Israel v Hamas

I agree with the sentiment and that these are very annoying people.

But personally if someone isn't violent and has an opinion I don't like.....I'm not going to take away their liberty.

There are lines though....like burning the nation's flag where I would arrest people.
Or being part of a group who caused millions of pound damage to an RAF aircraft. This was created by 2TK last year with his over zealous punishments. Now he has set a precedent of
small crime big time.
 
I don't need to misrepresent your opinions - your take on the mass rape of children by gangs of mainly men of Pakistani heritage is there for all to read and see. The function of parents is to protect their children. The only wonder is that more did not take the law into their own hands as it was clear that the police were not going to help them.
Some did and were warned for being racist.
 
I don't need to misrepresent your opinions - your take on the mass rape of children by gangs of mainly men of Pakistani heritage is there for all to read and see. The function of parents is to protect their children. The only wonder is that more did not take the law into their own hands as it was clear that the police were not going to help them.
That’s true but it’s not how you, and several others, seek to present it. You seem obsessed in trying to see things that exist solely in your imagination.

The function of parents is to care for their children and prepare them to face the world.

This idea that the police failed institutionally to do their duty is so preposterous it hardly needs rebutting. Yes, they were under resourced and over burdened, but that’s not their responsibility. No one should ever take the law into their own hands.
 
That’s true but it’s not how you, and several others, seek to present it. You seem obsessed in trying to see things that exist solely in your imagination.

The function of parents is to care for their children and prepare them to face the world.

This idea that the police failed institutionally to do their duty is so preposterous it hardly needs rebutting. Yes, they were under resourced and over burdened, but that’s not their responsibility. No one should ever take the law into their own hands.

Preposterous?

 
That’s true but it’s not how you, and several others, seek to present it. You seem obsessed in trying to see things that exist solely in your imagination.

The function of parents is to care for their children and prepare them to face the world.

This idea that the police failed institutionally to do their duty is so preposterous it hardly needs rebutting. Yes, they were under resourced and over burdened, but that’s not their responsibility. No one should ever take the law into their own hands.
It is preposterous to deny that the police failed to do their duty. It's also preposterous to expect anything else from you.
 
Preposterous?

Nobody has ever suggested there weren’t failures, that the responses were perfect or lessons haven’t been learned with experience. What’s argued is the idea this was a deliberate institutional policy and not individual mistakes or the result of under resourcing or over commitment.
 
Nobody has ever suggested there weren’t failures, that the responses were perfect or lessons haven’t been learned with experience. What’s argued is the idea this was a deliberate institutional policy and not individual mistakes or the result of under resourcing or over commitment.
Really?

 
Nobody has ever suggested there weren’t failures, that the responses were perfect or lessons haven’t been learned with experience. What’s argued is the idea this was a deliberate institutional policy and not individual mistakes or the result of under resourcing or over commitment.
So you agree that they failed to do their duty.
 
That’s true but it’s not how you, and several others, seek to present it. You seem obsessed in trying to see things that exist solely in your imagination.

The function of parents is to care for their children and prepare them to face the world.

This idea that the police failed institutionally to do their duty is so preposterous it hardly needs rebutting. Yes, they were under resourced and over burdened, but that’s not their responsibility. No one should ever take the law into their own hands.
Promise I am not having a go at you specifically tonight, but I have to take issue with this. If policing and the criminal justice system fail to uphold the law, then it leaves us with 2 choices. Be bullied and abused, or take the law into your own hands. The lack of resourcing for both policing and criminal justice is rapidly leaving people in this position. Do you really think a shop owner should allow shoplifters to steal with impunity because the police don't have the resources to attend a crime as it is being committed ? If it was me, I would take a baseball bat to them and sod the consequences. I am not at all disposed to violence, but I have been taught to stand up to bullies, and if that means taking the law into my own hands because the government won't, then so be it.
 
Promise I am not having a go at you specifically tonight, but I have to take issue with this. If policing and the criminal justice system fail to uphold the law, then it leaves us with 2 choices. Be bullied and abused, or take the law into your own hands. The lack of resourcing for both policing and criminal justice is rapidly leaving people in this position. Do you really think a shop owner should allow shoplifters to steal with impunity because the police don't have the resources to attend a crime as it is being committed ? If it was me, I would take a baseball bat to them and sod the consequences. I am not at all disposed to violence, but I have been taught to stand up to bullies, and if that means taking the law into my own hands because the government won't, then so be it.
It's not lack of resources, it is warped priorities.
 
Yes really. What you reference is the political blame game being played in the HoC.

Once again, this has nothing to do with the thread, so any further comment ought to go in the correct place.

Your constant refrain was that we should wait for the report and now the report can be dismissed as politically biased. The fact that it comes to the same conclusions as many posters on here is purely coincidental.
 
Promise I am not having a go at you specifically tonight, but I have to take issue with this. If policing and the criminal justice system fail to uphold the law, then it leaves us with 2 choices. Be bullied and abused, or take the law into your own hands. The lack of resourcing for both policing and criminal justice is rapidly leaving people in this position. Do you really think a shop owner should allow shoplifters to steal with impunity because the police don't have the resources to attend a crime as it is being committed ? If it was me, I would take a baseball bat to them and sod the consequences. I am not at all disposed to violence, but I have been taught to stand up to bullies, and if that means taking the law into my own hands because the government won't, then so be it.
If you did that you would be arrested. Taking the law into your own hands is not an option. That though doesn’t mean you cannot do something and not just stand back. You do have opinions. You can make a citizens arrest. A shop keeper can lock the doors and call the police. You can use CCTV to record events to help identify criminals and support insurance claims. If violence is used it can be met with proportionate resistance.

I have been taught to face down and humiliate bullies by turning aside and ignoring them. They are at heart attention seeking cowards. If everyone ignores them they fail.
 
Your constant refrain was that we should wait for the report and now the report can be dismissed as politically biased. The fact that it comes to the same conclusions as many posters on here is purely coincidental.
The criticism here is of the police themselves. Not of their political masters, whether in central or local government.

So it is not the same. It is totally different. Indeed it confirms what I have said. That being under resourced and over committed is not the same as being institutionally responsible for ignoring an issue. Who is responsible for the resourcing and setting of priorities?
 
The criticism here is of the police themselves. Not of their political masters, whether in central or local government.

So it is not the same. It is totally different. Indeed it confirms what I have said. That being under resourced and over committed is not the same as being institutionally responsible for ignoring an issue. Who is responsible for the resourcing and setting of priorities?
How could any crimes being committed be more deserving of police resources?
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top