Most serious

[oompah]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7469180.stm
Seems like the paedophile charges take second place to the terroism charges,to my mind he should serve a year for every indecent image of children found on his computer.

 

[Bahco]

Castration should be mandatory for these sick vile people!

 

[megawatt]

I completely agree ... Now let's all wait and see how long it takes BAS the waz to wade in with his usual diatribe about the rights of the pervert and how we are all a bunch of torturers.

MW

 

[oompah]

He his due for sentencing tomorrow it will be interesting to see what the judiciary will think the more serious.He had 39,000 indecent images of children on his computer that means either 1 child was photographed 39,000 times or 39,000 different children or any combination in between.He had 4 nail bombs that might have caused death and destruction to maybe a handful of people.The paedophile part wins hands down.

 

[Space cat]

1 child was photographed 39,000 times or 39,000 different children or any combination in between.He had 4 nail bombs that might have caused death and destruction to maybe a handful of people.The paedophile part wins hands down.

I don't see how this comparison works. Is there evidence that he committed the child abuse himself! Did he have real nail bombs or just images of bombs on his computer!! What if he'd had a video on his computer of somebody else's nail bomb going off!!!

 

[Softus]

I don't see how this comparison works.

Is there evidence that he committed the child abuse himself?

He hasn't been charged with child abuse. He has admitted to the illegal act of downloading images onto his computer.

Did he have real nail bombs or just images of bombs on his computer?

Neo-Nazi Martyn Gilleard has been found guilty of making bombs...

What if he had a video on his computer of somebody else's nail bomb going off?

He isn't charged with having such a video on his computer.

Stick to the facts and you'll be less befuddled.

 

[Space cat]

Stick to the facts and you'll be less befuddled.

I do know the facts. My questions were rhetorical but I've just read my own post and it's not so obvious. A few exclamation marks would have helped so I've edited them in! Sorry for the confusion.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I completely agree ... Now let's all wait and see how long it takes BAS the waz to wade in with his usual diatribe about the rights of the pervert and how we are all a bunch of torturers.

If he is being processed by a society which professes to be better than someone who uses pain and abuse for gratification, and violence and killing to achieve social aims, then he does have the right not to be given abuse, pain, violence and death by that society.

That doesn't mean he has the right to do the things he did, or the right not to be locked up for them.

I don't see how this comparison works. Is there evidence that he committed the child abuse himself!

No, but by providing a market for the images he promoted and encouraged abuse by others.


"Detectives who interviewed his work colleagues were told that he had expressed racist views to them."
Maybe if his colleagues had done something about that, and not just shrugged their shoulders and said "freedom of speech, innit", he would have lost his job and not had the money to pay for child pornography and bomb making materials....

 

[sooey]

Maybe if his colleagues had done something about that, and not just shrugged their shoulders and said "freedom of speech, innit", he would have lost his job and not had the money to pay for child pornography and bomb making materials....

Nice switch back onto your favourite subject. Being a paedophile does not necessarily follow from being a racist.

"Detectives who interviewed his work colleagues were told that he had expressed racist views to them."

In the past you have labelled people racist for expressing worries about job security due to the high levels of immigration into this country. Maybe it was somebody like you who was talking to the detectives.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Nice switch back onto your favourite subject. Being a paedophile does not necessarily follow from being a racist.

I never suggested it did - I can't see how any interpretation of what I wrote leads you to that conclusion.

 

[imamartian]

to my mind he should serve a year for every indecent image of children found on his computer.

Wrong... they should be killed for having one !!!! that would stop them !!

 

[WDIK]

to my mind he should serve a year for every indecent image of children found on his computer.

Wrong... they should be killed for having one !!!! that would stop them !!

well sure it would but isnt that a tad radical even exstreme

 

[imamartian]

oh yeah... liberalism rules.... if i may !
If it were a pic of one of my kids, i'd kill them myself... why even consider ANY tolerence when it comes to sex and children?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

It is possible to not tolerate it and not kill the perpetrators.

But it does require a modicum of civilisation to see that.

 

[WDIK]

its a little like the joke.

are you going to have your child, circumsised?

only if they are really naughty


liberal ?

your kids? they are your responsibility, your responsibility to know where they are.

incidently the majority of those crimes when not being hyped by the media, are actually commited by familly members.
so dont scream here

check your own circumstances before you scream and point