Five stabbed at ASDA beddington.

[Phil’s Barber]

Is Phil's Barber on ignore then ?

No, I am not on Wisbech’ ignore list. He even quoted my post which is what prompted me to type my reply.

As you say, it was very unusual for Wisbech to selectively ignore that one when he generally jumps all over replies specifically signposted for his attention.

 

[georgenorman]

One Babah Sesay, aged 30, has now been charged with GBH.

 

[cryrst]

One Babah Sesay, aged 30, has now been charged with GBH.

GBH with a knife yeah that’s ok then !

 

[PalazioVecchio]

One Babah Sesay, aged 30, has now been charged with GBH.

GBH ? Not attempted murder ? i will confess to being confused. It seems i haven't watched enough violent movies to not know the difference ?


any relative to this South London Neurosurgeon ? or this other stabber ? or the other fella questioned over attacking some other Argos staff ?

South London man caught with heroin and cocaine in his underwear

He was stopped as part of a police investigation into cross border drug crime

www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk

Three jailed over murder of man stabbed in Coventry park

Marvin Warmington, 47, was killed after an argument over the theft of a shared bicycle, say police.

www.bbc.com

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/390620.two-men-guilty-of-kidnap/

 

[Rudi Hedman]

One Babah Sesay, aged 30, has now been charged with GBH.

Welsh?

 

[eaglesdare]

One Babah Sesay, aged 30, has now been charged with GBH.

Well I for one am absolutely shocked 😯

 

[Phil’s Barber]

Well I for one am absolutely shocked 😯

Unbelievable isn’t it?! 🤔

 

[Willo]

GBH ? Not attempted murder ? i will confess to being confused. It seems i haven't watched enough violent movies to not know the difference ?


any relative to this South London Neurosurgeon ? or this other stabber ? or the other fella questioned over attacking some other Argos staff ?

South London man caught with heroin and cocaine in his underwear

He was stopped as part of a police investigation into cross border drug crime

www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk

Three jailed over murder of man stabbed in Coventry park

Marvin Warmington, 47, was killed after an argument over the theft of a shared bicycle, say police.

www.bbc.com

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/390620.two-men-guilty-of-kidnap/

The main difference between "Attempted murder" and other serious offences against individuals such as "GBH", is the intention to kill.

 

[Stirlingsays]

A snivelling non-answer. Link me to one post that is ‘far left’.

This sounds like I'm having a go at you but I really find this quite puzzling.

Surely you recognise that you align with the 'far left' on their most well known identifiers. You agree with their racial politics and all their minority against the majority biases.....I remember your comments causing me to describe it as a fetish.....You agree with their oppressor/oppressed narrative seemingly without end, You were just recently weighing in on sympathy for the trans agenda because people on the right here were so bold as to criticise it......How you differ from their economic ideas I don't know.....seemingly it's Keynesianism on permanent steroids even though the man never meant that in the first place.

Perhaps you see yourself as different from the far left because you don't align on point 3 section 4 of their fruitcake philosophy......but I hardly think small differences constitute some radical separation.

Feel free to educate us on your radical differences and perhaps we will accept this distinction.

 

[Apollofuzz]

GBH ? Not attempted murder ? i will confess to being confused. It seems i haven't watched enough violent movies to not know the difference ?


any relative to this South London Neurosurgeon ? or this other stabber ? or the other fella questioned over attacking some other Argos staff ?

South London man caught with heroin and cocaine in his underwear

He was stopped as part of a police investigation into cross border drug crime

www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk

Three jailed over murder of man stabbed in Coventry park

Marvin Warmington, 47, was killed after an argument over the theft of a shared bicycle, say police.

www.bbc.com

https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/390620.two-men-guilty-of-kidnap/

I believe it is easier to prove GBH than attempted murder (Which is also classed as GBH), so in cases like this the CPS propose the lesser charge for a better chance of conviction. Attempted murder you have to prove they intended to kill, GBH they intended to harm.

 

[Willo]

I believe it is easier to prove GBH than attempted murder (Which is also classed as GBH), so in cases like this the CPS propose the lesser charge for a better chance of conviction. Attempted murder you have to prove they intended to kill, GBH they intended to harm.

The "Intention to kill" is the key difference.

 

[cryrst]

I believe it is easier to prove GBH than attempted murder (Which is also classed as GBH), so in cases like this the CPS propose the lesser charge for a better chance of conviction. Attempted murder you have to prove they intended to kill, GBH they intended to harm.

That makes sense but ABH is the more serious but again what’s a stab wound between friends !

 

[Apollofuzz]

That makes sense but ABH is the more serious but again what’s a stab wound between friends !

I am not an expert but I believe GBH is the more serious crime. Maybe someone more learned will confirm.

ABH = Max 5 years -- GBH with intent = Life -- GBH without intent = Max 5 years

 

[PalazioVecchio]

The "Intention to kill" is the key difference.

right. So when i thrust a big knife at a fella i was......trying to tickle him ?

 

[DanH]

This sounds like I'm having a go at you but I really find this quite puzzling.

Surely you recognise that you align with the 'far left' on their most well known identifiers. You agree with their racial politics and all their minority against the majority biases.....I remember your comments causing me to describe it as a fetish.....You agree with their oppressor/oppressed narrative seemingly without end, You were just recently weighing in on sympathy for the trans agenda because people on the right here were so bold as to criticise it......How you differ from their economic ideas I don't know.....seemingly it's Keynesianism on permanent steroids even though the man never meant that in the first place.

Perhaps you see yourself as different from the far left because you don't align on point 3 section 4 of their fruitcake philosophy......but I hardly think small differences constitute some radical separation.

Feel free to educate us on your radical differences and perhaps we will accept this distinction.

But this is your definition of 'far left' politics? Absolutely not in any well acknowledged sense of the definition. I'm not anti-capitalist, I believe that markets should be as free as possible and only require government intervention to stop exploitation, largely of labour, but also of monopoly (especially natural ones). I believe in meritocracy but equal opportunity (rather than equality of outcome).

Socially, my overriding belief is that people should be free to be whatever they want to be, especially when that comes to something as personal and ingrained as sexuality and who you are fundamentally in your own skin. This means being tolerant of anything that people have no control over, whether that is gender, sexuality, skin colour, socio-economic background or whatever.

My main belief; however, which seems to be completely out of vogue in current mainstream political discourse, is that policy should be based on actual evidence and statistics, by experts in their fields (not career politicians), rather than by narrative and a belief system. To this end, I think labels such as 'right' and 'left' are lazy, and actually completely unhelpful when it comes to any meaningful political debate. Especially now that everything seems to have be binary and there is no room for any nuance in any political discussion.

 

[Apollofuzz]

right. So when i thrust a big knife at a fella i was......trying to tickle him ?

If you thrust a knife at someone, it is easier to prove they intended to hurt/maim/injury/disable/etc. someone, than it is to prove they were intent on killing that person. Thus easier to get a conviction. Is that right no but would rather see someone convicted of this crime than walk free because of lack of proof.

 

[Stirlingsays]

But this is your definition of 'far left' politics? Absolutely not in any well acknowledged sense of the definition. I'm not anti-capitalist, I believe that markets should be as free as possible and only require government intervention to stop exploitation, largely of labour, but also of monopoly (especially natural ones). I believe in meritocracy but equal opportunity (rather than equality of outcome).

Socially, my overriding belief is that people should be free to be whatever they want to be, especially when that comes to something as personal and ingrained as sexuality and who you are fundamentally in your own skin. This means being tolerant of anything that people have no control over, whether that is gender, sexuality, skin colour, socio-economic background or whatever.

My main belief; however, which seems to be completely out of vogue in current mainstream political discourse, is that policy should be based on actual evidence and statistics, by experts in their fields (not career politicians), rather than by narrative and a belief system. To this end, I think labels such as 'right' and 'left' are lazy, and actually completely unhelpful when it comes to any meaningful political debate. Especially now that everything seems to have be binary and there is no room for any nuance in any political discussion.

You didn't describe where you differed, I think that's quite important if you are suggesting you aren't far left.

I'd also suggest that far left ideology fits quite comfortably within most of your description.....Here's how.

The 'governmental intervention' point has to be seen within your full support for lockdown spending at its massive scale....that's about as big an intervention into the markets as you can get. I can accept that you view this as an exceptional instance, but still, it's hardly a hard on for free markets is it.

Your 'I believe in meritocracy but' statement......Dan, you don't fully believe in meritocracy if you then put a 'but' after it.....You believe in a qualified version.....So do I but mine operates with different criteria to yours.

The 'equal opportunity' but not 'equality of outcome' point is something I find hard to believe coming from yourself given your many stated instances of providing excuses for unequal outcomes like racism (easily disproven with the reality of East Asian and Jewish success) or sexism or insert excuse....rather than being different from the far left that's essentially one of its most common halmarks. Essentially the modern far left blame white people and their institutions for failures related to, on average, poorly performing groups..

Essentially the wiggle room here is that the far left can forever claim that the system isn't equal....So I regard the starting statement as just one of theory.

Your 'everyone should be what they want to be'......Well, that's the room for no limits transgenderism and alphabet ideology right there. No commentary on extent and where this cuts off.....Seemingly no reliasation of exactly what problems and disasters this belief has and is leading to, no accountability either....Not only for, in some cases, promoting mental illness but for birth rate and thus future pensions failure ..but also the disgusting outcome of children being maimed for life by people with agendas. This is the reality of 'feel good' easy to say statements like your one above....it results in no pushback for people pushing 'you're a girl/boy' ideology to children.....The scandals are already out there.

As for your experts point......That's a nuanced discussion as I regard that idea as valid only within a system free of money corruption and ideological gate keeping....which unfortunately isn't the case.

 

[DanH]

You didn't describe where you differed, I think that's quite important if you are suggesting you aren't far left.

I'd also suggest that far left ideology fits quite comfortably within most of your description.....Here's how.

The 'governmental intervention' point has to be seen within your full support for lockdown spending at its massive scale....that's about as big an intervention into the markets as you can get. I can accept that you view this as an exceptional instance, but still, it's hardly a hard on for free markets is it.

Your 'I believe in meritocracy but' statement......Dan, you don't fully believe in meritocracy if you then put a 'but' after it.....You believe in a qualified version.....So do I but mine operates with different criteria to yours.

The 'equal opportunity' but not 'equality of outcome' point is something I find hard to believe coming from yourself given your many stated instances of providing excuses for unequal outcomes like racism (easily disproven with the reality of East Asian and Jewish success) or sexism or insert excuse....rather than being different from the far left that's essentially one of its most common halmarks. Essentially the modern far left blame white people and their institutions for failures related to, on average, poorly performing groups..

Essentially the wiggle room here is that the far left can forever claim that the system isn't equal....So I regard the starting statement as just one of theory.

Your 'everyone should be what they want to be'......Well, that's the room for no limits transgenderism and alphabet ideology right there. No commentary on extent and where this cuts off.....Seemingly no reliasation of exactly what problems and disasters this belief has and is leading to, no accountability either....Not only for, in some cases, promoting mental illness but for birth rate and thus future pensions failure ..but also the disgusting outcome of children being maimed for life by people with agendas. This is the reality of 'feel good' easy to say statements like your one above....it results in no pushback for people pushing 'you're a girl/boy' ideology to children.....The scandals are already out there.

As for your experts point......That's a nuanced discussion as I regard that idea as valid only within a system free of money corruption and ideological gate keeping....which unfortunately isn't the case.

This is why it’s pointless discussing anything with you, you either don’t read what is written properly, or you just choose to put your own interpretation on it anyway and still try and ram home your points.

You can call me ‘far left’ all you want if it makes you feel better, even if it is ultimately meaningless. Not sure you can point to many ‘far left’ groups in history that were pro-capitalist free marketeers.

You seem to think your lockdown point is some big ‘gotcha’ as well. If you take a purely economic outlook on it of course it’s a terrible course of action to take. But it wasn’t purely an economic one was it? If it was there wouldn’t have been any lockdowns. It was a drastic public health matter. You seem to revel in taking the contrarian view to most courses of action as it is much easier to try and score points against action that was taken rather than hypothesise about action that wasn’t and say ‘wouldn’t have happened if they did what I suggested’.

I seem to remember your main arguments at the time were more about civil liberties than economics, like lockdowns were some sort of perverted social experiment the government couldn’t wait to implement, rather than a last resort health measure. Find it quite ironic that you had a hissy fit over being told to wear a little mask in public as it eroded your civil liberties but you think you can dictate to trans people how to live their entire lives?

The bold bit is entirely plausible btw. For example, if you believe that the best people to be Prime Minister of this country, purely on merit, just happen to be largely a succession of Eton school boys, then as your well worn phrase goes, I’ve got some magic beans to sell you.

 

[Stirlingsays]

This is why it’s pointless discussing anything with you, you either don’t read what is written properly, or you just choose to put your own interpretation on it anyway and still try and ram home your points.

You can call me ‘far left’ all you want if it makes you feel better, even if it is ultimately meaningless. Not sure you can point to many ‘far left’ groups in history that were pro-capitalist free marketeers.

You seem to think your lockdown point is some big ‘gotcha’ as well. If you take a purely economic outlook on it of course it’s a terrible course of action to take. But it wasn’t purely an economic one was it? If it was there wouldn’t have been any lockdowns. It was a drastic public health matter. You seem to revel in taking the contrarian view to most courses of action as it is much easier to try and score points against action that was taken rather than hypothesise about action that wasn’t and say ‘wouldn’t have happened if they did what I suggested’.

I seem to remember your main arguments at the time were more about civil liberties than economics, like lockdowns were some sort of perverted social experiment the government couldn’t wait to implement, rather than a last resort health measure. Find it quite ironic that you had a hissy fit over being told to wear a little mask in public as it eroded your civil liberties but you think you can dictate to trans people how to live their entire lives?

The bold bit is entirely plausible btw. For example, if you believe that the best people to be Prime Minister of this country, purely on merit, just happen to be largely a succession of Eton school boys, then as your well worn phrase goes, I’ve got some magic beans to sell you.

You are focusing on the economic point, which is fair enough but it's something I consider the least egregious aspect of the far left. As in some areas there are even agreements to be found.

I'm not that interested in a 'gotcha' more than honestly questioning what your differences were with the far left. Because you chose to make general philosophical statements about your belief system rather than answer the question I decided to waste my time showing how how your beliefs can easily still fit within that political prism. I suspect the reason you don't want to state a difference is quite obvious, but that's ok....it was an inquiry not an excuse to hammer away at you.

You are right that one of my main concerns over the lockdowns was civil liberties but it hardly ended there. We discussed it at quite a length at the time and our differences were obviously markedly different....You supported establishment policy while I thought it economically insane, ineffective and authoritarian to freedoms.

Not only has it left a generational debt burden but that the aim of 'no one can be risked' is just unworkable madness for a respiratory illness.....Obviously there was far more in the covid thread but god forbid we all want to go over that again.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

I am not an expert but I believe GBH is the more serious crime. Maybe someone more learned will confirm.

ABH = Max 5 years -- GBH with intent = Life -- GBH without intent = Max 5 years

Yes. The levels of assault simplified are;

Common assault - hurt but no real injury
ABH - Actual Bodily Harm - Visible to moderate injury
GBH - Serious Injury caused (Grievous)
GBH with intent - Nasty b****** who intended to cause serious injury.