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: Grimly Curmudgeon on 21 Dec 2009 10:50 We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> saying something like: >my obvious >underlying point is capital punishment applied to a 3 Strikes Then You Are >Out policy which has always seemed reasonable to me. That's 3 *serious* (1) >(1) I count theft of a motorcycle secured in a garage as serious Now you're just touting for votes.
From: Champ on 21 Dec 2009 10:51 On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:36:22 -0000, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>> Just so you know - I don't respond to trolls. >>>> >>>>> Who is Trolling? I wasn't. >>>> >>>> Yeah, you always say that, usually after saying something trollish >>>> about public executions. >> >>> No, you simply chose not to consider the question or an answer >> >> OK, Mr Troll, here's your chance to defend your Trollish behaviour. >> >> You said: "So do you think they should have been executed in public >> after their 3rd or 4th or 5th offence rather than inflicting the 20th >> on you?" >> >> So, do you *genuinely* believe that public executions are the way you >> would deal with the issue of low level youth crime? > >This being a NG and UKRM I may flower up the language but my obvious >underlying point is capital punishment applied to a 3 Strikes Then You Are >Out policy which has always seemed reasonable to me. That's 3 *serious* (1) >detected property/against a person crimes for which conventional penalties >are imposed and on the 4th offence it's a bullet. You might even couch that >inside a time frame if you choose, for liberal effect, say 20 years. you appear to be genuinely proposing capital punishment for 3 crimes against property. You're either a troll or deeply unpleasant. -- Champ We declare that the splendour of the world has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. ZX10R | Hayabusa | GPz750turbo neal at champ dot org dot uk
From: 'Hog on 21 Dec 2009 11:11 Champ wrote: > On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:36:22 -0000, "'Hog" > <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> wrote: > >>>>>>> Just so you know - I don't respond to trolls. >>>>> >>>>>> Who is Trolling? I wasn't. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, you always say that, usually after saying something trollish >>>>> about public executions. >>> >>>> No, you simply chose not to consider the question or an answer >>> >>> OK, Mr Troll, here's your chance to defend your Trollish behaviour. >>> >>> You said: "So do you think they should have been executed in public >>> after their 3rd or 4th or 5th offence rather than inflicting the >>> 20th on you?" >>> >>> So, do you *genuinely* believe that public executions are the way >>> you would deal with the issue of low level youth crime? >> >> This being a NG and UKRM I may flower up the language but my obvious >> underlying point is capital punishment applied to a 3 Strikes Then >> You Are Out policy which has always seemed reasonable to me. That's >> 3 *serious* (1) detected property/against a person crimes for which >> conventional penalties are imposed and on the 4th offence it's a >> bullet. You might even couch that inside a time frame if you choose, >> for liberal effect, say 20 years. > > 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. 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. Not that disagreeing with large sections of society is a bad thing you understand. I usually do, just not on this. -- 'Hog
From: doetnietcomputeren on 21 Dec 2009 11:16 On 2009-12-21 16:51:39 +0100, Champ <news(a)champ.org.uk> said: >> >> This being a NG and UKRM I may flower up the language but my obvious >> underlying point is capital punishment applied to a 3 Strikes Then You Are >> Out policy which has always seemed reasonable to me. That's 3 *serious* (1) >> detected property/against a person crimes for which conventional penalties >> are imposed and on the 4th offence it's a bullet. You might even couch that >> inside a time frame if you choose, for liberal effect, say 20 years. > > you appear to be genuinely proposing capital punishment for 3 crimes > against property. > > You're either a troll or deeply unpleasant. I think you missed an option there. -- Dnc
From: doetnietcomputeren on 21 Dec 2009 11:18
On 2009-12-21 17:11:26 +0100, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> said: >>>> So, do you *genuinely* believe that public executions are the way >>>> you would deal with the issue of low level youth crime? >>> >>> This being a NG and UKRM I may flower up the language but my obvious >>> underlying point is capital punishment applied to a 3 Strikes Then >>> You Are Out policy which has always seemed reasonable to me. That's >>> 3 *serious* (1) detected property/against a person crimes for which >>> conventional penalties are imposed and on the 4th offence it's a >>> bullet. You might even couch that inside a time frame if you choose, >>> for liberal effect, say 20 years. >> >> 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. And what makes you think that Capital or Corporal punishment would change anything? (Hint, it doesn't in many other countries). -- Dnc |