|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 3, 2024 19:12:40 GMT
Seems strange when Englishmen feel they need to riot and d estroy property and injure police in towns and cities around their own country that they say they want back… ..and now there is a switcheroo to a different subject / tack and we get another slice of BLM hypocrisy.floating to the surface It's like an interlocking crossword puzzle where every answer is another cognitive distortion You're tying yourself in knots here, not the rest of us. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Aug 3, 2024 19:50:01 GMT
BLM isn’t the topic here, it’s those claiming to be patriotic Englishmen violently destroying parts of the same country they claim to want to reclaim by targeting the Police and Islam.
I’m hoping those opposing these thugs don’t get drawn into confronting such blatant BNP-type racism — they mustn’t muddy the waters but leave policing to the police…
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,449
|
Post by Steve on Aug 3, 2024 22:10:43 GMT
..and now there is a switcheroo to a different subject / tack and we get another slice of BLM hypocrisy.floating to the surface It's like an interlocking crossword puzzle where every answer is another cognitive distortion You're tying yourself in knots here, not the rest of us. More like lying himself in knots. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 4, 2024 1:37:59 GMT
BLM isn’t the topic here, it’s those claiming to be patriotic Englishmen violently destroying parts of the same country they claim to want to reclaim by targeting the Police and Islam. I’m hoping those opposing these thugs don’t get drawn into confronting such blatant BNP-type racism — they mustn’t muddy the waters but leave policing to the police… More BLM hypocrisy |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,449
|
Post by Steve on Aug 4, 2024 9:12:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 4, 2024 9:14:36 GMT
BLM isn’t the topic here, it’s those claiming to be patriotic Englishmen violently destroying parts of the same country they claim to want to reclaim by targeting the Police and Islam. I'm highlighting hypocrisy - this typically needs a comparison of two instances to be made. Zany 'gave in' on the matter some time ago, when he attempted to explain why he employed a double standard |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,449
|
Post by Steve on Aug 4, 2024 9:23:54 GMT
No you are desperately trying to divert people away from criticism of thuggery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 4, 2024 9:35:08 GMT
No you are desperately trying to divert people away from criticism of thuggery. Nobody i'm responding to is making any kind of consistent point on the matter.. violence is 'understandable' when it is pursuing something you want and 'unacceptable' when it is pursuing a cause you don't support I recall you went as far as to spend weeks trying to justify a convicted child abuser cornering a 17 year old in a car park and assaulting him. It's a pretty drastic double standard in your caseThis is an extremely defamatory claim, please desist from this type of claim against a fellow poster. |
|
|
|
Post by AvonCalling on Aug 4, 2024 9:40:44 GMT
I guess it's a trade off. You either release prisoners or build more prisons. So the question is if you don't want prisoners released (it was also my understanding that these were low risk prisoners as far as that can be safely ascertained) how much more tax are you willing to pay to keep them in prison. For me the make someone else pay the tax for it argument illustrates a lack of commitment to the solution or that you are just griping.. not that I am accusing you of either. The problem I have with saving the tax this way is does it? Release prisoners early and you send out a message that crime pays along with a cost of that. Still short term emergency is different. My point wasn't so much about saving tax it was more about if you don't want to ket people out you are going to hvae to fund it and so many oeoples reponse to thia kind if thing (people IRL not the forum) is make the rich pay more or stop the scroungers. In the short term there's no where to put prisoners so it's difficult to see what a realistic option is. In the long term for me the big question is why do we as a nation lock more people up than our European neighbours? (Although I could be wrong) |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 4, 2024 9:48:22 GMT
I guess it's a trade off. You either release prisoners or build more prisons. So the question is if you don't want prisoners released (it was also my understanding that these were low risk prisoners as far as that can be safely ascertained) how much more tax are you willing to pay to keep them in prison. For me the make someone else pay the tax for it argument illustrates a lack of commitment to the solution or that you are just griping.. not that I am accusing you of either. Release prisoners early and you send out a message that crime pays along with a cost of that. The left ignores the concept of incentives. That's the key reason why left wing policy and social models tend to fail. I could go a bit further - the UK government / Labour party want crimes like theft and fraud to go relatively unpunished because these crimes help support many of of criminal syndicates in its client groups |
|
|
|
Post by AvonCalling on Aug 4, 2024 9:53:14 GMT
Have a niggling suspicion that I have read articles that say the length of a sentence does not act as a disincentive. Isn't one of the arguments against the death penalty that it doesn't act as a disincentive? I was under the impression that from the perspective of a criminal mind ( and I think this is a key point here as I would hazard that most here aren't criminally minded) it was the likelihood of getting caught that was the disincentivisingfactor
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 4, 2024 9:55:57 GMT
Have a niggling suspicion that I have read articles that say the length of a sentence does not act as a disincentive. Then, instead of believing everything you are told, you should instead attempt to apply some basic reasoning and your independent critical faculties to such claims. When i say the left don't believe in incentives, it is truer to say they can't believe in incentives and remain left |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 4, 2024 9:56:53 GMT
The problem I have with saving the tax this way is does it? Release prisoners early and you send out a message that crime pays along with a cost of that. Still short term emergency is different. My point wasn't so much about saving tax it was more about if you don't want to ket people out you are going to hvae to fund it and so many oeoples reponse to thia kind if thing (people IRL not the forum) is make the rich pay more or stop the scroungers. In the short term there's no where to put prisoners so it's difficult to see what a realistic option is. In the long term for me the big question is why do we as a nation lock more people up than our European neighbours? (Although I could be wrong) Sorry, I wasn't questioning your point. I was adding to it by pointing out the government error in letting people out short of their sentences rather than finding the money to resolve the issue. (Current exceptional circumstances accepted) There are growing calls for Labour to look to borrowing to get the economy moving rather than just meeting the budget restraints. This is yet another example. Shop lifting in this country is at an all time high and has moved from trying to sneak something out to blatantly removing large items in full view. This is because the police budget was cut and officers decided stopping shop lifting and petty theft was not economically viable. This may well be part of a reason we have so many in prison when you let your population get so embedded in crime before you attempt arrest. By example. If you stopped investigating tax fraud how many more people would turn to it and eventually end up in prison. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 4, 2024 9:58:27 GMT
Release prisoners early and you send out a message that crime pays along with a cost of that. The left ignores the concept of incentives. That's the key reason why left wing policy and social models tend to fail. I could go a bit further - the UK government / Labour party want crimes like theft and fraud to go relatively unpunished because these crimes help support many of of criminal syndicates in its client groups But it was the Right that decided that police budgets could be cut. The Right that decided petty theft only needed a crime number for their insurers. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 4, 2024 10:02:23 GMT
Have a niggling suspicion that I have read articles that say the length of a sentence does not act as a disincentive. Then, instead of believing everything you are told, you should instead attempt to apply some basic reasoning and your independent critical faculties to such claims. I disagree with you here Orac. There is a lot of evidence that long prison sentences do not reduce crime rates. Most criminals do not consider being caught when they get involved in crime. This is because they get away with it for such a long time before getting caught. The answer is to make getting caught more common, not to imprison those caught for longer, thus pushing them into the criminal fraternity, with little other choice. |
|
