Crime

[Strikegold]

Abhorrent. However, the "gesture of good will" is not allowed and this incident should not ever have happened. The prison will have to answer why they put this woman at risk. However the perpetrator was arrested the same day (in hours infact) and recalled to prison. The reason they could do this was because of the scheme. Well done Labour for making a tough decision.
Correct, that is part of their role. So how could they have done that if the prisons were full? They couldn't because the police at that point will be told to stop policing. Yep to stop arresting people. No threat or deterrent to criminals will lead to a breakdown in society very very quickly. Well done Labour on making a tough decision.
If there's no incentive to behave (early release) why would you bother? Part of that rehabilitation is showing you can behave. Other than A cat, prisons are run on the goodwill of the prisoners. Staffing of a ration of about 50-1 means that this has to be the case. Take away early release and you have to increase staff by a factor of 10. That'll be very costly and make prison punitive as opposed to rehabilitative.
As for building new jails I believe they are doing that... I know you'll agree while Labour are good, they'll need a bit more than 2 months to plan, develop, initiate and comission the raft of new establishments that the Tories didn't t bother their arse to even look at. Good work Labour.
I haven't seen anyone get 3 years for throwing stones... I've seen them get that for throwing bricks, flaming bins, scaffold poles, overturning cars, torching cars, assault, gbh, threats to kill, antisemitism, racism, sexism, homophobia and even worse. I'd love to see evidence of this 3 years throwing stones incident if you can share. Aside from that, I think we're still using the sentencing guidelines installed under the Tories and they're keen on thieving from everyone so may have encouraged leniency. I can see why you may be upset potentially finding yourself in that same situation in the near future.
Trainers and a suit, like a MOTD presenter. Performed badly on a TV show... Yep, hang him...

I gave the quick solution to early release....open up military camps until the prisons are built.
The 20,000 place programme of new prison places put in place in 2020 by a Conservative government was hit by planning constraints. It was due by 2025. Hardly couldn't be bothered their arse.
I didn't suggest hanging Lammy but Foreign Secretary......jeez. That's an indication of Labours calibre.

 

[Strikegold]

There are over 10,000 foreign nationals in our prisons. Deport them.

 

[Strikegold]

Abhorrent. However, the "gesture of good will" is not allowed and this incident should not ever have happened. The prison will have to answer why they put this woman at risk. However the perpetrator was arrested the same day (in hours infact) and recalled to prison. The reason they could do this was because of the scheme. Well done Labour for making a tough decision.

Correct, that is part of their role. So how could they have done that if the prisons were full? They couldn't because the police at that point will be told to stop policing. Yep to stop arresting people. No threat or deterrent to criminals will lead to a breakdown in society very very quickly. Well done Labour on making a tough decision.

If there's no incentive to behave (early release) why would you bother? Part of that rehabilitation is showing you can behave. Other than A cat, prisons are run on the goodwill of the prisoners. Staffing of a ration of about 50-1 means that this has to be the case. Take away early release and you have to increase staff by a factor of 10. That'll be very costly and make prison punitive as opposed to rehabilitative.

As for building new jails I believe they are doing that... I know you'll agree while Labour are good, they'll need a bit more than 2 months to plan, develop, initiate and comission the raft of new establishments that the Tories didn't t bother their arse to even look at. Good work Labour.

I haven't seen anyone get 3 years for throwing stones... I've seen them get that for throwing bricks, flaming bins, scaffold poles, overturning cars, torching cars, assault, gbh, threats to kill, antisemitism, racism, sexism, homophobia and even worse. I'd love to see evidence of this 3 years throwing stones incident if you can share. Aside from that, I think we're still using the sentencing guidelines installed under the Tories and they're keen on thieving from everyone so may have encouraged leniency. I can see why you may be upset potentially finding yourself in that same situation in the near future.

Trainers and a suit, like a MOTD presenter. Performed badly on a TV show... Yep, hang him...

An 18 year old got 2 years and 4 months for kicking a police van, a 19 year old 3 years for hurling bricks and lit arrows at police.
The police officer was I think in his 40s and stole 115 quid from a dead man's wallet. How low can you get ? He got 16 months.
Hugh Edwards got no jail time for what he did.

 

[Yid]

An 18 year old got 2 years and 4 months for kicking a police van, a 19 year old 3 years for hurling bricks and lit arrows at police.
The police officer was I think in his 40s and stole 115 quid from a dead man's wallet. How low can you get ? He got 16 months.
Hugh Edwards got no jail time for what he did.

You should write to your MP.

 

[Strikegold]

You should write to your MP.

Labour MP....no point.

 

[Thfcire]

It's not about me and the thread is about ethnic crime.
But I have had two vehicles stolen by the traveller community.
A thief I caught stealing from my shop was a lowlife with his skank girlfriend in tow.
I lived in Guernsey for 3 years, they have very little crime. They vet everyone coming to the island to work and live. It is strictly controlled.

They must have fucked you out so for being a massive sausage walle.feel free to reapply we all pitch in for a dingy

 

[Strikegold]

They must have fucked you out so for being a massive sausage walle.feel free to reapply we all pitch in for a dingy

You don't know what you are talking about you idiot.

 

[BrooklynYid]

My gosh, how did I miss this thread?

 

[Thfcire]

You don't know what you are talking about you idiot.

Ohh touched a nerve?? Come on why were you thrown out of paradise?? You couldn’t get the stains out of your clan hood?? You refused to eat any foreign muck ?? Ohh no please tell me it’s not you ?? Your not the famous phantom guernsey saddle sniffer that was in the papers

 

[J.spurs]

My gosh, how did I miss this thread?

Lucky you. Here’s a brief recap:

 

[Strikegold]

Ohh touched a nerve?? Come on why were you thrown out of paradise?? You couldn’t get the stains out of your clan hood?? You refused to eat any foreign muck ?? Ohh no please tell me it’s not you ?? Your not the famous phantom guernsey saddle sniffer that was in the papers

Wrong on every point, what a fool.

 

[Thfcire]

Wrong on every point, what a fool.

Wrong on every point, what a fool.

Knock knock

 

[Strikegold]

Osmajic gets an 8 match ban and 15 k fine for biting an opponent in the neck.
Should have been a life ban, same for Defoe when he did it...animals.

 

[Dave]

Osmajic gets an 8 match ban and 15 k fine for biting an opponent in the neck.
Should have been a life ban, same for Defoe when he did it...animals.

It's about right though. Suarez got a 10 match ban for biting Ivanovic. In fairness too he'd do serious damage. He's a set of teeth like a horse.

 

[Strikegold]

It's about right though. Suarez got a 10 match ban for biting Ivanovic. In fairness too he'd do serious damage. He's a set of teeth like a horse.

About right in what context ? They should be banned for life IMO.

 

[Yid]

About right in what context ? They should be banned for life IMO.

Gallows...?
Firing squad...?
Lethal injection...?
Take away their winter fuel allowance...?

 

[spurious]

About right in what context ? They should be banned for life IMO.

I think the context is right there in the post, mate. Similar previous instance adjudicated by FIFA. You can disagree with the outcome, but context is clear.

 

[Strikegold]

I think the context is right there in the post, mate. Similar previous instance adjudicated by FIFA. You can disagree with the outcome, but context is clear.

So football has a different set of morals to decent people ? Biting an opponent is disgusting and should carry a heavy cost. That's my wider point, previous punishments were wrong aswell. Context doesn't make it right.

 

[Strikegold]

Gallows...?
Firing squad...?
Lethal injection...?
Take away their winter fuel allowance...?

Banned for life...that's what they deserve for starters, then a criminal conviction to follow outside of the football law. It's GBH or ABH. It's not like a bad tackle.

 

[spurious]

So football has a different set of morals to decent people ? Biting an opponent is disgusting and should carry a heavy cost. That's my wider point, previous punishments were wrong aswell. Context doesn't make it right.

Yes, I think so. You should come over here and watch an ice hockey game (which we call a hockey game).

However...I was being pedantic about the definition of context (pedantic, but correct). The question you raise is actually interesting, but one on which reasonable people can disagree: are certain acts on the field of play, in the, um, context of professional sport, permissible, but not in the regular walk of life? I'd say yes. Boxing, to pick an obvious example, but even the one you cite - a bad tackle - would get me in a lot of trouble if I tried it on round the corner or during one of my five-a-side matches.

Biting someone is ridiculous, but it seems right to me that if you're caught doing it during a professional football match, in which aggression and physical contact are encouraged and even demanded, the punishment should be different, i.e. limited to field-of-play consequences, than it would be if you bit someone during any other sort of disagreement.

 

[Strikegold]

Yes, I think so. You should come over here and watch an ice hockey game (which we call a hockey game).

However...I was being pedantic about the definition of context (pedantic, but correct). The question you raise is actually interesting, but one on which reasonable people can disagree: are certain acts on the field of play, in the, um, context of professional sport, permissible, but not in the regular walk of life? I'd say yes. Boxing, to pick an obvious example, but even the one you cite - a bad tackle - would get me in a lot of trouble if I tried it on round the corner or during one of my five-a-side matches.

Biting someone is ridiculous, but it seems right to me that if you're caught doing it during a professional football match, in which aggression and physical contact are encouraged and even demanded, the punishment should be different, i.e. limited to field-of-play consequences, than it would be if you bit someone during any other sort of disagreement.

A life ban would be far worse than the criminal conviction consequences which probably wouldn't even get a custodial sentence.
I can't even contemplate making any allowance for it being on field. Tyson should have been banned for biting Holyfields ear off too.
In my youth I was an amateur boxer but now appreciate is a barbaric sport which should probably be banned.

 

[Strikegold]

A homeless Somalian man Mohamed Lidow repeatedly raped a woman on a park bench in London. She died either during or soon after of a heart attack.

 

[Yid]

A homeless Somalian man Mohamed Lidow repeatedly raped a woman on a park bench in London. She died either during or soon after of a heart attack.

Do you happen to know or care about the ethnicity or nationality of the woman...?

 

[Strikegold]

Two police officers re-instated after being sacked for stopping and searching a suspicious vehicle running a red light and evading police.
Black woman athlete and her dodgy boyfriend pulled the race card after behaving disrespectfully and breaking the law and the wokist leftie police body sided with them.

 

[Strikegold]

Do you happen to know or care about the ethnicity or nationality of the woman...?

I don't know but do care. She may have been targeted for her ethnicity.
Imported crime again but how low does it get ?

 

[Yid]

I don't know but do care. She may have been targeted for her ethnicity.
Imported crime again but how low does it get ?

Dont you think it's important that we know the full details of the victim?

 

[Strikegold]

Dont you think it's important that we know the full details of the victim?

Full details meaning what? Very little has been disclosed.
The point is it's imported crime of a very serious type. It's not about your pathetic agenda against me.

 

[spurious]

Full details meaning what? Very little has been disclosed.
The point is it's imported crime of a very serious type. It's not about your pathetic agenda against me.

Let's try another angle here. How many other women got raped that day? What is it about this particular incident that makes it worse?

Of the other incidents, how many were actually prosecuted? Of the ones that were prosecuted, how many convictions were secured? I could go on, but it's really just the answer to the second question that I'm interested in. And don't say you don't know the answer to the first one, because it's rhetorical. Let's just say it's more than one. That'll do for the sake of the argument.

 

[spurious]

Two police officers re-instated after being sacked for stopping and searching a suspicious vehicle running a red light and evading police.
Black woman athlete and her dodgy boyfriend pulled the race card after behaving disrespectfully and breaking the law and the wokist leftie police body sided with them.

Do you actually, honestly, think that being black makes it less likely that the cops will get away with fucking you over?

 

[Strikegold]

Do you actually, honestly, think that being black makes it less likely that the cops will get away with fucking you over?

The police didn't do anything wrong. The couple they pulled did and it was upheld on appeal.