Get Ready To Be Shocked
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;767491 wrote: Spot are you seriously trying to say that cutting off a car thief's clutch-pedal leg off is less morally odious than imprisoning him with hot meals in a centrally heated building for 6 months? Or that imprisoning people on any basis is indefensible? This is laughable nonsense and it's becomming bizarre.I'm seeing where it takes me. At the same time I'm giving a hint of how utterly odious I find the idea of imprisonment by saying that cutting off a limb is less offensive to my mind, unless rehabilitation is a reasonable prospect and seriously attempted. This site is absolutely crawling with vindictive psychopaths who want to lock up any number of people and throw away the key solely for reasons of punishment. I find that intolerable.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
grh;767337 wrote: So, if I'm getting the gist of this... you're thinking this is all part of the CIA master-plot to turn public opinion toward totally annihilating Iran, in an effort to stop them from running over some poor hungry boys arms?
And at this strategy meeting it was decided that the best vehicle for this propaganda would be carollys email....
Clever bastards!
We prefer the phrase "Sneaky bastards" er I mean they..
And at this strategy meeting it was decided that the best vehicle for this propaganda would be carollys email....
Clever bastards!
We prefer the phrase "Sneaky bastards" er I mean they..
Get Ready To Be Shocked
YZGI;767501 wrote: We prefer the phrase "Sneaky bastards" er I mean they..
Thank god you showed up in this thread!
I was half tempted to make that 'Cleaver Bastards' in keeping with where the thread got turned... but figured that some might find that totally insensitive while others just questioned my spelling...
You, however......:p
Thank god you showed up in this thread!
I was half tempted to make that 'Cleaver Bastards' in keeping with where the thread got turned... but figured that some might find that totally insensitive while others just questioned my spelling...
You, however......:p
Who are they to protest me? Who are they? Unless they've been me and been there and know what the hell they're yelling about!
:yh_glasse
rambo
:yh_glasse
rambo
-
pantsonfire321@aol.com
- Posts: 2920
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:26 am
Get Ready To Be Shocked
grh;767504 wrote: Thank god you showed up in this thread!
I was half tempted to make that 'Cleaver Bastards' in keeping with where the thread got turned... but figured that some might find that totally insensitive while others just questioned my spelling...
You, however......:p
Watch it hun or you'll get an infraction for swearing .
I was half tempted to make that 'Cleaver Bastards' in keeping with where the thread got turned... but figured that some might find that totally insensitive while others just questioned my spelling...
You, however......:p
Watch it hun or you'll get an infraction for swearing .
Can go from 0 - to bitch in 3.0 seconds .
Smile people :yh_bigsmi
yep, this bitch bites back .
Smile people :yh_bigsmi
yep, this bitch bites back .
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;767494 wrote: I'm seeing where it takes me. At the same time I'm giving a hint of how utterly odious I find the idea of imprisonment by saying that cutting off a limb is less offensive to my mind, unless rehabilitation is a reasonable prospect and seriously attempted. This site is absolutely crawling with vindictive psychopaths who want to lock up any number of people and throw away the key solely for reasons of punishment. I find that intolerable.
Sure, there are people who are vengeful or see the criminal justice system as a spectator sport, but what of that? There are other people who cringe when they see a child repremanded as they see all authority as coertion because they can't make the link between freedom and enforced rules. As long as they are not on the jury, its not relevant about the extreme or misguided views some people take personally on various cases, which is why lawyers can (in some countries), ask to have certain members removed and replaced from a trial jury for a variety of reasons.
But what about holding people accountable for their own actions? We have a criminal justice system in my country mostly because we need one, because people commit horrdenous crimes and act in an unacceptable manner. In terms of punishments, well rehabilitation in the community is certainly an option for some crimes, but not serious or violent ones. The alternatives to prison are death, public torture or humiliation, mutilation and amputation (which you advocate), or letting them off with a bit of a lecture and a stern look. I am sorry, but you have lost me a good way back the road upon which you are travelling.
Sure, there are people who are vengeful or see the criminal justice system as a spectator sport, but what of that? There are other people who cringe when they see a child repremanded as they see all authority as coertion because they can't make the link between freedom and enforced rules. As long as they are not on the jury, its not relevant about the extreme or misguided views some people take personally on various cases, which is why lawyers can (in some countries), ask to have certain members removed and replaced from a trial jury for a variety of reasons.
But what about holding people accountable for their own actions? We have a criminal justice system in my country mostly because we need one, because people commit horrdenous crimes and act in an unacceptable manner. In terms of punishments, well rehabilitation in the community is certainly an option for some crimes, but not serious or violent ones. The alternatives to prison are death, public torture or humiliation, mutilation and amputation (which you advocate), or letting them off with a bit of a lecture and a stern look. I am sorry, but you have lost me a good way back the road upon which you are travelling.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally, thank you for your post, you took the words right out of my mouth and saved me posting a reply to this very sad and misguided person.
Spot -------- one question :- Have you ever experienced a violent physical assault upon yourself or a loved one ?
Another question:- Have you ever witnessed somebody being hacked with a knife ?
Another question :- Have you ever witnessed the terror of a child that has been grabbed, stripped naked and sexually assaulted, just for that attacker's gratification?
Another question:- Have you ever been violently robbed by a gang of youths, whilst you have been walking in the town, about your business ---- in broad daylight ?
Another question:- Have you ever been burgled, your home literally trashed, your bank cards and other financial documents stolen, your dog assaulted with a 2" x 2" stake of wood, causing it to have a stroke . In broad daylight?
Another question :- Have you ever had a mob of about 20 youths attack you with stones, bottles and bricks, while you have been driving your car, minding your own business, on your way home at night?
Oh for pities sake I could go on for ever Spot !
I have had first hand knowledge and experience of three of the above dreadful offences. I will also add that none of those that I was involved in were ever sorted, bringing the perpetrators to court.
I will never understand anybody who says 'You cannot jail those villains, it will spoil their lives' In my opinion, people who say and have said that sort of thing, have been instrumental in the increase in violent crime in this country.
What about the poor victims ? What about the lives that these scum have destroyed physically and mentally ? These poor innocent people have been severely damaged for life. Spot, I know this to be true, because I have the EVIDENCE -------- I have been a victim at least three times. I would also imagine that there must be dozens and dozens of members who will have had similar experiences, and many of them a lot worse than my experiences.
Spot why don't you retire and put your keyboard in a useful place, like the local school ?
Spot -------- one question :- Have you ever experienced a violent physical assault upon yourself or a loved one ?
Another question:- Have you ever witnessed somebody being hacked with a knife ?
Another question :- Have you ever witnessed the terror of a child that has been grabbed, stripped naked and sexually assaulted, just for that attacker's gratification?
Another question:- Have you ever been violently robbed by a gang of youths, whilst you have been walking in the town, about your business ---- in broad daylight ?
Another question:- Have you ever been burgled, your home literally trashed, your bank cards and other financial documents stolen, your dog assaulted with a 2" x 2" stake of wood, causing it to have a stroke . In broad daylight?
Another question :- Have you ever had a mob of about 20 youths attack you with stones, bottles and bricks, while you have been driving your car, minding your own business, on your way home at night?
Oh for pities sake I could go on for ever Spot !
I have had first hand knowledge and experience of three of the above dreadful offences. I will also add that none of those that I was involved in were ever sorted, bringing the perpetrators to court.
I will never understand anybody who says 'You cannot jail those villains, it will spoil their lives' In my opinion, people who say and have said that sort of thing, have been instrumental in the increase in violent crime in this country.
What about the poor victims ? What about the lives that these scum have destroyed physically and mentally ? These poor innocent people have been severely damaged for life. Spot, I know this to be true, because I have the EVIDENCE -------- I have been a victim at least three times. I would also imagine that there must be dozens and dozens of members who will have had similar experiences, and many of them a lot worse than my experiences.
Spot why don't you retire and put your keyboard in a useful place, like the local school ?
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;767518 wrote: you have lost me a good way back the road upon which you are travelling.I think, in those countries which employ it, that amputation is considered to have a deterrent effect out of all proportion to the frequency with which it's employed.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;767525 wrote: Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
ineffective police work? I would have thought it was more due to problems within the society? If you got rid of the causes, the police wouldn't have any crime to detect or prevent.
ineffective police work? I would have thought it was more due to problems within the society? If you got rid of the causes, the police wouldn't have any crime to detect or prevent.
-
pantsonfire321@aol.com
- Posts: 2920
- Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:26 am
Get Ready To Be Shocked
G#Gill;767524 wrote: Galbally, thank you for your post, you took the words right out of my mouth and saved me posting a reply to this very sad and misguided person.
Spot -------- one question :- Have you ever experienced a violent physical assault upon yourself or a loved one ?
Another question:- Have you ever witnessed somebody being hacked with a knife ?
Another question :- Have you ever witnessed the terror of a child that has been grabbed, stripped naked and sexually assaulted, just for that attacker's gratification?
Another question:- Have you ever been violently robbed by a gang of youths, whilst you have been walking in the town, about your business ---- in broad daylight ?
Another question:- Have you ever been burgled, your home literally trashed, your bank cards and other financial documents stolen, your dog assaulted with a 2" x 2" stake of wood, causing it to have a stroke . In broad daylight?
Another question :- Have you ever had a mob of about 20 youths attack you with stones, bottles and bricks, while you have been driving your car, minding your own business, on your way home at night?
Oh for pities sake I could go on for ever Spot !
I have had first hand knowledge and experience of three of the above dreadful offences. I will also add that none of those that I was involved in were ever sorted, bringing the perpetrators to court.
I will never understand anybody who says 'You cannot jail those villains, it will spoil their lives' In my opinion, people who say and have said that sort of thing, have been instrumental in the increase in violent crime in this country.
What about the poor victims ? What about the lives that these scum have destroyed physically and mentally ? These poor innocent people have been severely damaged for life. Spot, I know this to be true, because I have the EVIDENCE -------- I have been a victim at least three times. I would also imagine that there must be dozens and dozens of members who will have had similar experiences, and many of them a lot worse than my experiences.
Spot why don't you retire and put your keyboard in a useful place, like the local school ?
Scum should be locked up. Any one who can beat another human being to a pulp is an animal and will always be an animal . I wish we did have DP, maybe then we wouldn't have scum walking the streets and breathing the same air as the rest of us , decent law abiding citizens .
Spot -------- one question :- Have you ever experienced a violent physical assault upon yourself or a loved one ?
Another question:- Have you ever witnessed somebody being hacked with a knife ?
Another question :- Have you ever witnessed the terror of a child that has been grabbed, stripped naked and sexually assaulted, just for that attacker's gratification?
Another question:- Have you ever been violently robbed by a gang of youths, whilst you have been walking in the town, about your business ---- in broad daylight ?
Another question:- Have you ever been burgled, your home literally trashed, your bank cards and other financial documents stolen, your dog assaulted with a 2" x 2" stake of wood, causing it to have a stroke . In broad daylight?
Another question :- Have you ever had a mob of about 20 youths attack you with stones, bottles and bricks, while you have been driving your car, minding your own business, on your way home at night?
Oh for pities sake I could go on for ever Spot !
I have had first hand knowledge and experience of three of the above dreadful offences. I will also add that none of those that I was involved in were ever sorted, bringing the perpetrators to court.
I will never understand anybody who says 'You cannot jail those villains, it will spoil their lives' In my opinion, people who say and have said that sort of thing, have been instrumental in the increase in violent crime in this country.
What about the poor victims ? What about the lives that these scum have destroyed physically and mentally ? These poor innocent people have been severely damaged for life. Spot, I know this to be true, because I have the EVIDENCE -------- I have been a victim at least three times. I would also imagine that there must be dozens and dozens of members who will have had similar experiences, and many of them a lot worse than my experiences.
Spot why don't you retire and put your keyboard in a useful place, like the local school ?
Scum should be locked up. Any one who can beat another human being to a pulp is an animal and will always be an animal . I wish we did have DP, maybe then we wouldn't have scum walking the streets and breathing the same air as the rest of us , decent law abiding citizens .
Can go from 0 - to bitch in 3.0 seconds .
Smile people :yh_bigsmi
yep, this bitch bites back .
Smile people :yh_bigsmi
yep, this bitch bites back .
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Carolly;767432 wrote: I have come here again for one reason and one reason only and then I wont again so any reply that is made will not to be replied to so anybody can say what they like about me ..I am sorry for not looking i nto things abit better than I did but I am appalled that a moderator of all people has seen fit to publicly castigate me for showing compassion for a fellow human being ¦
In my opinion if person concerned KNEW without a shadow of a doubt that the e-mail was a fake, he should simply have told me so in a civil way and in plain english and in a more friendly way ...... ¦ there was no need to attack and belittle me time and time again in the way he did ¦ after all I just posted something in good faith which angered and upset me so much.Yes I was wrong and for that Yes I am sorry.You see a big person can say sorry when they know they are wrong.
So does this moderator have a hidden agenda or does he simply not like me....you make your own mind up.Spot I know that you will come out with your normal words that goes over so many of our heads but remember this, you have shown me something here in the past day that money could never buy.You see Spot also Im a good person no matter what you written about me here and thats the important thing that I have to remember when your words were hitting me so hard. l have also with your help seen True Friendship and learnt alot of truths that I never knew before about many things and for that I thankyou.I was brought up in a different world to you and thank goodness I did.You can go on any thread I may do.... as you have with one I put up this morning a very innocent one I may add.I wont ever reply to you as no matter what I say you wont be happy about.No doubt you will pull this message apart also.So Spot goodbye and thankyou.
Nice one Carol :-6
In my opinion if person concerned KNEW without a shadow of a doubt that the e-mail was a fake, he should simply have told me so in a civil way and in plain english and in a more friendly way ...... ¦ there was no need to attack and belittle me time and time again in the way he did ¦ after all I just posted something in good faith which angered and upset me so much.Yes I was wrong and for that Yes I am sorry.You see a big person can say sorry when they know they are wrong.
So does this moderator have a hidden agenda or does he simply not like me....you make your own mind up.Spot I know that you will come out with your normal words that goes over so many of our heads but remember this, you have shown me something here in the past day that money could never buy.You see Spot also Im a good person no matter what you written about me here and thats the important thing that I have to remember when your words were hitting me so hard. l have also with your help seen True Friendship and learnt alot of truths that I never knew before about many things and for that I thankyou.I was brought up in a different world to you and thank goodness I did.You can go on any thread I may do.... as you have with one I put up this morning a very innocent one I may add.I wont ever reply to you as no matter what I say you wont be happy about.No doubt you will pull this message apart also.So Spot goodbye and thankyou.
Nice one Carol :-6
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;767525 wrote: I think, in those countries which employ it, that amputation is considered to have a deterrent effect out of all proportion to the frequency with which it's employed.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
No, the police are not responsible for crime, they are only responsible for upholding the law. Crime is a consequence of people acting in a criminal manner.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
No, the police are not responsible for crime, they are only responsible for upholding the law. Crime is a consequence of people acting in a criminal manner.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;767525 wrote: I think, in those countries which employ it, that amputation is considered to have a deterrent effect out of all proportion to the frequency with which it's employed.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
Do you think that part of the problem is that the police are (occasionally!) quite effective in finding offenders. But the difficulty comes when the files are put before the Crown Prosecution Service who then say 'not enough evidence' or 'not in the public interest' when really they mean 'not sure that a jury would convict so lets's not bother' or 'this bloke's quite important so he doesn't need a driving ban' etc.
Or how about the early release scheme that ensures that prisoners don't serve anything like enough time so there's no deterrant.
Or the fact that the prisons are overcrowded so there's enough pressure on the staff just to keep a lid on crowd control let alone try to sort out some sort of rehabilitation schemes.
Or the fact that our society is very quick nowadays to excuse or justify criminal acts by saying that someone had a poor upbringing so there's no wonder they behave that way.
Or even that our police are spending too much time filling in forms and not enough time doing the routine patrol that they should be doing, a shoplifter who stole a can of beans can take up a whole 8 hour shift if the shop decides they want to prosecute.
Or that the senior police officers worry too much about being seen to do the right thing instead of actually doing the right thing and telling the government that they don't need to continually send their staff on a course for this and a course for that.
Rehabilitation in the community was never in my list of alternatives. Rehabilitation in prison was. We can, I think, agree that the punitive and deterrent effect of prison is minimal in our countries or there'd be a lot less crime.
I fall back, as before, on my suggestion that guaranteed detection and identification would be a greater deterrent than all of these alternatives put together. Crime is a consequence of ineffective police work.
Do you think that part of the problem is that the police are (occasionally!) quite effective in finding offenders. But the difficulty comes when the files are put before the Crown Prosecution Service who then say 'not enough evidence' or 'not in the public interest' when really they mean 'not sure that a jury would convict so lets's not bother' or 'this bloke's quite important so he doesn't need a driving ban' etc.
Or how about the early release scheme that ensures that prisoners don't serve anything like enough time so there's no deterrant.
Or the fact that the prisons are overcrowded so there's enough pressure on the staff just to keep a lid on crowd control let alone try to sort out some sort of rehabilitation schemes.
Or the fact that our society is very quick nowadays to excuse or justify criminal acts by saying that someone had a poor upbringing so there's no wonder they behave that way.
Or even that our police are spending too much time filling in forms and not enough time doing the routine patrol that they should be doing, a shoplifter who stole a can of beans can take up a whole 8 hour shift if the shop decides they want to prosecute.
Or that the senior police officers worry too much about being seen to do the right thing instead of actually doing the right thing and telling the government that they don't need to continually send their staff on a course for this and a course for that.
Originally Posted by spot
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;767546 wrote: No, the police are not responsible for crime, they are only responsible for upholding the law. Crime is a consequence of people acting in a criminal manner.
That's what I meant, but it couldn't say it quite so succinctly!!!!:wah:
That's what I meant, but it couldn't say it quite so succinctly!!!!:wah:
Originally Posted by spot
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
Get Ready To Be Shocked
I wanted to add that I misunderstood you spot in that I thought you were against prison, period. But I think what you mean is that you are against the idea of detention as a punishment or deterent, not against it in terms of the possibility of rehabilitating people. I do not share your opinion on those terms either, though it is a little more understandable.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
I just would like to say that a certain member, seems to have picked on Carolly as his next target for picking fault with, and having attacked this thread and belittled the author in no small way, has proceeded to Carolly's newly posted thread to seemingly carry on with his apparent vendetta. I apologise for interupting the run of this thread by posting the contributions so far on Carolly's new thread, but I did feel that it was in the interests of members to draw their attention to this person's apparent current 'mission'. I will leave you to decide for yourselves whether this person is conducting himself in a proper manner, appropriate to the good name of Forum Garden, with his efforts to apparently upset a member to the extent of causing her to think about having to leave this forum, as the only way to avoid this seeming persecution. Perhaps you may feel that that is too strong a word for me to use, however, I must point out to everybody that this is how I have perceived this ongoing activity. I also would like to express my concern that for somebody who is one of the Moderators of Forum Garden, to behave in this perceived manner, reflects badly on all Moderators and does not give me confidence that they are conducting their tasks in an unbiased and fair way.
Today, 10:06 AM #1
Carolly
Young At Heart
Supporting Member
Carolly's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Posh Essex
country flag
Posts: 3,487
Simple Question....Simple Answer
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you???NOT a debate just a simple question....no more no less.
Today, 10:08 AM #2
RedGlitter
CONTRABAND!
Supporting Member
RedGlitter's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: small town Arizona
country flag
Posts: 12,409
Send a message via Yahoo to RedGlitter
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I would say to me, that means don't ask more of others than what you are willing to ask of yourself.
__________________
Today, 10:27 AM #3
spot
Ichabod
Supporting Member
spot's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brigstowe
country flag
Posts: 10,111
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolly
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you?
It sounds rather like a reversal of the heart of Christian ethics, I can't think of a line anywhere in the New Testament which comes close to that. Not even "Don't judge others or you'll be judged on the same terms yourself", if I'm allowed to paraphrase.
It's all about applying your principles to others, surely. My principles are love, doing good, giving blessings, saying prayers, peace, generosity. If I were to apply those to myself before I apply them to others I'd be terribly self-centred and selfish.
Have love for those who are against you, do good to those who have hate for you, give blessing to those who give you curses, say prayers for those who are cruel to you.
If a man gives you a blow on one side of your face, then let the other side be turned to him; from him who takes away your coat, do not keep back your robe. Give to everyone who comes with a request, and if a man takes away your property, make no attempt to get it back again. Do to others as you would have them do to you.
If you have love for those who have love for you, what credit is it to you? for even sinners have love for those who have love for them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is it to you? for even sinners do the same. And if you let those have the use of your money, from whom you are hoping to get it back, what credit is it to you? even sinners do so to sinners, hoping to get back as much as they gave.
__________________
Today, 11:59 AM #4
kazalala
Senior Member
kazalala's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunderland UK
country flag
Posts: 4,050
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I think it means, you shouldnt expect Manners, Kindness, Understanding, Forgivenss, Respesct, Assistance, Sympathy, Freindship, (Oh theres probably loads more i cant think of at the moment) But i think you cant expect those things from others if you do not give those things to others.
Today, 03:16 PM #6
along-for-the-ride
Senior Member
along-for-the-ride's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: on the road of life
country flag
Posts: 1,598
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I think that just how you go along living your life you set an example for others. Not saying, "Look at me........I'm perfect." By just living you life.
__________________
"Life is a Highway......"
spot
Ichabod
Supporting Member
spot's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brigstowe
country flag
Posts: 10,111
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Quote:
Originally Posted by kazalala View Post
i think you cant expect those things from others if you do not give those things to others.
I'm trying hard to match that with the original suggestion that you "Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others", one or the other's upside down.
Yours fails morally too though, Kaz. You're meant to do these things with no hope or expectation of reward merely because they're the right thing to do. Expecting those things from others in return negates your gift or action entirely.
Today, 05:03 PM #8
G#Gill
Recycled Teenager
Supporting Member
G#Gill's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: England
country flag
Posts: 1,640
Send a message via Yahoo to G#Gill Send a message via Skypeâ„¢ to G#Gill
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Spot, when are you going to learn to not pick holes in what everybody says, by lecturing them on terminology etc. and trying to belittle them for goodness sake. You are obviously tired, so go and take a nap - there's a good chap, yes and I am a bit of a poet as well. By the way, what are you so frightened of - not showing a photo of yourself ?
__________________
__________________Today, 05:07 PM #9
Carolly
Young At Heart
Supporting Member
Carolly's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Posh Essex
country flag
Posts: 3,491
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Incase people have forgotten here let me tell you what I said in my first post......thankyou
Simple Question....Simple Answer
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you???NOT a debate just a simple question....no more no less
Today, 10:06 AM #1
Carolly
Young At Heart
Supporting Member
Carolly's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Posh Essex
country flag
Posts: 3,487
Simple Question....Simple Answer
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you???NOT a debate just a simple question....no more no less.
Today, 10:08 AM #2
RedGlitter
CONTRABAND!
Supporting Member
RedGlitter's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: small town Arizona
country flag
Posts: 12,409
Send a message via Yahoo to RedGlitter
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I would say to me, that means don't ask more of others than what you are willing to ask of yourself.
__________________
Today, 10:27 AM #3
spot
Ichabod
Supporting Member
spot's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brigstowe
country flag
Posts: 10,111
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolly
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you?
It sounds rather like a reversal of the heart of Christian ethics, I can't think of a line anywhere in the New Testament which comes close to that. Not even "Don't judge others or you'll be judged on the same terms yourself", if I'm allowed to paraphrase.
It's all about applying your principles to others, surely. My principles are love, doing good, giving blessings, saying prayers, peace, generosity. If I were to apply those to myself before I apply them to others I'd be terribly self-centred and selfish.
Have love for those who are against you, do good to those who have hate for you, give blessing to those who give you curses, say prayers for those who are cruel to you.
If a man gives you a blow on one side of your face, then let the other side be turned to him; from him who takes away your coat, do not keep back your robe. Give to everyone who comes with a request, and if a man takes away your property, make no attempt to get it back again. Do to others as you would have them do to you.
If you have love for those who have love for you, what credit is it to you? for even sinners have love for those who have love for them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is it to you? for even sinners do the same. And if you let those have the use of your money, from whom you are hoping to get it back, what credit is it to you? even sinners do so to sinners, hoping to get back as much as they gave.
__________________
Today, 11:59 AM #4
kazalala
Senior Member
kazalala's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sunderland UK
country flag
Posts: 4,050
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I think it means, you shouldnt expect Manners, Kindness, Understanding, Forgivenss, Respesct, Assistance, Sympathy, Freindship, (Oh theres probably loads more i cant think of at the moment) But i think you cant expect those things from others if you do not give those things to others.
Today, 03:16 PM #6
along-for-the-ride
Senior Member
along-for-the-ride's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: on the road of life
country flag
Posts: 1,598
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
I think that just how you go along living your life you set an example for others. Not saying, "Look at me........I'm perfect." By just living you life.
__________________
"Life is a Highway......"
spot
Ichabod
Supporting Member
spot's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brigstowe
country flag
Posts: 10,111
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Quote:
Originally Posted by kazalala View Post
i think you cant expect those things from others if you do not give those things to others.
I'm trying hard to match that with the original suggestion that you "Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others", one or the other's upside down.
Yours fails morally too though, Kaz. You're meant to do these things with no hope or expectation of reward merely because they're the right thing to do. Expecting those things from others in return negates your gift or action entirely.
Today, 05:03 PM #8
G#Gill
Recycled Teenager
Supporting Member
G#Gill's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: England
country flag
Posts: 1,640
Send a message via Yahoo to G#Gill Send a message via Skypeâ„¢ to G#Gill
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Spot, when are you going to learn to not pick holes in what everybody says, by lecturing them on terminology etc. and trying to belittle them for goodness sake. You are obviously tired, so go and take a nap - there's a good chap, yes and I am a bit of a poet as well. By the way, what are you so frightened of - not showing a photo of yourself ?
__________________
__________________Today, 05:07 PM #9
Carolly
Young At Heart
Supporting Member
Carolly's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Posh Essex
country flag
Posts: 3,491
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Incase people have forgotten here let me tell you what I said in my first post......thankyou
Simple Question....Simple Answer
Apply your principles to yourself before you apply it to others................tell me what does that say to you???NOT a debate just a simple question....no more no less
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
Get Ready To Be Shocked
I am afraid this next post has just been made on Carolly's new thread "Simple Question.......Simple Answer"
It says it all I'm afraid. People are just being driven away by the activity of one man!
Today, 05:47 PM #13
Chezzie
Post Whore 2007
Supporting Member
Chezzie's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: N.Wales
country flag
Posts: 2,634
Send a message via MSN to Chezzie
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Im not going to post my answer for fear of being Insulted, questioned, Intimitated or made to look downright stupid.
Sorry carol, ill email you
It says it all I'm afraid. People are just being driven away by the activity of one man!
Today, 05:47 PM #13
Chezzie
Post Whore 2007
Supporting Member
Chezzie's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: N.Wales
country flag
Posts: 2,634
Send a message via MSN to Chezzie
Re: Simple Question....Simple Answer
Im not going to post my answer for fear of being Insulted, questioned, Intimitated or made to look downright stupid.
Sorry carol, ill email you
I'm a Saga-lout, growing old disgracefully
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;767494 wrote: I'm seeing where it takes me. At the same time I'm giving a hint of how utterly odious I find the idea of imprisonment by saying that cutting off a limb is less offensive to my mind, unless rehabilitation is a reasonable prospect and seriously attempted. This site is absolutely crawling with vindictive psychopaths who want to lock up any number of people and throw away the key solely for reasons of punishment. I find that intolerable.
I don't think gov't should be involved in anything so emotional as punishment. If a person commits a crime, that person has proven himself a detriment to society. We should remove that detriment (put him in prison) until he can prove himself a benefit to society. I once thought that we should devote some tightly budgeted funds to help rehabilitate, but there are literally thousands of millionaires willing to foot the bill on their own. Let them. But the criminal stays in prison until he uses his own initiative to rehab himself.
A finite sentence does nothing but punish.
I don't think gov't should be involved in anything so emotional as punishment. If a person commits a crime, that person has proven himself a detriment to society. We should remove that detriment (put him in prison) until he can prove himself a benefit to society. I once thought that we should devote some tightly budgeted funds to help rehabilitate, but there are literally thousands of millionaires willing to foot the bill on their own. Let them. But the criminal stays in prison until he uses his own initiative to rehab himself.
A finite sentence does nothing but punish.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;767546 wrote: No, the police are not responsible for crime, they are only responsible for upholding the law. Crime is a consequence of people acting in a criminal manner.
Crime may be but imprisonment isn't. Crime rates would plummet if the police were effective in detecting and identifying criminals. There would be fewer people to rehabilitate in the long term. The state would stop devouring people.
The nature of people doesn't alter in as short a time as a hundred years. The nature of the state definitely does in that time scale. The increase in the prison population is a function of the state, not a function of the wickedness of the population.
Here's a snapshot of the prison population a hundred years ago (well, in 1889 from "In Darkest England and The Way Out" by General William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army):
In Convict Prisons .. .. .. .. .. 11,600
In Local Prisons.. .. .. .. .. .. 20,883
In Reformatories.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,270
Criminal Lunatics .. .. .. .. .. 910
The current figure? 80,000 with accomodation for an additional 15,000 in the pipeline? This is Americanization, this is a deliberate criminalizing of the population, this isn't anything to do with whether people are innately good or not. Victorian jails were reformatory, not punitive.
Crime may be but imprisonment isn't. Crime rates would plummet if the police were effective in detecting and identifying criminals. There would be fewer people to rehabilitate in the long term. The state would stop devouring people.
The nature of people doesn't alter in as short a time as a hundred years. The nature of the state definitely does in that time scale. The increase in the prison population is a function of the state, not a function of the wickedness of the population.
Here's a snapshot of the prison population a hundred years ago (well, in 1889 from "In Darkest England and The Way Out" by General William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army):
In Convict Prisons .. .. .. .. .. 11,600
In Local Prisons.. .. .. .. .. .. 20,883
In Reformatories.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,270
Criminal Lunatics .. .. .. .. .. 910
The current figure? 80,000 with accomodation for an additional 15,000 in the pipeline? This is Americanization, this is a deliberate criminalizing of the population, this isn't anything to do with whether people are innately good or not. Victorian jails were reformatory, not punitive.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
G#Gill;767690 wrote: I just would like to say that a certain member, seems to have picked on Carolly as his next target for picking fault with, and having attacked this thread and belittled the author in no small way, has proceeded to Carolly's newly posted thread to seemingly carry on with his apparent vendetta. Gill, I have no vendetta against Carolly in the slightest. The OP in this thread was an appalling piece of anti-Muslim propaganda, I'm delighted that the content was as thoroughly aired as it was. Carolly stuck to claiming it wasn't a lie which was rather silly of her.
My contribution to her more recent thread seems entirely benign, perhaps you'd like to explain why you find it offensive.
This entire flare-up stems from my picking apart a cut-and-paste thread of hers last week. My criticism of that was entirely levelled at the content and not at her.
Are you FOCers really going to orchestrate a campaign on the basis of anything this trivial?
My contribution to her more recent thread seems entirely benign, perhaps you'd like to explain why you find it offensive.
This entire flare-up stems from my picking apart a cut-and-paste thread of hers last week. My criticism of that was entirely levelled at the content and not at her.
Are you FOCers really going to orchestrate a campaign on the basis of anything this trivial?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Accountable;768014 wrote: I don't think gov't should be involved in anything so emotional as punishment. If a person commits a crime, that person has proven himself a detriment to society. We should remove that detriment (put him in prison) until he can prove himself a benefit to society. I once thought that we should devote some tightly budgeted funds to help rehabilitate, but there are literally thousands of millionaires willing to foot the bill on their own. Let them. But the criminal stays in prison until he uses his own initiative to rehab himself.
A finite sentence does nothing but punish.
I don't want to get into a general debate about the best way in which a state can ensure that a minimum standard of justice can be maintained, together with some form of order within a society in a broad sense, though I think most people would agree that the current Iranian government's ideas about justice in many areas are not very pleasant, aside from whatever any other country does. As for those that are interested in this subject a good start in trying to formulate any sense of what human justice should entail could read Dostoevsky or maybe Spinoza, I'm not gifted enough to be able to answer such questions other than to state my own wholly inadequate opinion.
A finite sentence does nothing but punish.
I don't want to get into a general debate about the best way in which a state can ensure that a minimum standard of justice can be maintained, together with some form of order within a society in a broad sense, though I think most people would agree that the current Iranian government's ideas about justice in many areas are not very pleasant, aside from whatever any other country does. As for those that are interested in this subject a good start in trying to formulate any sense of what human justice should entail could read Dostoevsky or maybe Spinoza, I'm not gifted enough to be able to answer such questions other than to state my own wholly inadequate opinion.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
spot;768030 wrote: Crime may be but imprisonment isn't. Crime rates would plummet if the police were effective in detecting and identifying criminals. There would be fewer people to rehabilitate in the long term. The state would stop devouring people.
The nature of people doesn't alter in as short a time as a hundred years. The nature of the state definitely does in that time scale. The increase in the prison population is a function of the state, not a function of the wickedness of the population.
Here's a snapshot of the prison population a hundred years ago (well, in 1889 from "In Darkest England and The Way Out" by General William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army):
In Convict Prisons .. .. .. .. .. 11,600
In Local Prisons.. .. .. .. .. .. 20,883
In Reformatories.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,270
Criminal Lunatics .. .. .. .. .. 910
The current figure? 80,000 with accomodation for an additional 15,000 in the pipeline? This is Americanization, this is a deliberate criminalizing of the population, this isn't anything to do with whether people are innately good or not. Victorian jails were reformatory, not punitive.
I take your points, but I reiterate that it is the the person who commits the offense who is ultimately responsible for what they have done, not the people charged with trying to prove they did it. I though that justice primarily involved making the people actually responsible for committing crimes accountable in some way for their actions through due process. Also the fact that people's awareness that they are more likely to get away with many crimes nowadays, and their then seeming increased willingness to commit crimes, should not limit their personal responsibility for whatever consequences their actions result in.
I would also suggest that a police force's ability to catch criminals and secure criminal convictions is proportional to the general population's clear understanding that you shouldn't act whatever way you like just because you think you will get away with it, and that there are such things as minimum standards of acceptable personal behaviour in a free, functioning society, that have nothing to do with how the judicial system operates. I would say that's one of the major differences between the 1800s and the present day, not the inability of police officers to do their job.
Also in a more general sense, if you feel that Britain is becoming more Americanized and are concerned about it, I would suggest you try to help your countrymen and women to rediscover that they actually live on an island 21 miles off the north coast of the continent containing three European nations (one large one and two small ones united under a constitutional British monarchy) and not the 51st State of the USA, or at the semi-unified post-modern centre of a happy clappy global trading empire. And they do not always have to copy everything their American cousins do (in some sort of bizarre fait accomplit arrangement) in ordering their society, or continue with dismantling traditionally common sense British approaches to ordering society on the Island of Britain because of a collective guilt about the colonial history of the past.
Good luck on that one, you will need it.
The nature of people doesn't alter in as short a time as a hundred years. The nature of the state definitely does in that time scale. The increase in the prison population is a function of the state, not a function of the wickedness of the population.
Here's a snapshot of the prison population a hundred years ago (well, in 1889 from "In Darkest England and The Way Out" by General William Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army):
In Convict Prisons .. .. .. .. .. 11,600
In Local Prisons.. .. .. .. .. .. 20,883
In Reformatories.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,270
Criminal Lunatics .. .. .. .. .. 910
The current figure? 80,000 with accomodation for an additional 15,000 in the pipeline? This is Americanization, this is a deliberate criminalizing of the population, this isn't anything to do with whether people are innately good or not. Victorian jails were reformatory, not punitive.
I take your points, but I reiterate that it is the the person who commits the offense who is ultimately responsible for what they have done, not the people charged with trying to prove they did it. I though that justice primarily involved making the people actually responsible for committing crimes accountable in some way for their actions through due process. Also the fact that people's awareness that they are more likely to get away with many crimes nowadays, and their then seeming increased willingness to commit crimes, should not limit their personal responsibility for whatever consequences their actions result in.
I would also suggest that a police force's ability to catch criminals and secure criminal convictions is proportional to the general population's clear understanding that you shouldn't act whatever way you like just because you think you will get away with it, and that there are such things as minimum standards of acceptable personal behaviour in a free, functioning society, that have nothing to do with how the judicial system operates. I would say that's one of the major differences between the 1800s and the present day, not the inability of police officers to do their job.
Also in a more general sense, if you feel that Britain is becoming more Americanized and are concerned about it, I would suggest you try to help your countrymen and women to rediscover that they actually live on an island 21 miles off the north coast of the continent containing three European nations (one large one and two small ones united under a constitutional British monarchy) and not the 51st State of the USA, or at the semi-unified post-modern centre of a happy clappy global trading empire. And they do not always have to copy everything their American cousins do (in some sort of bizarre fait accomplit arrangement) in ordering their society, or continue with dismantling traditionally common sense British approaches to ordering society on the Island of Britain because of a collective guilt about the colonial history of the past.
Good luck on that one, you will need it.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;768054 wrote: I don't want to get into a general debate about the best way in which a state can ensure that a minimum standard of justice can be maintained, together with some form of order within a society in a broad sense, though I think most people would agree that the current Iranian government's ideas about justice in many areas are not very pleasant, aside from whatever any other country does. As for those that are interested in this subject a good start in trying to formulate any sense of what human justice should entail could read Dostoevsky or maybe Spinoza, I'm not gifted enough to be able to answer such questions other than to state my own wholly inadequate opinion.
Gal, you sell yourself short. Your opinions aren't wholly inadequate.
Gal, you sell yourself short. Your opinions aren't wholly inadequate.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Accountable;768109 wrote: Gal, you sell yourself short. Your opinions aren't wholly inadequate.
Ah not wholly inadequate, accountable you have made my day you charmer. :wah:
Ah not wholly inadequate, accountable you have made my day you charmer. :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;767403 wrote: So from the original post, was the original email that sparked this debate here a hoax, yes it seems it probably was.
Did Carolly intentionally try to whip up internet xenophobia, or was she just upset by the nature of the story and perhaps not thinking twice about the email she recieved in terms of making sure it was a valid story, I would say probably the latter. So she was unwise perhaps, but hardly guilty of a hate crime.
Just because Iran is not run by very nice people, does that mean that we should believe every story we believe about Iran? Obviously not.
Is Iran a country run by the sort of people that I would waste one second of my life trying to defend from fair criticism though? No.
Good points well put. I must admit when i first saw the thread i initially thought she was a troll (in the internet sense that is) but wasn't sure. Having looked at some of the other threads i realise that is not the case. Perhaps a misunderstanding on all sides and an assumption that someone disagreeing with you means it personally rather than a criticism of the content.
The amnesty international report you refer is quoted quite a lot-rather selectively though here is the full text.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty ... since-1990
Iran does lead but
Since 1990 Amnesty International has documented 59 executions of child offenders in 10 countries: Afghanistan (extrajudicially by the Taleban), China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the USA and Yemen. Several of these countries have changed their laws to exclude the practice. Executions of child offenders represent a tiny fraction of the total of executions worldwide recorded by Amnesty International each year. The USA and Iran have each executed more child offenders than the other eight countries combined and Iran has now exceeded the USA's total since 1990 of 19 child executions.
USA nineteen Iran 23
or this older report
http://www.hrea.org/lists/child-rights/ ... 00110.html
Two thirds of the known executions of child offenders in the past
decade were carried out in the USA", the organization said. "It is clear
that the United States is the world's leading perpetrator of this
universally condemned human rights violation."
It was only in 2005 that the US supreme court finally banned child executions. There are currently over 2,000 children in US jails for crimes committed while juveniles that are there indefinitely without parole. The US has signed the international convention on the rights of the child but has yet to ratify it.
posted by galbally
Since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took office in August 2005, government officials have increasingly used “security as grounds for persecuting independent activism. A set of laws within Iran’s Islamic Penal Code entitled “Offenses Against the National and International Security of the Country lay the groundwork for the government to suppress peaceful political activity and deny due process rights to those arrested.
--
The authorities frequently hold detainees arrested on security grounds in facilities operating outside the mandated prison administration, most notoriously in Section 209 of Tehran’s Evin prison. Detainees in Evin 209 are subject to violations of their due process rights as well as abusive treatment during interrogation and in detention.
Oh you mean like guantanimo bay not in the US? maybe that's where they got the idea.
Yet if I post like that that I would be accused of being anti-american and despite the factual accuracy many simply wouldn't believe it. Things are getting worse in Iran but that the majority of Iranians approve of child executions, torture etc etc is no more likely to be true than that most Americans approve of it in their own country. Yet until recently both thought it perfectly acceptable to slaughter a child. Yet unlikely tales of sadistic punishment in the middle east are believed without any discrimination at all and the assumption made that the character of the people is the problem.
There is enough real horror in the world without attention being distracted by e-mails and articles designed to stir up hatred.
posted by galbally
I would also suggest that a police force's ability to catch criminals and secure criminal convictions is proportional to the general population's clear understanding that you shouldn't act whatever way you like just because you think you will get away with it, and that there are such things as minimum standards of acceptable personal behaviour in a free, functioning society, that have nothing to do with how the judicial system operates. I would say that's one of the major differences between the 1800s and the present day, not the inability of police officers to do their job.
It is also dependant on the population supporting the police. That was one of the key aims in the creation of the modern police force. It's certainty of being caught and punished that matters.
Comparing moral standards today with the 1800's doesn't actually help. We no longer accept a husband's right to beat his wife, lock up the destitute, laugh at the insane or tolerate children working in factories. that used to be acceptable behaviour in a free functioning society
posted by galbally
Also in a more general sense, if you feel that Britain is becoming more Americanized and are concerned about it, I would suggest you try to help your countrymen and women to rediscover that they actually live on an island 21 miles off the north coast of the continent containing three European nations (one large one and two small ones united under a constitutional British monarchy) and not the 51st State of the USA, or at the semi-unified post-modern centre of a happy clappy global trading empire. And they do not always have to copy everything their American cousins do (in some sort of bizarre fait accomplit arrangement) in ordering their society, or continue with dismantling traditionally common sense British approaches to ordering society on the Island of Britain because of a collective guilt about the colonial history of the past.
Good luck on that one, you will need it.
:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Did Carolly intentionally try to whip up internet xenophobia, or was she just upset by the nature of the story and perhaps not thinking twice about the email she recieved in terms of making sure it was a valid story, I would say probably the latter. So she was unwise perhaps, but hardly guilty of a hate crime.
Just because Iran is not run by very nice people, does that mean that we should believe every story we believe about Iran? Obviously not.
Is Iran a country run by the sort of people that I would waste one second of my life trying to defend from fair criticism though? No.
Good points well put. I must admit when i first saw the thread i initially thought she was a troll (in the internet sense that is) but wasn't sure. Having looked at some of the other threads i realise that is not the case. Perhaps a misunderstanding on all sides and an assumption that someone disagreeing with you means it personally rather than a criticism of the content.
The amnesty international report you refer is quoted quite a lot-rather selectively though here is the full text.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty ... since-1990
Iran does lead but
Since 1990 Amnesty International has documented 59 executions of child offenders in 10 countries: Afghanistan (extrajudicially by the Taleban), China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the USA and Yemen. Several of these countries have changed their laws to exclude the practice. Executions of child offenders represent a tiny fraction of the total of executions worldwide recorded by Amnesty International each year. The USA and Iran have each executed more child offenders than the other eight countries combined and Iran has now exceeded the USA's total since 1990 of 19 child executions.
USA nineteen Iran 23
or this older report
http://www.hrea.org/lists/child-rights/ ... 00110.html
Two thirds of the known executions of child offenders in the past
decade were carried out in the USA", the organization said. "It is clear
that the United States is the world's leading perpetrator of this
universally condemned human rights violation."
It was only in 2005 that the US supreme court finally banned child executions. There are currently over 2,000 children in US jails for crimes committed while juveniles that are there indefinitely without parole. The US has signed the international convention on the rights of the child but has yet to ratify it.
posted by galbally
Since President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took office in August 2005, government officials have increasingly used “security as grounds for persecuting independent activism. A set of laws within Iran’s Islamic Penal Code entitled “Offenses Against the National and International Security of the Country lay the groundwork for the government to suppress peaceful political activity and deny due process rights to those arrested.
--
The authorities frequently hold detainees arrested on security grounds in facilities operating outside the mandated prison administration, most notoriously in Section 209 of Tehran’s Evin prison. Detainees in Evin 209 are subject to violations of their due process rights as well as abusive treatment during interrogation and in detention.
Oh you mean like guantanimo bay not in the US? maybe that's where they got the idea.
Yet if I post like that that I would be accused of being anti-american and despite the factual accuracy many simply wouldn't believe it. Things are getting worse in Iran but that the majority of Iranians approve of child executions, torture etc etc is no more likely to be true than that most Americans approve of it in their own country. Yet until recently both thought it perfectly acceptable to slaughter a child. Yet unlikely tales of sadistic punishment in the middle east are believed without any discrimination at all and the assumption made that the character of the people is the problem.
There is enough real horror in the world without attention being distracted by e-mails and articles designed to stir up hatred.
posted by galbally
I would also suggest that a police force's ability to catch criminals and secure criminal convictions is proportional to the general population's clear understanding that you shouldn't act whatever way you like just because you think you will get away with it, and that there are such things as minimum standards of acceptable personal behaviour in a free, functioning society, that have nothing to do with how the judicial system operates. I would say that's one of the major differences between the 1800s and the present day, not the inability of police officers to do their job.
It is also dependant on the population supporting the police. That was one of the key aims in the creation of the modern police force. It's certainty of being caught and punished that matters.
Comparing moral standards today with the 1800's doesn't actually help. We no longer accept a husband's right to beat his wife, lock up the destitute, laugh at the insane or tolerate children working in factories. that used to be acceptable behaviour in a free functioning society
posted by galbally
Also in a more general sense, if you feel that Britain is becoming more Americanized and are concerned about it, I would suggest you try to help your countrymen and women to rediscover that they actually live on an island 21 miles off the north coast of the continent containing three European nations (one large one and two small ones united under a constitutional British monarchy) and not the 51st State of the USA, or at the semi-unified post-modern centre of a happy clappy global trading empire. And they do not always have to copy everything their American cousins do (in some sort of bizarre fait accomplit arrangement) in ordering their society, or continue with dismantling traditionally common sense British approaches to ordering society on the Island of Britain because of a collective guilt about the colonial history of the past.
Good luck on that one, you will need it.
:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Get Ready To Be Shocked
My responses are in black GMC
[QUOTE=gmc;768401]Good points well put. I must admit when i first saw the thread i initially thought she was a troll (in the internet sense that is) but wasn't sure. Having looked at some of the other threads i realise that is not the case. Perhaps a misunderstanding on all sides and an assumption that someone disagreeing with you means it personally rather than a criticism of the content.
The amnesty international report you refer is quoted quite a lot-rather selectively though here is the full text.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty ... since-1990
Iran does lead but USA nineteen Iran 23
or this older report
It was only in 2005 that the US supreme court finally banned child executions. There are currently over 2,000 children in US jails for crimes committed while juveniles that are there indefinitely without parole. The US has signed the international convention on the rights of the child but has yet to ratify it.
Yes, but this post is not about comparing the USA, or China, or Japan, or Nigeria or any other country that executes prisoners with Iran in terms of executions, its about Iran, and how justice is meted out to people in that country.
Oh you mean like guantanimo bay not in the US? maybe that's where they got the idea.
Yet if I post like that that I would be accused of being anti-american and despite the factual accuracy many simply wouldn't believe it. Things are getting worse in Iran but that the majority of Iranians approve of child executions, torture etc etc is no more likely to be true than that most Americans approve of it in their own country. Yet until recently both thought it perfectly acceptable to slaughter a child. Yet unlikely tales of sadistic punishment in the middle east are believed without any discrimination at all and the assumption made that the character of the people is the problem.
Sure, but again this has nothing to do with the USA, the original poster was British not American, and it wasn't a post comparing these two countries, why does everything have to brought back to the USA, even threads that essentially have nothing whatsoever to do with America, is it possible for an Irish citizen and several British citizens to have a discussion about say South Africa, or Iran, or Russia that doesn't end up back in talking about America?
There is enough real horror in the world without attention being distracted by e-mails and articles designed to stir up hatred.
Again I am not sure that's what she was trying to do.
It is also dependant on the population supporting the police. That was one of the key aims in the creation of the modern police force. It's certainty of being caught and punished that matters.
Sure and the biggest thing anyone can do to support the police is to be law abiding as an individual and also expect that standard of behavior from those around them.
Comparing moral standards today with the 1800's doesn't actually help. We no longer accept a husband's right to beat his wife, lock up the destitute, laugh at the insane or tolerate children working in factories. that used to be acceptable behaviour in a free functioning society
I tend to agree, it was spot who brough 19th century prison statistics into it, I was only repsonding to his points.
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Well, that's your call. :wah:
[QUOTE=gmc;768401]Good points well put. I must admit when i first saw the thread i initially thought she was a troll (in the internet sense that is) but wasn't sure. Having looked at some of the other threads i realise that is not the case. Perhaps a misunderstanding on all sides and an assumption that someone disagreeing with you means it personally rather than a criticism of the content.
The amnesty international report you refer is quoted quite a lot-rather selectively though here is the full text.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty ... since-1990
Iran does lead but USA nineteen Iran 23
or this older report
It was only in 2005 that the US supreme court finally banned child executions. There are currently over 2,000 children in US jails for crimes committed while juveniles that are there indefinitely without parole. The US has signed the international convention on the rights of the child but has yet to ratify it.
Yes, but this post is not about comparing the USA, or China, or Japan, or Nigeria or any other country that executes prisoners with Iran in terms of executions, its about Iran, and how justice is meted out to people in that country.
Oh you mean like guantanimo bay not in the US? maybe that's where they got the idea.
Yet if I post like that that I would be accused of being anti-american and despite the factual accuracy many simply wouldn't believe it. Things are getting worse in Iran but that the majority of Iranians approve of child executions, torture etc etc is no more likely to be true than that most Americans approve of it in their own country. Yet until recently both thought it perfectly acceptable to slaughter a child. Yet unlikely tales of sadistic punishment in the middle east are believed without any discrimination at all and the assumption made that the character of the people is the problem.
Sure, but again this has nothing to do with the USA, the original poster was British not American, and it wasn't a post comparing these two countries, why does everything have to brought back to the USA, even threads that essentially have nothing whatsoever to do with America, is it possible for an Irish citizen and several British citizens to have a discussion about say South Africa, or Iran, or Russia that doesn't end up back in talking about America?
There is enough real horror in the world without attention being distracted by e-mails and articles designed to stir up hatred.
Again I am not sure that's what she was trying to do.
It is also dependant on the population supporting the police. That was one of the key aims in the creation of the modern police force. It's certainty of being caught and punished that matters.
Sure and the biggest thing anyone can do to support the police is to be law abiding as an individual and also expect that standard of behavior from those around them.
Comparing moral standards today with the 1800's doesn't actually help. We no longer accept a husband's right to beat his wife, lock up the destitute, laugh at the insane or tolerate children working in factories. that used to be acceptable behaviour in a free functioning society
I tend to agree, it was spot who brough 19th century prison statistics into it, I was only repsonding to his points.
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Well, that's your call. :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
posted by galbally
Yes, but this post is not about comparing the USA, or China, or Japan, or Nigeria or any other country that executes prisoners with Iran in terms of executions, its about Iran, and how justice is meted out to people in that country.
I thought it was about the veracity or otherwise of that e-mail.
I wasn't trying to compare rather make the point that iran up until recently was not the worst culprit yet people were ready to take a report like that at face value as further proof of the barbarity of the middle east. The amnesty report is often quoted selectively. If child execution and imprisonment without trial are human rights issues in other countries why are they not in the country that points the finger the most? If you're gong to take the moral high ground you can't do it from the gutter. Yet one country is rightly condemned and outsiders will believe the people capable of the worst atrocities because they lack a moral sense because of their religion and the other is not. I don't believe the people of the middle east are by nature worse than we are, indeed civilised western countries have been known to imprison and execute children even until recent times.
posted by galbally
Sure, but again this has nothing to do with the USA, the original poster was British not American, and it wasn't a post comparing these two countries, why does everything have to brought back to the USA, even threads that essentially have nothing whatsoever to do with America, is it possible for an Irish citizen and several British citizens to have a discussion about say South Africa, or Iran, or Russia that doesn't end up back in talking about America?
Difficult. how can you talk about Iran as a fundamentalist state without mentioning how it got there. and whether current policy is making things worse or better.
Same with south africa-who supported apartheid and opposed sanctions on the grounds they should sort out their own problems? If you look at africa does the world trade orgnisation help- or hinder and who runs it?
Russia now is more interesting, the US will be taking a back seat on that one i think. I despair of the anti EU stance of some of my countrymen, not that that is perfect by any means. I occasionally bump in to an active member of UKIP. has his own lapel badge and everything in scotland he's rarer even than a tory but more fun to wind up.
posted by galbally
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Well, that's your call.
I'm thinking if starting the cardboard cut out party. just as effective as the real thing but cost less in expenses and salary. Would anybody spot the change?
Yes, but this post is not about comparing the USA, or China, or Japan, or Nigeria or any other country that executes prisoners with Iran in terms of executions, its about Iran, and how justice is meted out to people in that country.
I thought it was about the veracity or otherwise of that e-mail.
I wasn't trying to compare rather make the point that iran up until recently was not the worst culprit yet people were ready to take a report like that at face value as further proof of the barbarity of the middle east. The amnesty report is often quoted selectively. If child execution and imprisonment without trial are human rights issues in other countries why are they not in the country that points the finger the most? If you're gong to take the moral high ground you can't do it from the gutter. Yet one country is rightly condemned and outsiders will believe the people capable of the worst atrocities because they lack a moral sense because of their religion and the other is not. I don't believe the people of the middle east are by nature worse than we are, indeed civilised western countries have been known to imprison and execute children even until recent times.
posted by galbally
Sure, but again this has nothing to do with the USA, the original poster was British not American, and it wasn't a post comparing these two countries, why does everything have to brought back to the USA, even threads that essentially have nothing whatsoever to do with America, is it possible for an Irish citizen and several British citizens to have a discussion about say South Africa, or Iran, or Russia that doesn't end up back in talking about America?
Difficult. how can you talk about Iran as a fundamentalist state without mentioning how it got there. and whether current policy is making things worse or better.
Same with south africa-who supported apartheid and opposed sanctions on the grounds they should sort out their own problems? If you look at africa does the world trade orgnisation help- or hinder and who runs it?
Russia now is more interesting, the US will be taking a back seat on that one i think. I despair of the anti EU stance of some of my countrymen, not that that is perfect by any means. I occasionally bump in to an active member of UKIP. has his own lapel badge and everything in scotland he's rarer even than a tory but more fun to wind up.
posted by galbally
If only we could stop electing crooked numpties
Well, that's your call.
I'm thinking if starting the cardboard cut out party. just as effective as the real thing but cost less in expenses and salary. Would anybody spot the change?
Get Ready To Be Shocked
gmc;768461 wrote: posted by galbally
I thought it was about the veracity or otherwise of that e-mail.
I wasn't trying to compare rather make the point that iran up until recently was not the worst culprit yet people were ready to take a report like that at face value as further proof of the barbarity of the middle east. The amnesty report is often quoted selectively. If child execution and imprisonment without trial are human rights issues in other countries why are they not in the country that points the finger the most? If you're gong to take the moral high ground you can't do it from the gutter. Yet one country is rightly condemned and outsiders will believe the people capable of the worst atrocities because they lack a moral sense because of their religion and the other is not. I don't believe the people of the middle east are by nature worse than we are, indeed civilised western countries have been known to imprison and execute children even until recent times.
posted by galbally
Difficult. how can you talk about Iran as a fundamentalist state without mentioning how it got there. and whether current policy is making things worse or better.
Same with south africa-who supported apartheid and opposed sanctions on the grounds they should sort out their own problems? If you look at africa does the world trade orgnisation help- or hinder and who runs it?
Russia now is more interesting, the US will be taking a back seat on that one i think. I despair of the anti EU stance of some of my countrymen, not that that is perfect by any means. I occasionally bump in to an active member of UKIP. has his own lapel badge and everything in scotland he's rarer even than a tory but more fun to wind up.
posted by galbally
I'm thinking if starting the cardboard cut out party. just as effective as the real thing but cost less in expenses and salary. Would anybody spot the change?
I actually find that its quite easy to talk about Iran without mentioning the US, as its not America and its populaton are Iranians. Seriously though, you know its actually been an Islamic Republic since 1979 and not everything that goes on their since that time has got anything to do with what America is or has done, general geopolitics, or the colonial and post-colonial past. Some of its got to do with the people who run the place. In the same way that you don't instantly refer to the German Schilfen plan every time we discuss France, or the Austro-Prussian war any time we might talk about what happens in Vienna. I don't subscribe to this veiw of the world that everything begins and ends in Washington, no more than I believe everything begins and ends in Mecca, or Bejing, or Moscow etc etc etc. Thats a fundamentally incorrect way of looking at a complicated world.
I thought it was about the veracity or otherwise of that e-mail.
I wasn't trying to compare rather make the point that iran up until recently was not the worst culprit yet people were ready to take a report like that at face value as further proof of the barbarity of the middle east. The amnesty report is often quoted selectively. If child execution and imprisonment without trial are human rights issues in other countries why are they not in the country that points the finger the most? If you're gong to take the moral high ground you can't do it from the gutter. Yet one country is rightly condemned and outsiders will believe the people capable of the worst atrocities because they lack a moral sense because of their religion and the other is not. I don't believe the people of the middle east are by nature worse than we are, indeed civilised western countries have been known to imprison and execute children even until recent times.
posted by galbally
Difficult. how can you talk about Iran as a fundamentalist state without mentioning how it got there. and whether current policy is making things worse or better.
Same with south africa-who supported apartheid and opposed sanctions on the grounds they should sort out their own problems? If you look at africa does the world trade orgnisation help- or hinder and who runs it?
Russia now is more interesting, the US will be taking a back seat on that one i think. I despair of the anti EU stance of some of my countrymen, not that that is perfect by any means. I occasionally bump in to an active member of UKIP. has his own lapel badge and everything in scotland he's rarer even than a tory but more fun to wind up.
posted by galbally
I'm thinking if starting the cardboard cut out party. just as effective as the real thing but cost less in expenses and salary. Would anybody spot the change?
I actually find that its quite easy to talk about Iran without mentioning the US, as its not America and its populaton are Iranians. Seriously though, you know its actually been an Islamic Republic since 1979 and not everything that goes on their since that time has got anything to do with what America is or has done, general geopolitics, or the colonial and post-colonial past. Some of its got to do with the people who run the place. In the same way that you don't instantly refer to the German Schilfen plan every time we discuss France, or the Austro-Prussian war any time we might talk about what happens in Vienna. I don't subscribe to this veiw of the world that everything begins and ends in Washington, no more than I believe everything begins and ends in Mecca, or Bejing, or Moscow etc etc etc. Thats a fundamentally incorrect way of looking at a complicated world.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;768504 wrote: I actually find that its quite easy to talk about Iran without mentioning the US, as its not America and its populaton are Iranians. Seriously though, you know its actually been an Islamic Republic since 1979 and not everything that goes on their since that time has got anything to do with what America is or has done, general geopolitics, or the colonial and post-colonial past. Some of its got to do with the people who run the place. In the same way that you don't instantly refer to the German Schilfen plan every time we discuss France, or the Austro-Prussian war any time we might talk about what happens in Vienna. I don't subscribe to this veiw of the world that everything begins and ends in Washington, no more than I believe everything begins and ends in Mecca, or Bejing, or Moscow etc etc etc. Thats a fundamentally incorrect way of looking at a complicated world.
OK then. Without the iran iraq war and all that has happened since do you think a more moderate government might have got control by now? The islamists are not having it all their own way.
OK then. Without the iran iraq war and all that has happened since do you think a more moderate government might have got control by now? The islamists are not having it all their own way.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
gmc;768515 wrote: OK then. Without the iran iraq war and all that has happened since do you think a more moderate government might have got control by now? The islamists are not having it all their own way.
No I don't, though its hard to be sure trying to second guess history, Iran is a complex society and one with a high level of civilization both in the modern world and historically so I don't think that its all one monolithic place, or that the current president or clerics are the only voices, but I think a lot of what happens in Iran is internal to the country and the politics of its revolution, which wasn't all about Islam either. I think if Saddam had won the Iran-Iraq war then things would have gone differently, but if the war had never been fought, well really who knows. But I would imagine that the people in charge have been very effective at staying in charge and will be very difficult to dislodge except by a general uprising, and even that is not guarenteed to work.
No I don't, though its hard to be sure trying to second guess history, Iran is a complex society and one with a high level of civilization both in the modern world and historically so I don't think that its all one monolithic place, or that the current president or clerics are the only voices, but I think a lot of what happens in Iran is internal to the country and the politics of its revolution, which wasn't all about Islam either. I think if Saddam had won the Iran-Iraq war then things would have gone differently, but if the war had never been fought, well really who knows. But I would imagine that the people in charge have been very effective at staying in charge and will be very difficult to dislodge except by a general uprising, and even that is not guarenteed to work.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
gmc;768515 wrote: OK then. Without the iran iraq war and all that has happened since do you think a more moderate government might have got control by now? The islamists are not having it all their own way.
Also, its important to point out that it was Saddam Hussain who got his country into the Iran-Iraq war all by himself, the US and the West were just happy to support him.
Also, its important to point out that it was Saddam Hussain who got his country into the Iran-Iraq war all by himself, the US and the West were just happy to support him.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Get Ready To Be Shocked
Galbally;768530 wrote: Also, its important to point out that it was Saddam Hussain who got his country into the Iran-Iraq war all by himself, the US and the West were just happy to support him.
Would he have done it if they hadn't? How did he end up in power anyway.
I think if Saddam had won the Iran-Iraq war then things would have gone differently, but if the war had never been fought, well really who knows. But I would imagine that the people in charge have been very effective at staying in charge and will be very difficult to dislodge except by a general uprising, and even that is not guarenteed to work.
Not so sure about that. They do have elections and you did have a politically aware populace. One of the things that makes it easy for an extreme govt to keep power is if it is attacked from outside and then also isolated from the outside world. Left alone religious fundamentalist governments sooner or later **** off the people. being under attack from outsiders makes it easier for them.
Would he have done it if they hadn't? How did he end up in power anyway.
I think if Saddam had won the Iran-Iraq war then things would have gone differently, but if the war had never been fought, well really who knows. But I would imagine that the people in charge have been very effective at staying in charge and will be very difficult to dislodge except by a general uprising, and even that is not guarenteed to work.
Not so sure about that. They do have elections and you did have a politically aware populace. One of the things that makes it easy for an extreme govt to keep power is if it is attacked from outside and then also isolated from the outside world. Left alone religious fundamentalist governments sooner or later **** off the people. being under attack from outsiders makes it easier for them.