|
2 jailed for railway graffiti
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ... "John Mara" wrote I guess I was looking at it more from the policing side than the prosecution side. Did British Rail have railway police? Do the new private companies have their own police? British Transport Police are a national police force, funded by the rail industry. They predated British Rail, and trace their history back to 1826, making them one of the oldest police forces in the world. http://www.btp.police.uk/History%20S...ety%20Main.htm I saw a very interesting "Illustrated Talk" by Sgt. Kevin Gordon (BTP) at the National Rail Museum at York on Sunday afternoon. Well recommended. -- Ken Ward "Society for the production of Maritime Reefs using MerseyRail 142's" (For membership email... ) "Leave the Mobile Phone at home day Oct 25th 2006" |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton
gently breathed: "Pyromancer" wrote in message ... [ Singapore ] I would have no problem going there if a suitable job happened to come up - in fact I'll probably go there eventually as a tourist as my parents spent time there in the 1960s. As for avoiding trouble, it's easy, just don't break the law. Yes, those nice men from Forest Gate would no doubt agree with you, as would all manner of unfortunate Irishmen over the years. What if the Singaporeans have an official dislike of all things Goth? Than I would have to restrict my social life a bit - just as I would if I were offered work in, say, an Islamic country. Not being able to go to a club for the duration of a contract is hardly a hardship, and it's perfectly possible to listen to Goth music without being fully, or even partially, gothed up. Or a downer on rail enthusiasts celebrating anything Hellfire? Again - when in Rome, do as the Romans do. Just because I can sometimes lean out of windows, or breathe clag, or flail, on a UK preserved line doesn't mean I'd automatically expect be able to do any of these things in another country. I'd find out what the local idea of acceptable and unacceptable was, and stick to it. Who knows, in a society where chewing gum is frowned upon. Chewing gum is an utterly revolting and disgusting habit. It's not quite as bad as public smoking, but the germ-laden saliva-covered residue which gum users leave all over (or usually under) furniture, building ledges, etc, is a health hazard. Any society which frowns on gum has clearly got something right. Noticeable that the example of how wonderful harsh punishment can be is not Saudi Arabia, where, despite a regime which includes public execution, the crime rate is far worse than in the UK. We're specifically talking about anti-social behaviour, especially the evils of graffiti. Of course, terrorism and murder are a mere sideshow when the main event is, er, graffiti. Does anyone realise just how potty this kind of argument sounds? Let's ignore the elephants and kick seven shades out of a few mice. It's called "sticking to the topic at hand", and is generally regarded as necessary if sensible debate is to be carried out. You don't stop all track maintenance just because a bridge somewhere up the line needs repairs. Saudi Arabia has it's own unique problems, and is hardly a valid like-for-like comparison with a secular western democracy. Like the USA, perchance? Capital punishment, and warehousing of the criminally inclined, yet crime just carries right on. The USA approach to capital punishment is fundamentally flawed. ISTR it's still statistically more likely for a back person to be executed than a white one, for the same crime, and that's just one of the problems. Anyway, warehousing most offenders is a waste of time and money. Petty offenders should receive a harsh and painful, but otherwise harmless. corporal penalty. Very serious offenders, violent serial rapists, etc, should be executed. Fine-defaulters should have some other financial penalty applied (perhaps raid their pension funds, or ban them from all NHS care for a period of time). The only people who should be warehoused are those who present a clear and serious danger to others - mostly violent thugs, robbers, etc. Far better that sending them to a cushy jail where as you say, they just learn how to do more crimes while enjoying all the "rights" we insist on giving them, and costing about 12k a year (or is it 20k?) per prisoner to run. I've never been to jail, so whether they are "cushy" I don't know. There are many news reports on the subject And you haven't been there either. Neither have I been to Mars, or the bottom of the Atlantic, or the Galapagos islands, nevertheless I know something of all three. Prisons should be about punishment. Punishment should not include being able to watch TV. If people want to watch TV, relax, have a pleasant time - then they shouldn't break the law. Prison should really be about forced labour, think how much work could be done on, for example, the cash-strapped branch lines, if there was free labour available. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
Tax rates in Britain on transport facilites Policing and form of transport was 2 jailed for railway graffiti
"Goalie of the Century" wrote in message ... In message , Roland Perry writes In message , at 01:32:13 on Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Clark F Morris remarked: Operational railway land is not subject to rates. Ah HA! A hidden subsidy. ARe any of the following subject to rates? 1. Highway facilities. 2. Pipelines 3. Port facilities. 4. Waterways. 5. Air traffic control facilities. 6. Airports. Most are listed at: http://www.voa.gov.uk/business_rates/RLI/Scats/scat.htm But it doesn't show the level of rates applied to each of those special categories. But you can search by category at http://ratinglists.voa.gov.uk/irl2k5/mainController?action=InitialiseApp&listYear=2000& lang=E The 23 items listed, with a number since deleted, for cat 231, Railways & tramways, seems rather short. Clearly some railway lands are more operational than others. -- Goalie of the Century Rates were not paid by Crown occupiers such as armed forces and nationalised railways. But they do(did) pay a contribution in liew of rates. I guess it was not considered desireable to have council or revenue officials measuring up many Crown sites for security easons. Power stations, railways, ports etc would have their rateable values or contributions in liew of rates calculated by reference to formulaes based on such things as generating capacity or money receipts. Even wind turbines generating electricity have their rateable value calculated by a formula. I suppose but don't know that privatised railways have a formula somewhere in the privatisation legislation determining rateable value. Regarding operational land there were Lands Tribunal cases concerning Stanier House in Birmingham. Operational land included control rooms and the like diectly concerned with day to day operation of the railway but offices concerned with administration were not operational land and they are the hereditaments that will apear in the rating list. The operational land offices were subsumed into the global list figure for the operatioal railway. So Stanier House would have an entry or entries in the rating list for normal offices but not for the operational offices. Items 2 to 6 are subject to rates - local or central rating lists but highways are not - who would be the occupier liable for the rates? So in short the railways do pay rates. The amount of rates each year can be calculated from the rateable value of each propert subject to transitional relief and movements of rateable value up and down for various reasons. Phew |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
In article , Pyromancer
writes Neither have I been to Mars, or the bottom of the Atlantic, or the Galapagos islands, nevertheless I know something of all three. Prisons should be about punishment. Punishment should not include being able to watch TV. If people want to watch TV, relax, have a pleasant time - then they shouldn't break the law. Prison should really be about forced labour, think how much work could be done on, for example, the cash-strapped branch lines, if there was free labour available. But allow an occasional bite of carrot as well as the stick. One thing I would do (as Dictator of the World) is to greatly increase the education budget for prisons. And to give some extra incentive to the process, allow prisoners to earn privileges - such as being allowed to watch telly - for educational achievement (including learning a useful craft). I recall with amusement my sons' days at prep school. Corporal punishment at the school was The Slipper, which was not actually formally abolished until the time they were there but (in the way of these things) had not actually been used for some time previously. It had been replaced, for the boarders, by something which many of them regarded as a much more cruel and unusual punishment - television deprivation! (Known as 'Off TV'.) I remember one son cheering when he was moved to another dorm, which meant he was no longer in with one of the school's star delinquents (this, I may add, is a cathedral choir school, and the star delinquents were almost invariably choristers!) which meant he now had a chance of occasionally watching an episode of 'Neighbours'! (I digress.) -- Sue The Sir Nigel Gresley Locomotive Preservation Trust is now at http://www.sirnigelgresley.co.uk Including - 00 gauge Hornby and Bachmann models for sale. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Sue
McNaughton gently breathed: In article , Pyromancer writes Neither have I been to Mars, or the bottom of the Atlantic, or the Galapagos islands, nevertheless I know something of all three. Prisons should be about punishment. Punishment should not include being able to watch TV. If people want to watch TV, relax, have a pleasant time - then they shouldn't break the law. Prison should really be about forced labour, think how much work could be done on, for example, the cash-strapped branch lines, if there was free labour available. But allow an occasional bite of carrot as well as the stick. One thing I would do (as Dictator of the World) is to greatly increase the education budget for prisons. And to give some extra incentive to the process, allow prisoners to earn privileges - such as being allowed to watch telly - for educational achievement (including learning a useful craft). Ok, that makes a lot of sense - perks for showing a willingness to learn, or to reform (working with anti-drug-use missions to deprived areas would be something else prisoners could do). But privileges, not "rights". Can we share the dictator of the world thing - like the rotating EU presidency? I have this plan for improved public transport you see, 14 coach locomotive hauled trains of neo-Mk1s running at 10 minute frequencies on main routes, with a return to steam on all the most scenic lines... :-) I recall with amusement my sons' days at prep school. Corporal punishment at the school was The Slipper, which was not actually formally abolished until the time they were there but (in the way of these things) had not actually been used for some time previously. It had been replaced, for the boarders, by something which many of them regarded as a much more cruel and unusual punishment - television deprivation! (Known as 'Off TV'.) I remember one son cheering when he was moved to another dorm, which meant he was no longer in with one of the school's star delinquents (this, I may add, is a cathedral choir school, and the star delinquents were almost invariably choristers!) which meant he now had a chance of occasionally watching an episode of 'Neighbours'! (I digress.) No idea if he was a delinquent or not, but ISTR Bruce Dickinson of Iron Maiden was a choirboy at Winchester Cathedral School. Hence all the references to the classics in Maiden's songs (not to mention the first verse of "Revalations" being lifted in it's entirety from the CoE hymn book). But (back to topic), if TV depravation is acceptable for disciplining children, then it should most certainly be acceptable for prisons. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
"Pyromancer" wrote in message ... Who knows, in a society where chewing gum is frowned upon. Chewing gum is an utterly revolting and disgusting habit. It's not quite as bad as public smoking, but the germ-laden saliva-covered residue which gum users leave all over (or usually under) furniture, building ledges, etc, is a health hazard. Any society which frowns on gum has clearly got something right. Had you read Dave Hill's post, you would have discovered that this is no longer the case in Singapore. This demonstrates the high moral tone and deeply rooted principles held by Singaporean legislators. Or the total lach thereof. We're specifically talking about anti-social behaviour, especially the evils of graffiti. Of course, terrorism and murder are a mere sideshow when the main event is, er, graffiti. Does anyone realise just how potty this kind of argument sounds? Let's ignore the elephants and kick seven shades out of a few mice. It's called "sticking to the topic at hand", and is generally regarded as necessary if sensible debate is to be carried out. You don't stop all track maintenance just because a bridge somewhere up the line needs repairs. You don't clean off the graffiti if the cleaner just got killed in a terrorist attack. Minor point. Anyway, warehousing most offenders is a waste of time and money. Petty offenders should receive a harsh and painful, but otherwise harmless. corporal penalty. Very serious offenders, violent serial rapists, etc, should be executed. Fine-defaulters should have some other financial penalty applied (perhaps raid their pension funds, or ban them from all NHS care for a period of time). The only people who should be warehoused are those who present a clear and serious danger to others - mostly violent thugs, robbers, etc. When we take an eye for an eye, we all end up blind. What you suggest - andI have to assume that this isn't a troll - is much worse. Fortunately, not even Rupert Murdoch can persuade any UK government down the road you so ludicrously propose. In the meantime, as I have better things to do with my time, you can join the august band in my killfile. -- Tim Selective killfiling - because life's too short |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Tim Fenton wrote:
"Pyromancer" wrote in message ... Who knows, in a society where chewing gum is frowned upon. Chewing gum is an utterly revolting and disgusting habit. It's not quite as bad as public smoking, but the germ-laden saliva-covered residue which gum users leave all over (or usually under) furniture, building ledges, etc, is a health hazard. Any society which frowns on gum has clearly got something right. Had you read Dave Hill's post, you would have discovered that this is no longer the case in Singapore. This demonstrates the high moral tone and deeply rooted principles held by Singaporean legislators. Or the total lach thereof. I did read it - the fact the the US govt has both the will and the ecconomic muscle to push through such changes is unfortunately a fact of international ecconomic life. None of which changes my assertion that "any society which frowns upon chewing gum has clearly got something right". We're specifically talking about anti-social behaviour, especially the evils of graffiti. Of course, terrorism and murder are a mere sideshow when the main event is, er, graffiti. Does anyone realise just how potty this kind of argument sounds? Let's ignore the elephants and kick seven shades out of a few mice. It's called "sticking to the topic at hand", and is generally regarded as necessary if sensible debate is to be carried out. You don't stop all track maintenance just because a bridge somewhere up the line needs repairs. You don't clean off the graffiti if the cleaner just got killed in a terrorist attack. Minor point. The topic of this thread is graffitti damage to railway property and ways of dealing with it, not prevention of terrorism. Saying "you shouldn't punish graffiti because it's not as bad as terrorism" is hardly a sensible approach, nor even a sensible argument. And yes, I know full well that no criminal justice system, hard-line or liberal, has any hope of ever deterring a terrorist. Terrorism (especially suicide terrorism) is a unique class of crime that we as a society are only just beginning to really investigate. Preventing it is probably the hardest task our legal and social systems have ever had to face. But that doesn't mean we should ignore everything else. Anyway, warehousing most offenders is a waste of time and money. Petty offenders should receive a harsh and painful, but otherwise harmless. corporal penalty. Very serious offenders, violent serial rapists, etc, should be executed. Fine-defaulters should have some other financial penalty applied (perhaps raid their pension funds, or ban them from all NHS care for a period of time). The only people who should be warehoused are those who present a clear and serious danger to others - mostly violent thugs, robbers, etc. When we take an eye for an eye, we all end up blind. Fine rethoric, but does it really add up in the real world? When we execute a serial rapist, we ensure he (or she, though that's rare) can carry out no further offences. What's so terrible about that? When we warehouse a violent thug, we prevent them from thuggery against the public for the length of their sentence - and with less overcrowding, perhaps the prisons would have more chance of reforming some of them. What you suggest - andI have to assume that this isn't a troll - is much worse. Fortunately, not even Rupert Murdoch can persuade any UK government down the road you so ludicrously propose. What's so "ludicrous" about it? Less people in prison, a more realistic and productive approach to fine defaulters, permanent removal of the most extreme and violent from society only after they have comitted several extreme offences, and punishments for lesser offences that will be regarded by the majority of the population as more fitting the crimes. You clearly don't like the idea, but you've not put forward any coherent reasons for not liking it. In the meantime, as I have better things to do with my time, you can join the august band in my killfile. The last retort of the playground politician who can't handle having their opinions challenged - say your peice, stick your fingers in your ears, and run away shouting "na-na-na-na I can't hear you"? So much for debate. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
"Pyromancer" wrote in message oups.com... When we take an eye for an eye, we all end up blind. Fine rethoric, but does it really add up in the real world? "I can't counter that, so I won't" When we execute a serial rapist We don't execute. What you suggest - andI have to assume that this isn't a troll - is much worse. Fortunately, not even Rupert Murdoch can persuade any UK government down the road you so ludicrously propose. What's so "ludicrous" about it? Less people in prison, a more realistic and productive approach to fine defaulters, permanent removal of the most extreme and violent from society only after they have comitted several extreme offences, and punishments for lesser offences that will be regarded by the majority of the population as more fitting the crimes. You clearly don't like the idea, but you've not put forward any coherent reasons for not liking it. Brutalising society. Lowering ourselves to the level of the criminal. Above all, not solving the underlying problems - which is by far the worst aspect. In the meantime, as I have better things to do with my time, you can join the august band in my killfile. The last retort of the playground politician Who's sinking to insults? Who's changing his email address in a desperate attempt to carry on his lame tirade? So much for debate. Indeed - your amended email address has also gone in the killfile. Plenty of room there yet. -- Tim Selective killfiling - because life's too short |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Pyromancer wrote:
Chewing gum is an utterly revolting and disgusting habit. It's not quite as bad as public smoking, but the germ-laden saliva-covered residue which gum users leave all over (or usually under) furniture, building ledges, etc, is a health hazard. Any society which frowns on gum has clearly got something right. Isn't it the case that the improper disposal of chewing gum is the problem, rather than the gum itself? I've never liked the stuff myself, but it's harmless enough. And what about those who use gum to help stop smoking? It's called "sticking to the topic at hand", and is generally regarded as necessary if sensible debate is to be carried out. You don't stop all track maintenance just because a bridge somewhere up the line needs repairs. Indeed not, but you'd ban chewing gum just because some people spit it out. The USA approach to capital punishment is fundamentally flawed. ISTR it's still statistically more likely for a back person to be executed than a white one, for the same crime, and that's just one of the problems. Do you mean the same crime, or similar crimes? If the latter, we get into the issue of just how similar. And as the death penalty is applied on a state-by-state basis the size of Black populations in death and non-death states must have a bearing. Anyway, warehousing most offenders is a waste of time and money. Not everyone believes that prison should always just be warehousing. Petty offenders should receive a harsh and painful, but otherwise harmless. corporal penalty. Very serious offenders, violent serial rapists, etc, should be executed. What happens after we execute an innocent man? Fine-defaulters should have some other financial penalty applied (perhaps raid their pension funds, or ban them from all NHS care for a period of time). Quite a lot of fine defaulters simply don't have much money, never mind a pension fund. And refusing medical treatment could effeectively be a death sentence. Poor people would be much more likely to be affected. The only people who should be warehoused are those who present a clear and serious danger to others - mostly violent thugs, robbers, etc. No work to try to rehabilitate, then? Neither have I been to Mars, or the bottom of the Atlantic, or the Galapagos islands, nevertheless I know something of all three. Prisons should be about punishment. Punishment should not include being able to watch TV. If people want to watch TV, relax, have a pleasant time - then they shouldn't break the law. Prison is hardly 'having a pleasant time'. Simple question: If they said in all prisons, "Ok, boys, the gates are unlocked. Anyone who wants to leave can" how many are going to stay? Prison should really be about forced labour, think how much work could be done on, for example, the cash-strapped branch lines, if there was free labour available. 'Free labour' being a euphemism for slavery. Which, of course, is what you have in the USA, where the 13th Amendment says: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States". I didn't think you were a fan of the Land of the Free, Home of the Brave... |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
|
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Stimpy typed
On 2/9/06 20:46, " wrote: Today's Daily Telegraph runs a glossy 3-page piece spread glamourising so-called "graffers" and their work. Graffiti artist Banksy lives and often works in this part of Bristol and has become a much-respected member of the local community. For those of you unfamiliar with his work, take a look at http://www.banksy.co.uk/menu.html Yebbut Banksy's work is witty, technically excellent and aesthetically pleasing. Most graffiti is not. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Pyromancer wrote:
It seems that most of the users spit it out, if the streets and pavements are any guide. If something can't be used without endangering public health, it shouldn't be used at all. I'd have to disagree there. If most people did, the streets would be far, far, far worse. It's like saying most kids are anti-social. Can you imagine if that were true? It would be anarchy. Of course, far too many are but it's certainly not the majority. Not yet, but society is working on it...! I chew gum rarely, partly for the reason that I hate having to try and find somewhere to throw it. I would NEVER spit it out, so wait for a bin or find a bit of paper so I can put it my pocket. I agree that it's filthy to spit out (and annoying if you step in it). I prefer the dissolvable strips to freshen my mouth/breath and not linger on (there's nothing worse than tasteless gum, which is usually about a minute after you start chewing it). If you want an example of where 'most' people do something, take a look at people who smoke. Look to see if any don't throw the cigarette on the floor. That's probably not most but ALL. Jonathan |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
"jonmorris" typed
Pyromancer wrote: It seems that most of the users spit it out, if the streets and pavements are any guide. If something can't be used without endangering public health, it shouldn't be used at all. I'd have to disagree there. If most people did, the streets would be far, far, far worse. It's like saying most kids are anti-social. Can you imagine if that were true? It would be anarchy. Of course, far too many are but it's certainly not the majority. Not yet, but society is working on it...! I chew gum rarely, partly for the reason that I hate having to try and find somewhere to throw it. I would NEVER spit it out, so wait for a bin or find a bit of paper so I can put it my pocket. I agree that it's filthy to spit out (and annoying if you step in it). I prefer the dissolvable strips to freshen my mouth/breath and not linger on (there's nothing worse than tasteless gum, which is usually about a minute after you start chewing it). If you want an example of where 'most' people do something, take a look at people who smoke. Look to see if any don't throw the cigarette on the floor. That's probably not most but ALL. Jonathan AIUI Westminster Council spends £9 MILLION per year on chewing gum removal. I don't know what proportion of gum purchased ends up on the street. It might only be 10% but it IS a significant problem. Fag ends are horrible and a fire risk too but are much easier to clear away. Adults certainly do spit gum round here but we won't discuss their ethnicity... -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
[ response for the benefit of anyone else reading the thread ]
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton gently breathed: "Pyromancer" wrote in message roups.com... When we execute a serial rapist We don't execute. That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. What you suggest - andI have to assume that this isn't a troll - is much worse. Fortunately, not even Rupert Murdoch can persuade any UK government down the road you so ludicrously propose. What's so "ludicrous" about it? Less people in prison, a more realistic and productive approach to fine defaulters, permanent removal of the most extreme and violent from society only after they have comitted several extreme offences, and punishments for lesser offences that will be regarded by the majority of the population as more fitting the crimes. You clearly don't like the idea, but you've not put forward any coherent reasons for not liking it. Brutalising society. Lowering ourselves to the level of the criminal. Above all, not solving the underlying problems - which is by far the worst aspect. The underlying problem is that a proportion of the human race is naturally evil. Most people aren't, but some are, and it's not something that can be identified, or screened for, or prevented. It's not affected by race, or gender, or sexuality, or parenting, or genetics, or anything like that. There simply are people who in their own minds don't think there's anything wrong with maiming, raping or killing, taking what they want by force, ruling all around themselves by fear. As long as that remains the case, there will continue to be crime, sometimes horrific crime. In the meantime, as I have better things to do with my time, you can join the august band in my killfile. The last retort of the playground politician Who's sinking to insults? Who's changing his email address in a desperate attempt to carry on his lame tirade? Ever heard of using different accounts at work and at home? Google doesn't give you a choice, once you sign up for a Gmail account, that is your address for posting from Google. So much for debate. Indeed - your amended email address has also gone in the killfile. Plenty of room there yet. I must admit I'm really rather touched by this. I do believe that in eleven years of posting to Usenet this is possibly the first time I've ever been killfiled (certainly on uk.r) - and for what offence? Not trolling, not crossposting garbage to 20 groups, not spamming, not any of the 101 other things trolls and their kind do, but rather for calling for an alternative approach to criminal justice which actually punishes wrongdoing. Weird! -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as jonmorris
gently breathed: If you want an example of where 'most' people do something, take a look at people who smoke. Look to see if any don't throw the cigarette on the floor. That's probably not most but ALL. Agreed. It's amazing how people who are fastidious about all other forms of litter will throw cigarette ends just about anywhere, including out in the countryside. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ross
gently breathed: In any case, with the sort of anti-social hardcases you're thinking of, the scars from the physical punishment would merely be worn as a badge of honour. Not quite the effect you intend, methinks. In some cases, yes. But there are plenty of "followers-on" who currently do nasty stuff because they want to look like hardcases, who might rethink if they thought they'd really be punished for it. Agree that it's the catching that matters most though. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
In uk.railway Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say:
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton We don't execute. That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. You don't need the death penalty in order to prevent reoffending. You just need a society that is prepared to lock people up such that they either come out of prison in a box or not at all ... -- These opinions might not even be mine ... Let alone connected with my employer ... |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Alistair Gunn wrote
In uk.railway Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say: Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton We don't execute. That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. You don't need the death penalty in order to prevent reoffending. You just need a society that is prepared to lock people up such that they either come out of prison in a box or not at all ... I noted that the case of a prisoner who was given 30 years for the murder of 3 police men reared its head on the BBC website yesterday. The event happened in 1966 he is still in prison and a review is supposed to have taken place some time back but not completed - secret reports about the person are on file. His legal eagles argue from a human violation of whatever stand. -- dave hill |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 00:49:24 +0100, Pyromancer wrote in
, seen in uk.railway: Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ross gently breathed: In any case, with the sort of anti-social hardcases you're thinking of, the scars from the physical punishment would merely be worn as a badge of honour. Not quite the effect you intend, methinks. In some cases, yes. For the hardcases, it's not a case of "in some cases". It *will* become a badge of honour, and quite possibly a requirement should an apprentice-hardcase wish to be seen seriously. But there are plenty of "followers-on" who currently do nasty stuff because they want to look like hardcases, who might rethink if they thought they'd really be punished for it. I doubt it very much. -- Ross, in Lincoln, most likely being cynical or sarcastic, as ever. Reply-to will bounce. Replace the junk-trap with my name to e-mail me. Demonstration of poor photography: http://www.rosspix.me.uk AD: http://www.merciacharters.co.uk for European charters occasionally gripped by me |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ross
gently breathed: On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 00:49:24 +0100, Pyromancer wrote in , seen in uk.railway: Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ross gently breathed: In any case, with the sort of anti-social hardcases you're thinking of, the scars from the physical punishment would merely be worn as a badge of honour. Not quite the effect you intend, methinks. In some cases, yes. For the hardcases, it's not a case of "in some cases". It *will* become a badge of honour, and quite possibly a requirement should an apprentice-hardcase wish to be seen seriously. Perhaps you're right - I do not understand hardcase mentality at all. To me, if something hurts, you stop doing it. But I gather some of these people don't seem to feel pain the same way normal people do. But there are plenty of "followers-on" who currently do nasty stuff because they want to look like hardcases, who might rethink if they thought they'd really be punished for it. I doubt it very much. Well, unless the resource is put in to catch them in the first place, it matters not whether the penalty is a slap on the wrist or decapitation, penalties only deter those who believe they might get caught (ISTR you saying something close to that several years ago!). -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
"Alistair Gunn" wrote in message . .. In uk.railway Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say: Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton We don't execute. That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. You don't need the death penalty in order to prevent reoffending. You just need a society that is prepared to lock people up such that they either come out of prison in a box or not at all ... There may be an initial expenditure excess in the "Death Penalty" but, over time it will work out cheaper. An excellent reason to adopt it along with the other benefits gained. -- Ken Ward "Society for the production of Maritime Reefs using MerseyRail 142's" (For membership email... ) "Leave the Mobile Phone at home day Oct 25th 2006" |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
On Sat, 16 Sep 2006, Ken Ward wrote:
There may be an initial expenditure excess in the "Death Penalty" but, over time it will work out cheaper. An excellent reason to adopt it along with the other benefits gained. "over time", where "time" is past the next election is concept that is alien to UK governments (of any colour). Cheers Chris -- Chris Johns |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:45:25 UTC, Pyromancer
wrote: : [ response for the benefit of anyone else reading the thread ] : : Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton : gently breathed: : We don't execute. : : That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and : each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. Have you any evidence for that? And are you arguing that we should kill all rapists, or only serial ones? : The underlying problem is that a proportion of the human race is : naturally evil. Proof? Ian |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:43:11 UTC, Alistair Gunn
wrote: : In uk.railway Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say: : Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton : We don't execute. : That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and : each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. : : You don't need the death penalty in order to prevent reoffending. You : just need a society that is prepared to lock people up such that they : either come out of prison in a box or not at all ... Or one that changes people while they are in prison so they don't reoffend when they come out. Ian -- |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ian
Johnston gently breathed: On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:45:25 UTC, Pyromancer wrote: : [ response for the benefit of anyone else reading the thread ] : Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton : gently breathed: : We don't execute. : That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and : each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. Have you any evidence for that? See numerous reported cases where serious sex offenders have been released only to commit more offences? And are you arguing that we should kill all rapists, or only serial ones? I don't think it's safe to execute anyone for a single offence, the risk of convicting someone innocent would be too high. But if someone has committed a really horrific crime like violent rape several times and the proof is to a high enough standard that there is no reasonable doubt, then we should either execute or lock up forever. Given finite resources, I'd rather execute and put the savings to better uses like health or pensions. TBH, execution is probably more humane than locking someone up for 60 years. : The underlying problem is that a proportion of the human race is : naturally evil. Proof? Um... Where would you like me to start? Witchburning? Serial killers? The UK guy who was interviewed in a programme on mercenaries during the Bosnian war who said "I've always wanted to kill legally"? Serial rapists? People who rape six month old babies? The people who brainwash other people into being suicide bombers? Just about any religious war you care to name? The list is endless... -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 11:44:17 UTC, Pyromancer
wrote: : Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ian : Johnston gently breathed: : On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 23:45:25 UTC, Pyromancer : wrote: : : We don't execute. : : : That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and : : each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. : : Have you any evidence for that? : : See numerous reported cases where serious sex offenders have been : released only to commit more offences? How numerous? What proportion of them? Compared to what proportion of those who weren't caught the first time? : And are you arguing that we should : kill all rapists, or only serial ones? : : I don't think it's safe to execute anyone for a single offence, the risk : of convicting someone innocent would be too high. So actually you're in favour of letting people out to offend again, in order to see whether they do? : : The underlying problem is that a proportion of the human race is : : naturally evil. : : Proof? : : Um... Where would you like me to start? Witchburning? Serial killers? : The UK guy who was interviewed in a programme on mercenaries during the : Bosnian war who said "I've always wanted to kill legally"? Serial : rapists? People who rape six month old babies? The people who : brainwash other people into being suicide bombers? Just about any : religious war you care to name? The list is endless... It's the "naturally" which worries me here. Ian |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Ian
Johnston gently breathed: On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 11:43:11 UTC, Alistair Gunn wrote: : In uk.railway Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say: : Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Tim Fenton : We don't execute. : That's the problem. We let them out to re-offend, again and again, and : each time some other innocent victim's life is ruined, often forever. : You don't need the death penalty in order to prevent reoffending. You : just need a society that is prepared to lock people up such that they : either come out of prison in a box or not at all ... Or one that changes people while they are in prison so they don't reoffend when they come out. Indeed. Which is one reason to only execute serial offenders (and even then only those who commit the worst types of crime). Re-habilitate and reform wherever possible - but also accept that there are those who cannot or will not change their ways. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
In message , at 00:13:31 on Thu,
21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: Which is one reason to only execute serial offenders (and even then only those who commit the worst types of crime). You still get edge cases. In the USA some states automatically execute murderers on the second offence. Unfortunately, this collides with a separate recent ruling that unborn children count, so someone murdering a pregnant woman (even if he was unaware of the pregnancy) is in danger of getting his "two strikes" in one go. -- Roland Perry |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 00:13:31 on Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: Which is one reason to only execute serial offenders (and even then only those who commit the worst types of crime). You still get edge cases. In the USA some states automatically execute murderers on the second offence. Unfortunately, this collides with a separate recent ruling that unborn children count, so someone murdering a pregnant woman (even if he was unaware of the pregnancy) is in danger of getting his "two strikes" in one go. I think, given the object is to prevent executing someone who's innocent, then that would still only count as "one act of murder", even if it killed more than one person. To be executed in the system I'm proposing, someone would have had to be convicted, beyond all reasonable doubt, of two seperate "acts". No doubt some of the Daily Wail congingent would claim that's too lax, but with something which really is unreversible, better to err on the side of caution, just in case. The USA has peculiar religious concepts driving some of it's social ideas, including a resurgance of the old idea that a child's life is worth more than a mother's, which is leading to campaigners demanding that all women of child-bearing age must at all times refrain from drinking, action sports, or anything else that might conceivably in any way harm any child they might happen to conceive. Women who's babies have been stillborn have been dragged off to jail if they are drug users and it's though the drug use has harmed the baby. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
In message .com, at
03:30:17 on Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 00:13:31 on Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: Which is one reason to only execute serial offenders (and even then only those who commit the worst types of crime). You still get edge cases. In the USA some states automatically execute murderers on the second offence. Unfortunately, this collides with a separate recent ruling that unborn children count, so someone murdering a pregnant woman (even if he was unaware of the pregnancy) is in danger of getting his "two strikes" in one go. I think, given the object is to prevent executing someone who's innocent, then that would still only count as "one act of murder", even if it killed more than one person. It might under some ideal system that you have in your head, but how do you know that a similar issue that you hadn't predicted would arise in a few years time? The way law and sentencing works is largely reaction to unexpected things happening in real life, rather than what the legislators were able to predict. To be executed in the system I'm proposing, someone would have had to be convicted, beyond all reasonable doubt, of two seperate "acts". In this case, one act is killing the mother, and the other act is killing the child. The argument which has arisen is that it doesn't matter whether the child was in the mother's arms, or womb, at the time. -- Roland Perry |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Roland Perry wrote:
In message .com, at 03:30:17 on Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: I think, given the object is to prevent executing someone who's innocent, then that would still only count as "one act of murder", even if it killed more than one person. It might under some ideal system that you have in your head, but how do you know that a similar issue that you hadn't predicted would arise in a few years time? The way law and sentencing works is largely reaction to unexpected things happening in real life, rather than what the legislators were able to predict. No system can be perfect, but with a little common sense, and a presumption to always err on the side of caution, it can be made to work. That's why we have human judges and juries, and not sentencing by (say) computer. To be executed in the system I'm proposing, someone would have had to be convicted, beyond all reasonable doubt, of two seperate "acts". In this case, one act is killing the mother, and the other act is killing the child. The argument which has arisen is that it doesn't matter whether the child was in the mother's arms, or womb, at the time. No no, I'm talking about entirely seperate "acts" - in different places or different timeframes. Even if someone planted a bomb that killed 50 people, from the death penalty POV it'd still be one act - the bomb itself. If they then went on to shoot or stab someone somewhere else (and left enough evidence in both cases for completely sound convictions), that would be a different act. The objective is not to start hanging people left right and centre, but only to do so for clear, serial offences. |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
In message om, at
10:10:57 on Thu, 21 Sep 2006, Pyromancer remarked: It might under some ideal system that you have in your head, but how do you know that a similar issue that you hadn't predicted would arise in a few years time? The way law and sentencing works is largely reaction to unexpected things happening in real life, rather than what the legislators were able to predict. No system can be perfect, but with a little common sense, and a presumption to always err on the side of caution, it can be made to work. That's why we have human judges and juries, and not sentencing by (say) computer. To be executed in the system I'm proposing, someone would have had to be convicted, beyond all reasonable doubt, of two seperate "acts". In this case, one act is killing the mother, and the other act is killing the child. The argument which has arisen is that it doesn't matter whether the child was in the mother's arms, or womb, at the time. No no, I'm talking about entirely seperate "acts" - in different places or different timeframes. Even if someone planted a bomb that killed 50 people, from the death penalty POV it'd still be one act - the bomb itself. If they then went on to shoot or stab someone somewhere else (and left enough evidence in both cases for completely sound convictions), that would be a different act. The objective is not to start hanging people left right and centre, but only to do so for clear, serial offences. This is all hopelessly idealistic in the real world of criminal justice systems. Never mind, you are allowed to dream. -- Roland Perry |
2 jailed for railway graffiti
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Roland
Perry gently breathed: The objective is not to start hanging people left right and centre, but only to do so for clear, serial offences. This is all hopelessly idealistic in the real world of criminal justice systems. Never mind, you are allowed to dream. Well, TBH the criminal justice system is probably one of the placed we really need to be as idealistic as possible - getting it wrong tends to have very serious consequences, and not just regarding the death penalty. It's been a very interesting thread - thanks to all who contributed. -- - DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP! http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk