"Lenient" Sentences- rubbish

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

Yes. Education, mental health provision, drug treatment provision, a reform of the benefits system, proper job opportunities etc etc.

This is more like it...

Former Member

Scary Monster wrote:

I don't for a second propose that prisoners should be starved or denied reasonable access to basic facilities. What I do object to is that despite having done wrong they are getting their board and lodging for free when the innocent have to work to pay for it and that they get better/cheaper access to other provisions than others do.

I also don't see why anyone who is being paid a proper wage should have accomodation provided for them. I can go along with prisoners doing community service in exchange for their board and lodging, or a small wage in addittion to board and lodging, but not both. Maybe thats just me and my humble opionion.

i'm sorry scary monster but you realy have no idea about prison and the board and lodgings they provide for free!
until about ten years ago ...most prisoners in city jails spent twenty three hours a day ...twenty four if it was raining ...locked in a cell ...three to a cell ...in a cell built in victorian times just big enough for one man to survive in ...no toilets ...no running water ...no heating ...am i wasting my breath here?

Former Member

luke88 wrote:

In my opinion this is just simply giving criminals an excuse.

So having mental health problems is an "excuse" is it? A client of mine at work who has severe mental health problems and a heroin addiction who keeps shoplifting because he feels safer in jail than on the street is making excuses is he? Someone who can't get housing so has to live in a hostel full of drugs and dealers, someone who keeps getting his benefits cut for no reason except complete incompetence by the DSS and is so completely institutionalised that he'd rather be in prison, is making "excuses"?

I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt luke, due to your naivety and young age. Otherwise I'd just think you were an unthinking, unfeeling sorry excuse for a human being. Hopefully one day you'll grow up and see a bit of the world.

Former Member

mental health problems and poverty aside ...i agree with luke that ...if your caught trying to kill me ...then fuck them back off home should they be an imigrant ...legal or not.
you blew your rights.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

mental health problems and poverty aside ...i agree with luke that ...if your caught trying to kill me ...then fuck them back off home should they be an imigrant ...legal or not.
you blew your rights.

We are in agreement there. :yippe:

JsT

stargalaxy wrote:

Jim, whatever people think of me as an individual is none of my concern. JsT would admit himself there's no love lost between me and him at the moment. People have every right to question what I say, in the same way I have every right to question what they say

What the hell have I got to do with this?!

Give it a break, stop playing the victim for no reason.

(Sorry Jim!)

Former Member

JsT wrote:

Give it a break, stop playing the victim for no reason.

Well it takes two, maybe he wouldn't play the victim if you didn't 'play' the bully, eh? I find your signature rather odd to say the least, if it is a direct jibe at SG, which it reads as to me, then perhaps that's reason enough for SG to feel victimised. Not to say that SG acts blameless either, no-one likes a whinger. If you two really can't get along then the pair of you might benefit from the ole ignore button or at least not respond to each other and let it die...

S'not my place to preach or tell either of you what to do but from a personal perspective, I know as much about politics as I do about dance music (see creamfields thread) and like to pop into P&D for a nibble at the topics, squables and tension (not specifically from you two) makes posting a tad daunting...

JsT

katralla wrote:

Well it takes two, maybe he wouldn't play the victim if you didn't 'play' the bully, eh? I find your signature rather odd to say the least, if it is a direct jibe at SG, which it reads as to me, then perhaps that's reason enough for SG to feel victimised. Not to say that SG acts blameless either, no-one likes a whinger. If you two really can't get along then the pair of you might benefit from the ole ignore button or at least not respond to each other and let it die...

S'not my place to preach or tell either of you what to do but from a personal perspective, I know as much about politics as I do about dance music (see creamfields thread) and like to pop into P&D for a nibble at the topics, squables and tension (not specifically from you two) makes posting a tad daunting...

My signature was direct retaliation for his sig which contained offensive comments about me, which he appears to have removed himself.

Former Member

morrocan roll wrote:

mental health problems and poverty aside ...i agree with luke that ...if your caught trying to kill me ...then fuck them back off home should they be an imigrant ...legal or not.
you blew your rights.

That's not what luke is saying though. He's saying that any foreigner committing any crime, regardless of circumstances should be sent "back".

Former Member

Are you bothered by the loaded terminology more than the policy?

Former Member

both bother me tbh.
the policy more so obviously, but loaded terminolgy is incredibly irritating

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

Are you bothered by the loaded terminology more than the policy?

Have you actually bothered to read a word that I've piosted on the subject?

Former Member

If you think someone didn't get your point then feel free to explain it again

Former Member

Jim V wrote:

If you think someone didn't get your point then feel free to explain it again

She did get my point, she's just being bloody minded.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

Have you actually bothered to read a word that I've piosted on the subject?

Are you going to answer the question?

SCC, in this case, loaded language can be hard to avoid. Rabid and more than slightly moronic racists howl that "they" be "sent back" refering to men and women born in the same hospital as the racists themselves... However we are refering only to foreign nationals, and there are only so many ways that you can say send them home.

Former Member

Blagsta wrote:

She did get my point, she's just being bloody minded.

Prove it.

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

Are you going to answer the question?

Actually maybe you didn't read the other thread, so I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. My point is that to have a policy of sending all foreign criminals home, regardless of circumstance would make for a very harsh and inhumane policy. I then gave an example

Blagsta wrote:

Regardless of circumstance? Seeing as you like hypothetical examples, here's one - a gay Jamaican man. Has a drug habit, living on the streets, pretty psychologically messed up because of his upbringing in Jamaica where gay men routinely get murdered. Shoplifts to get something to eat. Should he be deported back to Jamaica where he faces probable death for being gay?

Blagsta wrote:

Let's fill in some more back story - the man had applied for asylum in the UK because he was in fear of his life in Jamaica because of his sexuality. He was refused, so ended up on the streets. Still want to deport him?

The point being that to treat every person in every situation the same is absurd and not something that our criminal justice system currently does. Luke seems to want to treat all foreign criminals as "bad" and not take into acccount circumstance merely because they are foreign it seems.


See this thread
http://vbulletin.thesite.org.uk/showthread.php?t=101247

Former Member

That's not what I asked, I know what you've said. I asked if you are more bothered by the loaded language than the policy, and to skip a step, if not, does the loaded language affect your response in any way?

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

That's not what I asked, I know what you've said. I asked if you are more bothered by the loaded language than the policy, and to skip a step, if not, does the loaded language affect your response in any way?

I think this rather proves my point about your bloody mindedness and refusal to read my posts.

Former Member

Not at all, if anyone is being bloody minded it's you, with your consistant refusal to answer direct questions. SCC answered it easy enough, everything has to be a fight with you, are you concerned that I have hidden motives?

What's so hard about just answering a simple question? It's got nothing to do with what Luke thinks, or what you think, so what's making it so hard?

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

That's not what I asked, I know what you've said. I asked if you are more bothered by the loaded language than the policy, and to skip a step, if not, does the loaded language affect your response in any way?

I think probably the language used does affect the way I read things to a certain extent, and probably others too. Thats not always a good thing, and I know I can read past that and the loaded language wasnt the reason I am against Lukesh point - far from it, but I do think in general, If people write like a nine year old, then it makes it harder to take the point seriously. Likewise if they write like a sun or daily mail journalist, I do find it off-putting to a certain extent, but I can still see what theyre trying to say behind it obviously.

This could be a seperate debate though couldnt it.

Former Member

SuzyCreamcheese wrote:

I think probably the language used does affect the way I read things to a certain extent, and probably others too. Thats not always a good thing, and I know I can read past that and the loaded language wasnt the reason I am against Lukesh point - far from it, but I do think in general, If people write like a nine year old, then it makes it harder to take the point seriously. Likewise if they write like a sun or daily mail journalist, I do find it off-putting to a certain extent, but I can still see what theyre trying to say behind it obviously.

This could be a seperate debate though couldnt it.

Indeed, in the thread on building more prisons when I decided to help Luke clarify his point of view I chose to think a little harder about the way I could phrase it that would avoid such negative connotations. Luke's posting style lacks such finnesse, which is why some of you probably accuse him of racism. However, when you know what he's refering to, in this case, foreign nationals who are also criminals it doesn't really matter...

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

Not at all, if anyone is being bloody minded it's you, with your consistant refusal to answer direct questions. SCC answered it easy enough, everything has to be a fight with you, are you concerned that I have hidden motives?

What's so hard about just answering a simple question? It's got nothing to do with what Luke thinks, or what you think, so what's making it so hard?

I've given you my objections to the policy. If you want to continue to be bloody minded and refuse to read my point properly, thats your problem. I have stated my opinion - disregarding circumstance is unfair and unjust. Regardless of whether they are foreign or not. I rather suspect that luke gets all het up about this particular issue though because he has a problem with foreigners.

Can I also add that I get rather sick of having to constantly repeat myself for certain people on here who are too lazy to follow a thread.

Former Member

For the last time, I know what you think of the policy, I'm asking you about your opinion on the language of discussion. You can answer or not from here on in. You're far too much of a pig-headed arrogant arse to try so hard with.

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

Indeed, in the thread on building more prisons when I decided to help Luke clarify his point of view I chose to think a little harder about the way I could phrase it that would avoid such negative connotations. Luke's posting style lacks such finnesse, which is why some of you probably accuse him of racism. However, when you know what he's refering to, in this case, foreign nationals who are also criminals it doesn't really matter...

Its also true that sometimes if somebody makes continual threads on the same types of topic, and its obvious they have particular prejudices and ulterior motives, then its really difficult to not take that into account when replying to someone.
If one person made a thread or post amongst many other different types of posts, and it happened to have what I saw to be discriminatory or prejudiced undertones or be blatantly about that, then its easier to just debate that point of view, but if one person is coming up with the same stuff again and again, it kind of seems like thats their whole bloody personality, and its almost impossible to not take their other posts and points of view for other things into account when debating with them. I am obviously using Lukesh as an example here because a large amount of his posts pretty much being about sending foreigners and asylum seekers back to their country of origin. Thinking its ok to treat people differently because they werent born here, pissed off with them celebrating their religious festivals etc, thinking that they get it easier than white people, etc etc. Ive seen all that stuff in his posts and yeah it probably does mean that when i see a new one along the same old lines, i just think ffs. I dont think it should go unchallenged, and im glad it doesnt.

Former Member

SuzyCreamcheese wrote:

Its also true that sometimes if somebody makes continual threads on the same types of topic, and its obvious they have particular prejudices and ulterior motives, then its really difficult to not take that into account when replying to someone.
If one person made a thread or post amongst many other different types of posts, and it happened to have what I saw to be discriminatory or prejudiced undertones or be blatantly about that, then its easier to just debate that point of view, but if one person is coming up with the same stuff again and again, it kind of seems like thats their whole bloody personality, and its almost impossible to not take their other posts and points of view for other things into account when debating with them. I am obviously using Lukesh as an example here because a large amount of his posts pretty much being about sending foreigners and asylum seekers back to their country of origin. Thinking its ok to treat people differently because they werent born here, pissed off with them celebrating their religious festivals etc, thinking that they get it easier than white people, etc etc. Ive seen all that stuff in his posts and yeah it probably does mean that when i see a new one along the same old lines, i just think ffs. I dont think it should go unchallenged, and im glad it doesnt.

Yes, there are other examples, aladdin for example is particularly bothered by israel, and disillusioned liked the USA a lot. It is possible that you're right that Luke may be racist, however in his defence, even if he is he tries hard not to be. Sometimes it's merely part of how and where you grew up. Many of the things he says are not in and of themselves unreasonable, just lacking in detail and occasionally understanding. Just like there's nothing wrong with being against illegal aliens (as they fail to pay taxes and undermine the economy in many ways) he confuses them with asylum seekers who have to go through a lengthy process to be approved, in the same way there's nothing wrong with the suggestion of deporting criminal foreign nationals, he has failed to provide conditions such as if we would accept an asylum seeker from their native country then we shouldn't deport them, etc.

Former Member

Fiend_85 wrote:

Yes, there are other examples, aladdin for example is particularly bothered by israel, and disillusioned liked the USA a lot. It is possible that you're right that Luke may be racist, however in his defence, even if he is he tries hard not to be. Sometimes it's merely part of how and where you grew up. Many of the things he says are not in and of themselves unreasonable, just lacking in detail and occasionally understanding. Just like there's nothing wrong with being against illegal aliens (as they fail to pay taxes and undermine the economy in many ways) he confuses them with asylum seekers who have to go through a lengthy process to be approved, in the same way there's nothing wrong with the suggestion of deporting criminal foreign nationals, he has failed to provide conditions such as if we would accept an asylum seeker from their native country then we shouldn't deport them, etc.

I see what youre saying and I do agree with you, but its fucking annoying to have to dumb down for someone because they dont understand, and get different groups mixed up,even if they are trying hard to not be racist and its just the way theyre brought up etc.
In real life obviously racist people are everywhere. I tolerate them - i dont actually debate their views with them at every turn, and I respect that some people have hideous views, and tbh, usually i just change subject or find a non confrontational way to get my point accross, of course its easy for me to be so blasé about it though because im not a black person who has discrimination all over the place.

In a debating forum you should EXPECT to get your point debated, ignored or flamed if you dont know what youre going on about. Its happened to me before. Got into a debate or two that was above me, and ended up having to bow out, or better still actually learnt some stuff.
Luke needs to be more open minded and think outside the box a bit more, but it just doesnt seem to ever happen on here.

Former Member

This again. :rolleyes:

I'll be as simple as possible.

I am NOT racist, I do not believe I am racist and I don't understand why many of you think I am. My opposition to asylum and immigration is light compared to the likes of the BNP and may other people. They are racist, I am not. I am very criticial and so is a lot of people - the issue has been slammed by the government - they have even said they have lost control - thy have even said they want to send foreign prisoners back - they have even said they want less asylum seekers.... etc so they must be racist... we are institutionally racist then aren't we?
The use of the word racism, I feel is abused and not used properly. You're racist for very slightly criticising the system or the whole immigration and asylum system. Rediclous and politically incorrect - mad!

Also I've read that many of you are complaining i sound like a tabloid journalist... well that's a compliment to me... I could get a job for the sun.

Former Member

SuzyCreamcheese wrote:

I see what youre saying and I do agree with you, but its fucking annoying to have to dumb down for someone because they dont understand, and get different groups mixed up,even if they are trying hard to not be racist and its just the way theyre brought up etc.
In real life obviously racist people are everywhere. I tolerate them - i dont actually debate their views with them at every turn, and I respect that some people have hideous views, and tbh, usually i just change subject or find a non confrontational way to get my point accross, of course its easy for me to be so blasé about it though because im not a black person who has discrimination all over the place.

In a debating forum you should EXPECT to get your point debated, ignored or flamed if you dont know what youre going on about. Its happened to me before. Got into a debate or two that was above me, and ended up having to bow out, or better still actually learnt some stuff.
Luke needs to be more open minded and think outside the box a bit more, but it just doesnt seem to ever happen on here.

To be fair, this is meant to be for teenagers, I think most posters in P&D are slightly above average in terms of intelligence and age. When it come to luke, I think a little patience would go a long way, rather than the distain he habitually receives. He does not bear it well, and so often makes things worse for himself. But I think things would be easier in terms of a debate if things were broken down and made a little easier to understand for him, and probably others, without loosing any of the intellectual depth.

Former Member

maybe someone could translate it into teenager language then? Text talk maybe?

Theres plenty of people younger than me on P&D who know far more about all this than I do, its got nothing to do with age.. Its patronising to ask people to break it down and make it easier for the less able people to understand. Yes I could understand that if it was on the main information bit of the site which is geared at youths, but the forums are open to all. I know it does get heated in here, and often nasty, but then again, I think thats thesite in general, not just the P&D board. I think it tends to be pretty unfriendly and cliquey as a whole. I both like and dislike that about it, but ive never been to another board which has the same attitude