Can you give an example please?
Last edited:
PC Andrew Harper's
- Thread starter Elsa TLC
- Start date
Just low end trolling. Very poor really.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 28,562
- Reaction score
- 7,478
- Country
no point in trying educate you when you wont answer simple questions. You can ask your favourite AI instead.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 28,562
- Reaction score
- 7,478
- Country
post 21 conveniently ignored.. good effort though.
you might want to go back to
2, 5, 12, which were factually incorrect and then from 19 it went down hill.
Nosenout trolled the post as per usual and trollmod amplified it with a dollop of jew hate.
Now Labour plan to fix a problem of their own making.
Nosenout said it couldn't happen. Poor old boy is never right.
Last edited:
The wait goes on.
It's warey4life, what is your issue with my made up username?
Elsa TLC ????? And you say I'm mixed up?
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 257
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
Back to the substantive thread about PC Harper's killers ...
I'll admit that I remain uneasy about Harper's Law - the idea that the severity of the crime depends on the identity of the victim strikes me as difficult. Don't get me wrong, I feel all the outrage for what happened but the idea that any other person getting killed while trying to prevent these scum getting away would now be - effectively - a lesser offence cannot be right.
Anyway, much has been made about the fact that the government can't exclude these two from the ERS because, if they do, they'd have to exclude all of the 500 or so on manslaughter offences and that would mean not enough prison space is cleared.
Why?
I am not saying it is good law, or even a good idea, but as a technical thought process what is to prevent the government putting forward a law explicitly excluding these individuals from the ERS?
Or, even a new law that says "the ERS will not apply to any individual guilty of having committed the following offences against an emergency services worker"?
Yes, that would get challenged but by the time the courts got round to it, we're years and years away ... It where remaining in the ECHR is a good idea as the case backlog there would take these two vermin into their dotage anyway.
As I started by writing, I have difficulties with Harper's Law so I am not sure how I feel about further interventions to make one type of manslaugtherer different to another. I'm asking not about the morality of it (one way or the other), more the technical possibility of it.
I'll admit that I remain uneasy about Harper's Law - the idea that the severity of the crime depends on the identity of the victim strikes me as difficult. Don't get me wrong, I feel all the outrage for what happened but the idea that any other person getting killed while trying to prevent these scum getting away would now be - effectively - a lesser offence cannot be right.
Anyway, much has been made about the fact that the government can't exclude these two from the ERS because, if they do, they'd have to exclude all of the 500 or so on manslaughter offences and that would mean not enough prison space is cleared.
Why?
I am not saying it is good law, or even a good idea, but as a technical thought process what is to prevent the government putting forward a law explicitly excluding these individuals from the ERS?
Or, even a new law that says "the ERS will not apply to any individual guilty of having committed the following offences against an emergency services worker"?
Yes, that would get challenged but by the time the courts got round to it, we're years and years away ... It where remaining in the ECHR is a good idea as the case backlog there would take these two vermin into their dotage anyway.
As I started by writing, I have difficulties with Harper's Law so I am not sure how I feel about further interventions to make one type of manslaugtherer different to another. I'm asking not about the morality of it (one way or the other), more the technical possibility of it.
- Joined
- 11 Jan 2004
- Messages
- 46,841
- Reaction score
- 3,982
- Country
This "jew hate" claim is mentioned a lot.
If this cannot be substantiated, the claims should cease.
You and a couple other of your types on here keep accusing people of hating Jews. Care to show any evidence of this?
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 257
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
Ok, apparently not back to the susbtantive point of the thread, then. Seems like the usual people are happy just using this topic to continue their usual bickering amongst themselves.
It really is boring for everyone else so I hope you (and you know who you are) are having fun.
It really is boring for everyone else so I hope you (and you know who you are) are having fun.
You will never stop the likes of MBK, bodd, HWM etc from trolling.
It’s all they have.
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2015
- Messages
- 257
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
Ok, apparently not back to the susbtantive point of the thread, then. Seems like the usual people are happy just using this topic to continue their usual bickering amongst themselves.
It really is boring for everyone else so I hope you (and you know who you are) are having fun.
It really is boring for everyone else so I hope you (and you know who you are) are having fun.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 28,562
- Reaction score
- 7,478
- Country
would "types" would that be?
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 28,562
- Reaction score
- 7,478
- Country
it should stop, fortunately, most of the posts have been reported and deleted. It doesn't stop the OPs from posting again and it doesn't stop observers, spotting the pattern.
