Kaimani Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Nobody has 'done' that to him though, it's all of his own making. But he will be out in about 12 months and he's still young, so he still has plenty of time to make something of his life. He certainly can't blame this for the rest of his life if it is a screwed up. Plenty of criminals make a life for themselves after prison, no reason this chap shouldn't, and good luck to him with that. fair point. imagine though that we all got caught out for the stupid, and criminal, things we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 It does seem that way, unfortunately. But then I think there is a delusional element inherent in all of us that makes us lower our logical standards when listening to arguments for something we agree with, and then raising them for something we disagree with. I recognise this trait in me, and try hard to balance it out. Having lurked and posted here for a while now, it is obvious that a number of posters go out of their way to regularly, but correctly, tick off posters that make outrageous comments, but then remain silent when equally outrageous comments are made in the opposite direction from people that support their view. I wonder if it's the fact that many people actually support the cause of these students, or identify with the "decent family" background of the perpetrator, which makes them have empathy for him and make them think he was unfairly judged? Perhaps if it was some yob chucking a lump of concrete off a bridge onto traffic on parkway roundabout they would have less sympathy? One things for certain, certain posters will not be able to make comments in future without me thinking "mind the gap". you're right. it is easy to let go of some downright outlandish things people say if they agree with you. i always try to balance it out too but sometimes it comes to agreeing with the lesser of the outlandish depending on who's closer to you. there does seem to be a lot of extremes here, like on any other forum i guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 R You're going easy on this guy out of your solidarity for the students cause. If it was a country side alliance protest and it was Otis Ferry that chucked a fire extinguisher into a crowded area from a tall building i doubt you'd be so sympathetic. Wrong on all counts, it was somebody with no previous who had a moment of stupidity nothing more nothing less. I still think theres more deserving cases for his bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Could have, ifs and buts are not a good reason to send a message via a harsh sentence though. The crowd could have moved forward to be clobbered by the riot squad, but it didn't, why are you so willing to conjure imaginary events when the actual event never happened that way. His intention was to throw it at the gap, the news footage proves this better than the footage I provided, as he aims it, he takes a couple of swings and then lets go. The police officer had body armour and a helmet, your ignoring this because it supports what I'm saying. I'm ignoring the imaginary events because it didn't happen that way, regardless of the fact it could have. If the crowd had surged forward the defendant could have decided it too risky and not thrown it. The only danger that I can see is that the officer could have moved forward, or the extinguisher could have bounced in a different direction and took out another officers legs (who was chatting to two other officers and was oblivious to the fact it landed until it bounced past). Like I've said I'm not condoning throwing fire extinguishers off a building, but making examples of people that turn themselves in is wrong imo, it gives a message not to turn yourself in. Which does more harm to society than this one lad could ever have done. This is completely irrlevant, do you think he would not have done it if the police had not had armour on? He has never practiced throwing an extinguisher (I would hope) therefore throwing it at the gap is not an adequate defence. You are defending him for throwing a heavy object off a building at people. I accept the argument that he will probably not do it again but I do not accept that his actions could not have led to serious harm even if whoever it hit had riot armour on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted January 12, 2011 Author Share Posted January 12, 2011 You're going easy on this guy out of your solidarity for the students cause. If it was a country side alliance protest and it was Otis Ferry that chucked a fire extinguisher into a crowded area from a tall building i doubt you'd be so sympathetic. I don't support the students. Otis Ferry was fined £864 for drunk driving, he didn't even get a ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Rich Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 fair point. imagine though that we all got caught out for the stupid, and criminal, things we do. Its all a matter of degree. This idiot could have killed people. If it were up to me I would have brought a charge of attempted murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 Its all a matter of degree. This idiot could have killed people. If it were up to me I would have brought a charge of attempted murder. the attempted murder thing has been mentioned. you just need to go onto you tube to see some of the stupid things people do and yet nothing happens to them. if it's coz 'he could have killed someone' the police could just do the same for the idiots on you tube, but they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Rich Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 the attempted murder thing has been mentioned. you just need to go onto you tube to see some of the stupid things people do and yet nothing happens to them. if it's coz 'he could have killed someone' the police could just do the same for the idiots on you tube, but they don't. The things that may or may not be on youtube has got nothing to do with present topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 The things that may or may not be on youtube has got nothing to do with present topic. the point was that people do stupid things all the time. criminal? yes, sometimes, but the law should be wise enough to judge pattern, intend etc. you tube comes in coz you see people doing things that put lives in danger worse than this kid did, yet nothing happens. just like some people get caught and get away with worse. if you say he should have gone down for attempted murder so should anyone who's ever been in a fight coz we know you can kill people with a punch etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted January 12, 2011 Share Posted January 12, 2011 the point was that people do stupid things all the time. criminal? yes, sometimes, but the law should be wise enough to judge pattern, intend etc. you tube comes in coz you see people doing things that put lives in danger worse than this kid did, yet nothing happens. just like some people get caught and get away with worse. if you say he should have gone down for attempted murder so should anyone who's ever been in a fight coz we know you can kill people with a punch etc. How do you know nothing happens? How do you know none of those people ended up in the criminal justice system? Unless police and the rest of the criminal justice system can claim a 100% success rate at detecting and dealing with crime, it's inevitable some get away with it, that's not a reason to not punish those that are caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.