Capital Punishment

King Billy said:
In addition you are misquoting the definition of a noun adjunct. A noun adjunct is a noun acting as an adjective. It does not join together with the other noun to make a new noun. What you are describing is a compound noun, as in shoeshine, raindrop, etc. These are not nouns adjunct.
A noun adjunct is as I've said, a noun acting as an adjective and describing the other noun, i.e modifying it or differentiating it from other types of that noun, as in theft of cars, and other types of theft.
So that is the second reason why the word "aggravated "does not apply to the "theft of cars".
Click to expand...

Your use of closed compound nouns such as raindrop is very slippery. But I can see why you tried to slip it in to confuse matters.

So, let's stick with a proper example such as 'coffee cup'. You accepted that this a compound noun where 'coffee' is the noun adjunct. And you have already accepted that, in my example sentence, the adjective 'new' applied to this compound noun:

'We bought new plates and coffee cups'.

So, it seems that you agree with me regarding the basic principle.

I take note of what the Court of Appeal said in relation to the construction of contracts.

The rest of your post is confusing waffle.
 
King Billy said:
The use of both "aggravated" and "theft" in the same sentence, referring to the same offence, is an oxymoron. Theft excludes violence or force, so it's not an aggravated offence.

It doesn't matter because "aggravated" does not include theft. Theft excludes the use of violence or force.
And if he meant what he claims he meant, he would have used aggravated burglary and car jacking, or whatever form of violence or force he had in mind.
Click to expand...

The important point is that everyone else knew what HWM meant. It is true that, in the UK, there is no specific offence of aggravated theft. And that theft with the threat or use of force is technically known as robbery. But I don't have a problem with a lay person referring to theft with the use of violence as 'aggravated theft'. You are being overly pedantic. What really matters is that the sentence made sense grammatically and that everyone understood it.
 
I am all for capital and corporal punishment, I think the punishment should fit the crime, obviously for any concerns over guilt is to be avoided and prison but this must be hard labour and not a soft option. Violent offences such as agravated burglary and theft of cars etc,
 
You will clearly see that I say Violent offences such as... meaning aggravated theft of cars. It is very simple to understand and no need for 20 pages of complete waffle from silly billy who has had his feelings hurt by being mistaken.
 
Violent offences such as agravated burglary and theft of cars etc, can only mean one thing, if you steal a car violently then it is aggravated car theft. You said there was no such thing. Having been proven wrong you have destroyed a thread that was interesting. Well done King Billy in destroying another thread with your pedantic and pompous trait.
 
King Billy said:
The use of the word "theft" excludes the use of violence or force.
Well done to MNW, the organ grinder and his monkey for destroying another thread with their pedantry, pomposity and arrogance.
It's a shame they were wrong after all that tribal bluff and bluster. :rolleyes:

BTW, it's aggravated vehicle taking. Aggravated Vehicle-Taking Act 1992 But you can call it aggravated car theft, even if it is an oxymoron. That'll be one of your lesser mistakes because you're not expected to know the intricacies of the English language.
Click to expand...
Reported (again)
 
King Billy said:
It doesn't make sense in neither grammatical syntax, nor in plain English, nor in layman's legal knowledge.
You incorrectly applied a rule which does not exist to justify your argument. (Blame AI)
You've misrepresented the definition of a noun adjunct.
You've tried to conflate the noun adjunct with a compound noun.
You've further ignored the obvious oxymoron to argue that it made sense.
You've also ignored the legal definition of theft excluding the obvious aggravating factor.

You appear to have joined the tribal club, and put yourself in the same bracket as those who refuse to admit their mistakes.
Click to expand...

That's a very jaundiced way to look at it.

I have said many times before that I very much enjoy discussing language and grammar. It doesn't matter if we don't agree. Apart from your rather aggressive demeanour, this has been a good conversation in my opinion.
 
King Billy said:
I'm sorry if you misinterpret my assertiveness for aggression. But I know when I'm correct despite the yahooing* from the sidelines, because they're not capable of reasoned argument.
I misinterpret your demeaning manner for insults.


*Gulliver's travels.
Click to expand...

I'm always up for a discussion on law or language and grammar. And I approach both with strict objectivity.
 
King Billy said:
But you don't admit when you're wrong?
Or are you still relying on your assumption that everyone knew what he meant, because you and he happened to agree?
Pigeons and chess?
Or is it the tribalism?
Click to expand...

It's none of those things. That is where you are going wrong. I have fallen out with people from all sides on here because I am not at all tribal and am always objective. I mainly just enjoy a proper discussion. And in this case, it happens that my grammatical interpretation is different to yours.
 
King Billy said:
What do you mean, again?
I've aksed you several times and this is the first time you've answered.

Can you find this post of Himmy's where he said that all Italians are fascists?
I'm asking because you don't come across as a reliable person, so I'm expecting you to be able to prove that someone said all Italians are fascist because it's obviously not true, and I can't think anyone would be so silly to say that.
Click to expand...
Posted many many times and you've seen it.
Every new user you create you start the same rubbish about evidence but I told you 4 or 5 reincarnations ago that I won't play your psycho games anymore.
As said many times before, slavery has been abolished, so as you're so good at finding others' posts, find the offending one yourself.
Won't be difficult, you know exactly where it is.
Oh, and everyone has seen it, that's why everyone has zero respect for you, THE racist bigot in drags.
 
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