Death is the ultimate punishment.
That's a bit like the Scottish verdict of 'Not Proven' rather than not Guilty or Guilty.
True to a point.
True Gentlemen.
There’s a world of difference between an off-duty soldier being targeted and slaughtered in the street during peace time to avenge Muslims over past events and one killed during an ongoing conflict. Nosey thinks there’s no difference where, when, how and why someone is killed if they are a soldier and mentioned the IRA. Perhaps you should be asking him why he thinks one is no less heinous than the other unless you feel the same way.
Not to most people no. A soldier being murdered is just as tragic whether that's by a dark person or a any other terrorist. Different for RWR racist Reform voting types, I agree.
My point was, off duty soldiers not involved in any conflict were not targeted and slaughtered in the streets by religious fanatics in the good old days.
No this is once again your trait of twisting sentences and words to suit your version, you missed out the all important couple of words just before you cut and pasted my comment, the first two words were "for aggravated" offences. Perfectly clear to those that have a comprehension of the English language.HWM said:-
Maybe he wants to tattoo something on their forehead, or make them wear some kind of symbol, or their crime number etched on their wrist.
Car theft is not an aggravated offence, unless there is some aggravating factor associated with it.
I didn't make any mistake. I was fully aware of what I was saying, and of what HWM was suggesting.
Once again I could not be clearer on this, no joking about it but I would reject your suggestion of dunking them in water to establish guilt, I find that quite ridiculous and would pass that off as mere folly. You can call it what you want, the great charter or whatever, criminals who commit serious crime as in the examples that I have given in previous posts where there is no doubt that the offender is guilty, then this would carry an automatic death sentence. There is no right to a fair trial either, those rights were lost upon commiting such crimes.Perhaps we should dunk them in water. If they drown they were innocent, but if they survive, they're guilty, so then you'll execute them.
HWM's suggestions are developing into farce. He's doing it intentionally so he can claim it was all a joke really.
Next he'll be suggesting some form of foundational legal document to establish guaranteed rights such as fair trials.
We could call it something like the "Great Charter".
No they weren't.
Your words were aggravated burglary and theft of cars. Two entirely different offences. One has the added descriptor of aggravated, and the other doesn't.
Car theft is not an aggravated offence.
Exactly this and well he knows it, he is just being a silly billy and trying to twist again to somehow elevate himself but failed and went in the oppoosit direction of down rather than up. ?Funny isn't it how he and only he missed the obvious.
I doubt there would be any benefit to try this notion as the days of the Magna Carter have well past their sell by date and the offenders would be dust by now.
