If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
No you can't. Not directly, but I was making the point about how drawing on walls is pretty infantile.
However, I suspect that wasn;t what you meant. All I can say is that one age group, in my example, should know better. Wouldn't you say?
Define dangerous.
Yep, especially if the potential is based on a previous illegal act such as viewing child pornography.
:banghead:
You are posting some awful SHITE in this thread Mok.
Hardly the same thing is it? Its like comparing scrawling your name with spray paint outside Safeways as the same as the Sistine Chapel - after all they're both painting on walls...
Er? infantile in the context MoK uses it means lack of psychological maturity, not that they're literally infants (toddlers as whole don't break into train depots and spray the trains with paint)
Hmmn, yeah- I like it.
IP addresses can be traced quite easily. Obtain the IP lists from the porno server, and go back from there. You might have trouble proving who was using the computer at the time but it can still be done.
Do you know you definition of prejudice??? It's forming a view without knowing the facts e.t.c. e.t.c. These guys were found guilty of causing £13,000 of damage. Saying they are mindless, moronic vandals is not prejudicial. And no I don't just assume the kids I see in the street are up to no good, quite the opposite actually. I get on very well with the kids who hang around with nothing to do, because they behave themselves.
Quite different to mindless vandalism though.
That depends on the motive of the person abusing the child and taking the pictures.
If they are taking the pictures for their own purposes, and put them on the internet for others to view, then its fair to say that the abuse would happen anyway. The real kick is the actual abuse.
So how has society benefitted by locking up Langham?
There is no evidence that he has ever abused a child (in fact he was acquitted of child sex abuse), and he has had plenty of opportunity to do so.
I guess it depends on whether you think the wilful destruction of other people's property is a serious offence or not. I think that destroying #25,000 property has the same severity as stealing #25,000 property. I think destroying the lifetime's work of the volunteers at the East Lancashire Railway is pretty fucking serious. Far more serious than a drunken brawl.
I don't think that looking at images of child sex abuse is as severe as actually abusing a child, and anyone who does think that is an idiot.
I did say, though, if you actually bothered to read, that I thought Langham should have been jailed for what he did.
Out of interest, ShyBoy, what's your view on ogrish.com?
Because he PAID to view child sex images??? He funded a sick underground practise of kids being exploited purely for the profit??
Even if he did buy the images, the child would have been abused anyway, which is the really depressing thing.
How has society benefitted by Langham being imprisoned? And would society benefit more if he was imprisoned for longer?
Lets face it, I've seen you make hundreds of comments concerning paedos and rapists and how vile and nasty and how they should be castrated. If Langham watched a woman getting gang raped would you be signing the same tune? Doubt it.
Not really, the owner of the bar wouldn't agree with you if they had got into trouble.
BESIDES, still illegal... you especially know that.
Proved wrong? In what?
That mindless vandalism to the tune of £25,000 is acceptable behaviour and the people responsible should get a pat on the back? That destroying other people's property is only worthy of the gentlest of gentle taps on the wrist?
Hardly.
I don't erven know why ShyBoy dragged Chris Langham up, to be quite honest, as its completely irrelevant. But there you go. These two men should be in prison for a lot longer than they will be, not a lot less.
What the fuck are you going on about?
Are all crimes equal? So why are you trying to claim that they are?
These men have deprived Northern Rail, and others, of the use of £25,000. If they'd nicked that from the petty cash they'd be doing five years bird. I don't see why they shouldn't be.
That because the child has already been abused it somehow negates the severity of Chris' actions. That locking him up is useless because he didn't actually abuse the child. Balls. You get off on looking a children being abused, there's a chance you could do it yourself, you pay for images of children being abused you're funding the exploitation of children. He's a cunt, he deserves to go to prison.
Gentle taps on the wrist? Who said that? I actually said they should clean it up themselves and pay a fine. Stop talking shite.
It's not irrelevant, he was just pointing out the complete stupidity of the legal system in this country where two graffiti artists get sent down for 15 months and someone who looks at child porno only gets 10 months. That's what his point was.
This is coming from the person who thinks vandals are more of a danger to scoiety than people who look at child porn.
So you've said....several times.
By your own definition, yes it is.
Exactly.
I didn't realise we were in the business of punishing people for things they might do.
You take drugs. That makes you more likely to drive whilst under the influence of drugs. Should we punish you for that chance? Of course we shouldn't.
Aye, and you won't find me demanding his release any time soon.
The maximum CS is 240 hours, and I'm sorry, but I don't think that 5 weeks dossing about is sufficient punishment for someone who's caused £25,000 of damage, and destroyed some rare property.
If the law provided, say, one hour's CS for every £10 of damage, I'd agree with you. Make the scum lick it clean. But the law doesn't provide for that.
They don't need rehabilitation, they should of known in the first place is it wrong to damage private property. Prison will reinforce this message. If they do it again, it's back to jail.
Not if there out it wont.
Committing a crime = prison.
Therefore reinforcing the message.
If they break the law again, it's back inside. Are they that thick to want to spend their lives in prison for such a petty crime like this?
he didnt the last time i looked
and i don't see how anyone destroyed the trains, its not like they blew the fucking thing up or something there was a bit of bloody SPRAY PAINT on the side of it, boo fuckin hoo just leave it there, makes it look less shitty anyway
how someone can sit and honestly say they believe that someone deserves 15 months for a bit of graffiti is seriously beyond me .. do you have some of train fetish or what :crazyeyes
as for whowhere and his 'computer theories' .. don't open your mouth when you clearly don't have a clue wtf you're talking about :thumb:
That's what I was thinking.
it is not acceptable to destroy someone else's property. which they did, they caused thousands of pounds worth of damage.
What do you call it then?
who knows, maybe they have some sort of new super destructive spraypaint out that i havent heard about
its not the same as stealing / destroying it. they just dirtied it. its not broken!
yeah it might take £25,000 to clean it (btw, fuck knows how they got to that figure!), but still, it is not destroyed, as a lot of people in this thread have been calling it.