Capital Punishment

King Billy said:
I think you're being silly, using this example of attacking someone's spelling.
Attacking someone for taking the mickey out of another's narcissism is even sadder.
Click to expand...

You have been attacking other posters spelling a lot recently. It is the lowest form of debate and means you have lost the argument.
 
MNW67 said:
You have been attacking other posters spelling a lot recently. It is the lowest form of debate and means you have lost the argument.
Click to expand...
and look at his spelling mistakes whilst doing it, he has today called me pomous and various other examples. Totally embarrasing.
 
King Billy said:
You're making it up now.
How many types of theft are there?
How do we differentiate them, by adding an adjective, either before or after, as in 'theft in breach of trust', 'theft of metal', 'theft of art', 'theft of pets' 'theft by deception', etc.
"Theft" is the noun, and the adjective describes the type of theft, as in "Theft of cars", or "car theft".

Moreover, theft is taken to be stealing without the use of force. When the use of force is applied, it becomes a more serious offence, an aggravated offence. Theft involving the use of force becomes robbery.
So "theft of cars" or "car theft" is the lesser of two (or more) evils.
So theft of cars, is not an aggravated offence unless there are other offences committed during the driving.
Click to expand...
What about someone who thefts a minute of my life reading a load of crap?
 
King Billy said:
You're making it up now.
How many types of theft are there?
How do we differentiate them, by adding an adjective, either before or after, as in 'theft in breach of trust', 'theft of metal', 'theft of art', 'theft of pets' 'theft by deception', etc.
"Theft" is the noun, and the adjective describes the type of theft, as in "Theft of cars", or "car theft".

Moreover, theft is taken to be stealing without the use of force. When the use of force is applied, it becomes a more serious offence, an aggravated offence. Theft involving the use of force becomes robbery.
So "theft of cars" or "car theft" is the lesser of two (or more) evils.
So theft of cars, is not an aggravated offence unless there are other offences committed during the driving.
Click to expand...
Or you could look at it sensibly and think, is a death sentence a punishment that fits the crime for just car theft, or would aggravated car theft be a reasonable ground for it. Stop digging and accept the lesson that you have learnt.
 
King Billy said:
You're making it up now.
How many types of theft are there?
How do we separate them, by adding an adjective, either before or after, as in 'theft in breach of trust', 'theft of metal', 'theft of art', 'theft of pets' 'theft by deception', etc.
"Theft" is the noun, and the adjective describes the type of theft, as in "Theft of cars", or "car theft".
Click to expand...

No, I am correct.
If we take your two examples, 'car theft' and 'fingerless gloves'.
Car theft uses two nouns. No adjective is present. It forms a discrete grammatical unit.
Whereas 'fingerless gloves' is an adjective followed by a noun.

I have massively cut down my posting of AIs. But sometimes it seems the only way to move a stalled discussion forward. Please feel free to come back with your own source:

AI Overview

Car theft
is a compound noun phrase (or noun-noun compound) consisting of two distinct nouns:
  1. Car (Noun)
  2. Theft (Noun)
It forms a discrete grammatical unit known as a noun adjunct (or attributive noun), where the first noun ("car") functions to modify the second noun ("theft"). While "car" acts as a qualifier, it is syntactically a noun, not an adjective. Together, they function as a single compound noun to represent the specific crime of stealing a motor vehicle.
 
King Billy said:
The difference is between a typo (pomous obviously has a letter missing)and a persistent repetitive misspelling of common 4 letter words.
Click to expand...
Off course mate, I understand, yours are typos whereas anyone else's are laughable and means they do not grasp the English language.
 
King Billy said:
Therefore the second noun has been modified by an adjective (or nouns functioning as adjectives) so the rule of adjectives applying to several nouns does not apply. Otherwise the punishment would apply to all types of theft. But HWM only applied his punishment to aggravated burglary and one specific type of theft - "theft of cars".
Click to expand...

WRONG

AI Overview

An adjective appearing before a list of coordinate nouns, including an adjunct noun, is generally interpreted as modifying all of the items in that list.
Click to expand...

This means that, using standard grammatical interpretation, the adjective 'aggravated' applies to both the single noun 'burglary' and the adjunct noun 'car theft'.
 
King Billy said:
You're wrong. When the second noun is modified by an adjective (or a noun acting as an adjective) the rule does not apply.
I've already posted that rule.

The the use of an adjective (or noun acting s an adjective) "of cars" suitably modified the second noun, negating the rule of an adjective applying to all the nouns in list.

In addition the Court of Appeal said there is no rule to suggest what you claim is correct:

https://www.vwv.co.uk/insights/arti...-the-first-item-court-of-appeal-gives-ruling/

In HWM's case his use of the word "theft" which excludes the use of violence suggests that it is not an aggravated offence. Therefore the adjective "aggravated" would automatically only apply to the first noun.
Click to expand...
Give up whilst you're behind Bill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
What about a referendum
3 4 5
Replies
67
Views
4K
Notch7
N
D
Here's why I don't support the death sentence
2 3 4
Replies
45
Views
4K
Pat ex
P
B
Total Scum jailed for snapping tot's spine.
2 3
Replies
38
Views
6K
Sylvan Tieger
S
D
More pathetic sentencing
2 3
Replies
40
Views
5K
diy_fun_uk
D
B
  • Locked
'I'd rather employ a paedophile than ex-forces personnel!'
14 15 16
Replies
238
Views
29K
conny
C
Back
Top