Capital Punishment

[King Billy]

I'm asking for a justification for the accusation that noseall is an IRA apologist.

If Mottie doesn't have one then he's guilty of making an appalling personal attack, motivated entirely by personal animosity, the very epitome of an ad hominem comment.

There's many of those sort in this forum.

 

[King Billy]

Exactly that, if there are crimes that have been commited that doesn't require a trial to prove guilt, then just sentence them to death.

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".

 

[King Billy]

you fool.

Pompous ass.

 

[King Billy]

Technically what is the point of a trial if two blokes are filmed beheading a soldier on the streets of London ???

Or some bloke stabbing Joe cox in broad day light

To establish their guilt.

 

[King Billy]

True to a point.
They used to give the villains a warning first, if they ignored it, they would be given an appointment time to turn up at to be shot, to be fair the IRA always called for an ambulance to collect them after they had been dealt with.
However if the thug was connected to a an IRA member , then, maybe the restorative justice guidelines would be interpretated differently.

Loyalists were responsible for about 30% of the deaths during The Torubles.

 

[Mottie]

They used to give the villains a warning first, if they ignored it, they would be given an appointment time to turn up at to be shot, to be fair the IRA always called for an ambulance to collect them after they had been dealt with.

True Gentlemen.

 

[Mottie]

Well, since you're in the business of criticising people for disappearing into the ether, and going to ground, and since, I'm sure, you would deny that you're a hypocrite, you will soon be replying to this without personally attacking me, won't you.

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.

 

[noseall]

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.

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.

 

[Mottie]

Not to most people no. A soldier being murdered is just as tragic whether that's by a dark person or an 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.

 

[Highway Man]

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.

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.

 

[Highway Man]

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".

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.

 

[MNW67]

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.

The problem there is that it becomes a slippery slope. We need to keep the transparency afforded by the trial process, even if in these sort of cases it seems pointless.

 

[King Billy]

the first two words were "for aggravated" offences.

No they weren't.

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, should be met with lashes of substansial proportions to inflict not just pain but to mark the offender. I spent a bit of time in Thailand where they have very severe penantys for drugs and crime in general.

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.

 

[King Billy]

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.

Like sinking an unarmed ship that is minding its own business, miles away from the conflict, that's just taken part in a naval exercise.
The soldiers killed by Lee Rigby were in uniform.

 

[King Billy]

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.

Off duty soldiers are killed in their homes, along with their wives, children and extended family these days.
I wonder who set that standard?