

Foss
28th Jul 2006, 09:42
"It was just a bit of a lark," she said, pointing out that the only dog she had now was a Jack Russell pup called Rabbit, which was too small to savage callers of any religion.

Absolutely hilarious.

There was an article in the paper here about a man who cemented broken glass onto the to of the wall at the back of his corner shop. This is a common practice. Police arrived and told him to remove it, because someone could get hurt. like a burglar

Fos

tony draper
28th Jul 2006, 09:51
Yup,scum at the top stealing from us, scum at the bottom stealing from us,and another group of wig wearers protecting both and sucking on the tit of crime and doing very nicely thank you.
:suspect:

BombayDuck
28th Jul 2006, 10:21
this calls for some Pink Floyd

The lunatic is on the grass
The lunatic is on the grass
Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs
Got to keep the loonies on the path

The lunatic is in the hall
The lunatics are in my hall
The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
And every day the paper boy brings more

And if the dam breaks open many years too soon
And if there is no room upon the hill
And if your head explodes with dark forebodings too
Ill see you on the dark side of the moon

The lunatic is in my head
The lunatic is in my head
You raise the blade, you make the change
You re-arrange me till I'm sane
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head but its not me.

And if the cloud bursts, thunder in your ear
You shout and no one seems to hear
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
Ill see you on the dark side of the moon

:ok:

rotated
28th Jul 2006, 10:58
Thanks BD:ok:

I'm changing my location now... :) :} :8

green granite
28th Jul 2006, 11:34
The answer to the police calling should be "No I will not take it down/ demolish it etc", which will leave them with 2 options prosecute or ingnore you. If they prosecute demand trial by jury on the grounds that magistrates allways side with the police. :rolleyes:

frostbite
28th Jul 2006, 11:58
" Diana Sneezum, the chairman of Bursledon parish council"


Why is it that people with silly names always seem to go for public office?

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!
28th Jul 2006, 12:49
Please use your spellchecker in future.What, you don't like intestate, but Lacashire is ok? :confused: :} :} :}

G-CPTN
28th Jul 2006, 13:40
The 'broken glass' prohibition has been effected hereabouts for twenty years and more. Methinks that Police nowadays look for 'offences' where the perpetrator is easily identifiable (and therefore requires no detective work) to inflate their 'clear-up rate'. If you know the answer before you ask the question . . .
Oh and for 'minor' offences I don't believe that you can insist on a jury trial.

G-ZUZZ
29th Jul 2006, 20:14
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i262/planeenglish/wedontdial.jpg

Plenty of four-chamber revolvers around. The real question is, is it double-action....? No keep your mind out of the gutter!

Double action means it's halfway to a discharge and you getting that third eye you dream of! That'll give you something to go aaaaaargh about.


But no it's obviously a 6-shooter.

tony draper
29th Jul 2006, 20:30
To add slightly nerdish note here, when confronted by a revolver like that, if when the confronter cocks the piece or commences to squeeze the trigger, you see the chamber rotates clockwise its a Smith and Wesson, if anti clockwise tiz a Colt, usefull to know as it may well be the last observation you ever make.
:rolleyes:

G-ZUZZ
29th Jul 2006, 20:35
Do you have any tips on determining the make when it's an automatic? Maybe direction of rifling or something like that?

tony draper
29th Jul 2006, 20:42
One could not possibly allow oneself o be shot by any of those feckin new fangled automatic pistols,they are the weapon of a cad and bounder, except possible Mr Colt 1911 .45 jobby.
:rolleyes:

G-ZUZZ
29th Jul 2006, 21:00
I agree entirely, in fact some would go so far as to suggest that real men use the ram-rod and take their time about it too.


Incidentally is this "Colt" or "Smith & Wesson" you refer to the very same invented by our former colonials, cum cowboys? (No reference to recent controversial Hollywood "Western" film productions intended...)

tony draper
29th Jul 2006, 21:17
One begs to differ you will find that revolving chambers had been knocking about long before Mr Colts product, there exists functioning weapon with a revolving chamber in the Tower of London dating from Tudor times utilising the same pawl and rachet method of chamber rotation as Mr Colts 1843 Navy Colt it has also been suggested that old Sam visitied said Tower of London on one of his trips before the mast and took great interest in this particular gun.
Never the less one is a great admirer of Mr Colt and his excellent products past and present
:rolleyes:

G-ZUZZ
29th Jul 2006, 21:44
Not heard the one about Colt and the Tower but for my money it's hard to go past Gatling's legacy from the good old days. Being something of a purist, though, you might not agree.

henry crun
29th Jul 2006, 23:05
My sign is a more accurate.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/crun9/sign.jpg