Not a typical day [longish]
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
Prev: With regard to the "Rage Against The Machine for Christmas Number One" campaign
Next: Petrol pipe blocked - help
From: steve auvache on 21 Dec 2009 14:05 In article <200912211946072196-doesnotcompute(a)gmailcom>, doetnietcomputeren <doesnotcompute(a)gmail.com> writes >On 2009-12-21 19:28:07 +0100, steve auvache <dont_spam(a)thecow.me.uk> said: > >>>>> It's not a deterrent. >>>> >>>> The entire history of mankind demonstrates that punishment, be it >>>> capital, corporal or any other kind, appears not to be a deterrent for >>>> some. The solution, if ever there is to be one, seems to lie in >>>> preventing "crime" in the first place. >>> >>> <Auvache in rare lucid moment shocker> >> >> Typewriters, monkeys, etc. > >Is that some sort of apology I see? No, I am olde skool ukrm, you won't get the S word out of me. -- steve auvache
From: Leszek Karlik on 21 Dec 2009 14:14 On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:33:40 +0100, 'Hog <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailchips.co.uk> wrote: [...] > If it has no beneficial effect then why do the 'Merkin public support it? <boggle> -- Leszek 'Leslie' Karlik NTV 650
From: 'Hog on 21 Dec 2009 14:24 doetnietcomputeren wrote: > On 2009-12-21 19:33:40 +0100, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> > said: >>>> And I suspect the HOW of the sentence also has a lot to do with the >>>> deterrent effect. >>> >>> The prospect of ending up in Fulsom, would be enough to keep me from >>> getting caught doing anything that would warrant me going there. >>> >>> For those that are prepared to go there, or to death row, I doubt >>> that stoning, hanging drawing and quartering or being fed bleeding >>> feet first to pirhanas is going to make much difference. Certainly >>> being faced by an angry mob of a dozen of you wouldn't worry them >>> in the slightest. >> >> I see what you are saying. It doesn't change the fact that it will >> deter some and prevents re-offending. >> >> If it has no beneficial effect then why do the 'Merkin public >> support it? > > Many of the Merkins don't support it. It's only available in something > like 37 states and has been abolished in some and ruled > unconstitutional in several others. In terms of percentage of the population? Around 69% I believe. -- 'Hog
From: 'Hog on 21 Dec 2009 14:27 Andy Bonwick wrote: > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:11:26 -0000, "'Hog" > <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: > >> Champ wrote: > > snip> > >>> you appear to be genuinely proposing capital punishment for 3 crimes >>> against property. >>> >>> You're either a troll or deeply unpleasant. >> >> I'm suggesting liquidating those who systematically disrupt and try >> to destroy the lives of those around them. Over and over. Resisting >> all efforts to educate them. >> > While I'd suggest a good kicking would be in order I think the 'final > solution' is a step too far. > >> More likely you who is rather out of touch with the feelings of a >> rather large section of the population. >> >> Naturally one has to agree with Capital Punishment and Retribution. >> Polls suggest 87 to over 90% of people do in specific circumstances. >> > I think you're being a bit selective here because though some people > might well agree with topping murderers or child molesters I think > you'd struggle to find more than one in a million who'd do the same to > a burglar. Depends how you construct the question. Perhaps also on whether they had recently been burgled. The penalty was not for burglary but on repeated offending. -- 'Hog
From: 'Hog on 21 Dec 2009 14:27
Leszek Karlik wrote: > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:33:40 +0100, 'Hog > <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailchips.co.uk> wrote: > > [...] >> If it has no beneficial effect then why do the 'Merkin public >> support it? > > <boggle> It was a question. See? -- 'Hog |