BuzzJack
Entertainment Discussion

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register | Help )

Latest Site News
5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> A Three Strikes Law
Track this topic - Email this topic - Print this topic - Download this topic - Subscribe to this forum
3 Strikes Law
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 17
Guests cannot vote 
vidcapper
post Dec 3 2017, 03:53 PM
Post #21
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Dec 3 2017, 03:13 PM) *
Yes, VERY simple. Much like the Leave Politicians version of events that hasn't happened.

I don't see you as scapegoat for the 17.4m by the 43m who didn't vote for it! I just see you as adopting the same stance most of those 17.4m are taking these days: I don't care if it ruins us! It's a matter of principle!


But the point is - if we genuinely believed the country would be 'ruined' by Brexit, then we wouldn't have voted for it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Dec 3 2017, 03:59 PM
Post #22
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,580
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidsanta @ Dec 3 2017, 03:51 PM) *
Just 10 years when I was on jury service, it was still practically taboo.

And should still be now. Unfortunately, successive governments have pandered to the tabloids and changed the rules.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Dec 3 2017, 09:01 PM
Post #23
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidsanta @ Dec 3 2017, 03:53 PM) *
But the point is - if we genuinely believed the country would be 'ruined' by Brexit, then we wouldn't have voted for it.


Well, not true, I had a VERY sweary heated debate about it with my brother soon after the referendum - and he genuinely doesn't care what happens he so loathes the EU he'd rather see the UK ruined than be a member. So not 100% of people who voted Leave had altruistic reasons, sorry! (You see, my family and friends split 50/50 pretty much Leave/Remain, and for a variety of reasons, some of them racist, some of them not so I know you can't claim to represent the viewpoints of all Brexit voters, as we pretty much represent the same percentages as the nation)

We could always have "three strikes and you're out" (the country) to anyone fooled by the liars IF it all goes belly-up? 1. The Referendum result 2. Voting for the Brexiting Tories and one more chance and "STEEEERIKE!" Bye now!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Dec 4 2017, 09:49 AM
Post #24
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,580
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Dec 3 2017, 09:01 PM) *
Well, not true, I had a VERY sweary heated debate about it with my brother soon after the referendum - and he genuinely doesn't care what happens he so loathes the EU he'd rather see the UK ruined than be a member. So not 100% of people who voted Leave had altruistic reasons, sorry! (You see, my family and friends split 50/50 pretty much Leave/Remain, and for a variety of reasons, some of them racist, some of them not so I know you can't claim to represent the viewpoints of all Brexit voters, as we pretty much represent the same percentages as the nation)

We could always have "three strikes and you're out" (the country) to anyone fooled by the liars IF it all goes belly-up? 1. The Referendum result 2. Voting for the Brexiting Tories and one more chance and "STEEEERIKE!" Bye now!

I vote that they be sentenced to listen to Farage and Johnson on a continuous loop for eternity.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Dec 4 2017, 12:31 PM
Post #25
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Dec 4 2017, 09:49 AM) *
I vote that they be sentenced to listen to Farage and Johnson on a continuous loop for eternity.


Well it would reduce the pension problem as they all jump into the nearest chasm after a couple of years, though some of them might be masochists. That would explain a lot laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Dec 4 2017, 02:34 PM
Post #26
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Dec 4 2017, 12:31 PM) *
Well it would reduce the pension problem as they all jump into the nearest chasm after a couple of years, though some of them might be masochists. That would explain a lot laugh.gif


If only people got *my* humour like you do each other's. mellow.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 17 2018, 05:35 AM
Post #27
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


I decided to bump this thread up, as there was more I wanted to say about this issue.

QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 16 2018, 08:27 AM) *
3. I'm not interested in getting back into the 3 strikes argument in this thread


... so I moved it here instead.

QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 17 2018, 12:02 AM) *
2. Me neither. Because u can't supply examples of definitive justice. No one can.


What do you mean by 'definitive justice'?

My ideal would be a form of justice that persuades a convicted criminal never to commit another crime again.

And before you ask, I'm not thinking of capital punishment here - perhaps some sort of virtual prison could do the trick instead?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 17 2018, 06:10 PM
Post #28
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 17 2018, 06:35 AM) *
I decided to bump this thread up, as there was more I wanted to say about this issue.
... so I moved it here instead.
What do you mean by 'definitive justice'?

My ideal would be a form of justice that persuades a convicted criminal never to commit another crime again.

And before you ask, I'm not thinking of capital punishment here - perhaps some sort of virtual prison could do the trick instead?


we have virtual prison. It's called Community Service.

How clear do I ned to be? You seem to have some sort of ESP able to tell who is guilty of something and think newspapers have the same ability, and that every nation and every person in the world holds the same views on what constitutes a crime and what the exact punishment should be regardless of individual circumstances, or heaven forbid the notion that someone might be wrongly accused, cos that NEVER ever happens in a million years, and guilty people with enormous wealth never ever get away with it by hiring expensive lawayers good at finding loophole technicalties.

I imagine you are thinking of "God". Because I can't see how any human can possibly have that sort of power.

Well, of course, if you executed every person after committing a crime that should do the trick. In fact let's just execute them for looking like they were thinking about committing a crime, or just looking a bit too Muslim-ey and suspicious, or just believeing every accusation made by anybody about anybody else and dispensing swift justice without the expense of a trial. Saves on prison fees, keeps jobs open for English people. Sorted.

(PS what I'm saying is the world is complicated, shades of grey and you see things only in black and white absolutes, and I most certainly don't trust any human being who sees other people's lives as something they can absolutely rule on themselves because they "know better" than namby pamby liberals whinging about justice and rights.)

(PPS societies that have harsh laws do not get rid of crime, all they do is increase injustice. Stats available)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 18 2018, 05:54 AM
Post #29
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 17 2018, 07:10 PM) *
we have virtual prison. It's called Community Service.


Otherwise known as 'a slap on the wrist' rolleyes.gif

QUOTE
How clear do I ned to be? You seem to have some sort of ESP able to tell who is guilty of something and think newspapers have the same ability, and that every nation and every person in the world holds the same views on what constitutes a crime and what the exact punishment should be regardless of individual circumstances, or heaven forbid the notion that someone might be wrongly accused, cos that NEVER ever happens in a million years, and guilty people with enormous wealth never ever get away with it by hiring expensive lawayers good at finding loophole technicalties.

Well, of course, if you executed every person after committing a crime that should do the trick. In fact let's just execute them for looking like they were thinking about committing a crime, or just looking a bit too Muslim-ey and suspicious, or just believeing every accusation made by anybody about anybody else and dispensing swift justice without the expense of a trial. Saves on prison fees, keeps jobs open for English people. Sorted.
You really love melodrama, don't you.

QUOTE
(PS what I'm saying is the world is complicated, shades of grey and you see things only in black and white absolutes, and I most certainly don't trust any human being who sees other people's lives as something they can absolutely rule on themselves because they "know better" than namby pamby liberals whinging about justice and rights.)

(PPS societies that have harsh laws do not get rid of crime, all they do is increase injustice. Stats available)


As I see it, the problem is not so much rights, as responsibilities. Crime suspects are very quick to claim their rights, but very few give a sh1t about the responsibilities that go with them. This irresponsibility is why I support ideas like '3 strikes'. If criminals cannot be persuaded to go straight, then the best we can do is protect the public from them as long as possible.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 18 2018, 09:03 AM
Post #30
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 18 2018, 06:54 AM) *
Otherwise known as 'a slap on the wrist' rolleyes.gif

You really love melodrama, don't you.
As I see it, the problem is not so much rights, as responsibilities. Crime suspects are very quick to claim their rights, but very few give a sh1t about the responsibilities that go with them. This irresponsibility is why I support ideas like '3 strikes'. If criminals cannot be persuaded to go straight, then the best we can do is protect the public from them as long as possible.


1. Known as reducing expense of prisons and rehabilitating people for minor crimes on people who are no danger to society. Simple concept. Why do you not understand it?

2. Not melodrama. It's sarcasm. Quite a difference. If only someone could put a dictionary on the web? I did look for a great latin equivalent to help but drew a blank, sadly.

PS that is also sarcasm.

3. Crime "suspects" are guilty of nothing under British law. Innocent until proven guilty. You seem to have problems with that concept. I refer you back to my ESP comments. You seem to have gifts beyond us mere mortals able to tell criminals at a glance. Truly awesome talent you have. Maybe you should get in touch with the Police forces of Gloucestershire and help them remove all criminals before they do anything? While you're at it you could help the British Legal system work out what is the best way to build a whole new county of prisons to house all the people you decide would be the correct response to stealing a bag of crisps? I'm sure they could do with your help in coming up with a new system of punishment. Try writing to your local MP with the ideas. Or Christopher Chope, he'll be open to ideas.

PS that is also sarcasm. Sarcasm is a way of making a point by taking a useless argument inverting it to an extreme and pretending to be impressed to show how ridiculous it is.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 18 2018, 10:49 AM
Post #31
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 18 2018, 10:03 AM) *
1. Known as reducing expense of prisons and rehabilitating people for minor crimes on people who are no danger to society. Simple concept. Why do you not understand it?


I understand that it is not a magic bullet - what about career criminals who've been in & out of jail dozens of times? Anyone with common sense can see the only solution to *them* is to 'lock em up & throw away the key'.

That's the whole point of three strikes - to protect the public from people who have proven they *cannot* be rehabilitated, either through unwillingness or incapability.

QUOTE
3. Crime "suspects" are guilty of nothing under British law. Innocent until proven guilty. You seem to have problems with that concept.
Nonsense - I have never ever said criminals should be convicted without trial!

QUOTE
I refer you back to my ESP comments. You seem to have gifts beyond us mere mortals able to tell criminals at a glance. Truly awesome talent you have. Maybe you should get in touch with the Police forces of Gloucestershire and help them remove all criminals before they do anything? While you're at it you could help the British Legal system work out what is the best way to build a whole new county of prisons to house all the people you decide would be the correct response to stealing a bag of crisps? I'm sure they could do with your help in coming up with a new system of punishment. Try writing to your local MP with the ideas. Or Christopher Chope, he'll be open to ideas.

PS that is also sarcasm.


I would describe that as abusing sarcasm. rolleyes.gif


This post has been edited by vidcapper: Jun 18 2018, 10:52 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 18 2018, 04:12 PM
Post #32
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 18 2018, 11:49 AM) *
I understand that it is not a magic bullet - what about career criminals who've been in & out of jail dozens of times? Anyone with common sense can see the only solution to *them* is to 'lock em up & throw away the key'.

That's the whole point of three strikes - to protect the public from people who have proven they *cannot* be rehabilitated, either through unwillingness or incapability.

Nonsense - I have never ever said criminals should be convicted without trial!
I would describe that as abusing sarcasm. rolleyes.gif


1. No. For f***s sake, someone committing 3 minor offenses is not a danger to society. They are at best a minor nuisance. You seem utterly incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong and what is minor and what is serious, you just lump every human being into one homogenous "villain" category when the truth is if you were hungry, starving and society controls broke down you would be grabbing someone else's food rather than starve. That makes everyone a potential criminal given the right circumstances.

2. You said "suspects" abusing their "rights" to get "off". There is no such thing. You are either found guilty or innocent, and until found guilty everyone has a right to assumed innocence. It's enshrined in our law and copied throughout the Empire that you love so much. Plenty of innocent people get found guilty until the truth comes out. In your world you would just say "tough" and carry on seeing the world in simplistic terms.

3. I would call your comments that sparked my sarcasm pretty banal. See my comments above about the world being complex and your response being simplistic. Plus, it doesn't work. It's expensive. It causes real hardship for families. You still have given no list of crimes and punishments so I'll keep on with the sarcasm thanks. You make it so easy tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 19 2018, 05:38 AM
Post #33
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 18 2018, 05:12 PM) *
1. No. For f***s sake, someone committing 3 minor offenses is not a danger to society. They are at best a minor nuisance. You seem utterly incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong and what is minor and what is serious, you just lump every human being into one homogenous "villain" category when the truth is if you were hungry, starving and society controls broke down you would be grabbing someone else's food rather than starve. That makes everyone a potential criminal given the right circumstances.

2. You said "suspects" abusing their "rights" to get "off". There is no such thing. You are either found guilty or innocent, and until found guilty everyone has a right to assumed innocence. It's enshrined in our law and copied throughout the Empire that you love so much. Plenty of innocent people get found guilty until the truth comes out. In your world you would just say "tough" and carry on seeing the world in simplistic terms.

3. I would call your comments that sparked my sarcasm pretty banal. See my comments above about the world being complex and your response being simplistic. Plus, it doesn't work. It's expensive. It causes real hardship for families. You still have given no list of crimes and punishments so I'll keep on with the sarcasm thanks. You make it so easy tongue.gif


1. I'm not talking of 3 offences, but of dozens, over the course of decades!

I was not talking of a fantasy 'society breaking down' scenario, as you well know.

However, since you like out-there scenarios - I propose that criminal-loving lefties each have a hardened career criminal (or junkie) put in their custody for a month. Long before the end of that period, they will have their naivety blasted away, and advocate measures against criminals that would make even Trump squirm!

2. I prefer my 'simplistic terms' to your suicidally naive ones!


This post has been edited by vidcapper: Jun 19 2018, 05:40 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 19 2018, 06:22 AM
Post #34
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


Is *this* criminal enough for you?

http://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-585751...d-bed-wife.html

Mayor of Godalming is jailed for nine years for sex with 13-year-old girl - who even shared bed with him and his wife - after telling arresting police: 'Do know who I am?

Former Mayor of Godalming Simon Thornton, 46, has been jailed for nine years
When arrested in 2017 Mr Thornton was the town mayor in Godalming, Surrey
Thornton abused a girl for three years and even made her sleep in his marital bed

*************

I sincerely hope you are not going to make excuses for this vile p****.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 19 2018, 06:48 AM
Post #35
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 19 2018, 07:22 AM) *
Is *this* criminal enough for you?

http://dailymail.co.uk/news/article-585751...d-bed-wife.html

Mayor of Godalming is jailed for nine years for sex with 13-year-old girl - who even shared bed with him and his wife - after telling arresting police: 'Do know who I am?

Former Mayor of Godalming Simon Thornton, 46, has been jailed for nine years
When arrested in 2017 Mr Thornton was the town mayor in Godalming, Surrey
Thornton abused a girl for three years and even made her sleep in his marital bed

*************

I sincerely hope you are not going to make excuses for this vile p****.


Piss off. One actual criminal who has received the sentence he deserves according to British justice does not in any way give you any argument for allowing lawlessness. No doubt he will be on a sex offences register and monitored quite rightly for the rest of his life and his life made a misery. If you think the sentence is too light then you are free to write to your MP and campaign for harsher sentences for specific crimes. Or you can just whinge melodramatically to anyone listening about all criminals and how crap British justice is.

And as for your deliberately provocative offensive innuendo I think I have expressed my view on paedophiles many many times enough for you to know exactly what you are doing.

Someone else has made an argument which I find very convincing:

"@kumailn
2h2 hours ago
More
I have always believed that there is no inherent sense of right and wrong within people, that morality comes from a just society. An unjust society leads to immoral people. It’s how mass atrocities happen. What is happening in this country right now makes me believe this more."

Your way of dealing with criminals makes things worse. This is historically 100% obvious and you are deluded. You know of nothing of the legal system, your views are entirely aroused by Daily Fail headlines and propaganda.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 19 2018, 07:09 AM
Post #36
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 19 2018, 07:48 AM) *
Piss off.


Oh, very sophisticated response. rolleyes.gif

QUOTE
One actual criminal who has received the sentence he deserves according to British justice does not in any way give you any argument for allowing lawlessness. No doubt he will be on a sex offences register and monitored quite rightly for the rest of his life and his life made a misery. If you think the sentence is too light then you are free to write to your MP and campaign for harsher sentences for specific crimes. Or you can just whinge melodramatically to anyone listening about all criminals and how crap British justice is.

And as for your deliberately provocative offensive innuendo
What are you talking about? I am absolutely mystified as to what on earth you *possibly* find offensive about my sincere hope that you would not excuse him in any way? huh.gif unsure.gif

QUOTE
Your way of dealing with criminals makes things worse. This is historically 100% obvious and you are deluded. You know of nothing of the legal system, your views are entirely aroused by Daily Fail headlines and propaganda.


IMO there would be far less crime if the DM was in charge of the judicial system... teresa.gif


This post has been edited by vidcapper: Jun 19 2018, 07:10 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Suedehead2
post Jun 19 2018, 11:34 AM
Post #37
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Veteran
Posts: 36,580
Member No.: 3,272
Joined: 13-April 07
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 19 2018, 08:09 AM) *
Oh, very sophisticated response. rolleyes.gif

What are you talking about? I am absolutely mystified as to what on earth you *possibly* find offensive about my sincere hope that you would not excuse him in any way? huh.gif unsure.gif
IMO there would be far less crime if the DM was in charge of the judicial system... teresa.gif

No, there would be more crime. I’m sure even the DM would agree, if pushe, that people should still be tried before sentencing. If jurors think the potential punishment is excessive, they simply won’t convict.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 19 2018, 12:02 PM
Post #38
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 19 2018, 08:09 AM) *
Oh, very sophisticated response. rolleyes.gif

What are you talking about? I am absolutely mystified as to what on earth you *possibly* find offensive about my sincere hope that you would not excuse him in any way? huh.gif unsure.gif
IMO there would be far less crime if the DM was in charge of the judicial system... teresa.gif


It was the response you deserve, as well you know.

Your justification for holding your views is to hold up a criminal guilty of abusive a girl and then say "do you condemn it" insinuating that in some way that means anything you say holds any water on the grounds that no reasonable person would disagree. This is complete bollocks and is just intended to be inflammatory because you are incapable of holding logical conversations on things you find it difficult to justify.

You: "Well I think I'm right, so there, na na na na" and then go off to sulk in the playground....

It would be very easy to reverse it, and say anyone who doesn't believe in British justice and the British Legal system is a Traitor. An Enemy Of The People. Y'now Headlines you LOVE to bits. Moan for years about wanting the British to have control and then moan when they do. Basically, just moan either way. So, you would rather a millionaire living in the EU to guard his billions has control over the British people than people trained and a legal system that has been drawn up over centuries and which has been the template for most of the Western World...

As you clearly don't believe in democracy and experts anymore I think we have at long last established something useful to refer back to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
vidcapper
post Jun 19 2018, 02:00 PM
Post #39
Paul Hyett
*******
Group: Banned
Posts: 25,346
Member No.: 364
Joined: 4-April 06
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(Popchartfreak @ Jun 19 2018, 01:02 PM) *
It was the response you deserve, as well you know.


I don't agree - I am never abusive to you, so there's no justification for your abuse of me.

QUOTE
As you clearly don't believe in democracy and experts anymore I think we have at long last established something useful to refer back to.


I *do* believe in democracy - lets start with 23 June 2016...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Popchartfreak
post Jun 19 2018, 07:27 PM
Post #40
BuzzJack Legend
*******
Group: Moderator
Posts: 22,697
Member No.: 17,376
Joined: 18-July 12
   No Gallery Pics
 


QUOTE(vidcapper @ Jun 19 2018, 03:00 PM) *
I don't agree - I am never abusive to you, so there's no justification for your abuse of me.
I *do* believe in democracy - lets start with 23 June 2016...

It wasn't personally abusive. It was an expression of disbelief that you are reduced to inane attempts to link paedophilia with the argument for harsh sentencing as if (without actually saying it) you believe 9 years isn't enough and anyone who disagrees is somehow a supporter of perverts.

Why, for example, did you specifically aim your comment at me rather than say:

"Here is one example where I feel the law needs to be harsher"

as opposed to leaping to the conclusion (as you continually do) that all sentences for all people arent harsh enough and we are too wishy washy letting people off who YOU feel are guilty despite having no background knowledge of the specific cases or specific instances. And all the while hypocritically turning a blind eye to the illegal activities of people like Trump and Farage who personally I believe should be in prison for their crimes but who avoid it thanks to their establishment connections and wealth. You know, REAL actual traitors and Enemies Of The People, colloborating with fascists and Russians as we find more evidence coming out on a weekly basis.

Condemn them, show some continuity in your statements, and agree they need locking up, and you just MAY have a moral high ground to condemn all criminals. Failing that all you are doing is nitpicking because the damage they have done to lives far outweighs that of any petty thief.

The Referendum was fixed by alliances with Russia and lies. That's not democracy. That's propaganda. That's why you and all Brexiters are petrified of a re-run or an actual vote by MP's. Piss-scared of democracy, but sneakily trying to hide behind pretending to be democratic.

Full circle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post


5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 02:13 AM