HeadingNorth Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Because in the balance of probability a bunch of mentally subnormal, hood rats with a penchant for swiped ipods and Nike's are hardly likely to stumble upon a way of eradicating the scourge of the medical profession. I think we're talking at cross purposes. You (and possibly the chap who first brought up taking kids into care) seem to be talking about juveniles who were involved in rioting, but I was thinking of what would happen to the children of people involved in rioting. Of the first group, those actually involved, I do see your point. They're not likely to produce anything constructive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just_words Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 An inner London police station is not provincial. Gathering at the police station was not a political act. Somebody had been shot dead. The people were asking for answers and weren't there on a political rally. The IPCC failed to provide info to the family and fed incorrect info to the press, verbally. There were no local football matches that day, only lower league matches in other parts of the capital. You are horrendously badly informed I'm afraid. I just read that a mum of two was sent to prison for 6 months for wearing a pair of shorts somebody had looted. She was was asleep during the riots. Should her family be evicted from their property? I know I heard I heard that most of the police officers from that station were policing football matches. I don't follow myself! Provincial as in the fact they wouldn't be able to pass information on. Yes that rally was political! As to your last question, refer to earlier answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I think we're talking at cross purposes. You (and possibly the chap who first brought up taking kids into care) seem to be talking about juveniles who were involved in rioting, but I was thinking of what would happen to the children of people involved in rioting. Of the first group, those actually involved, I do see your point. They're not likely to produce anything constructive. Single mum of two kids under 5 sent down for 6 months for wearing a pair of shorts She loses her liberty, her kids, and it seems her home. Totally disproportionate and wrong. Like you say it is hard to fathom what can be achieved by a sentence like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arguendo Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Personally I don’t think wholesale evictions will work, I do believe certain families who are problematic, deserve eviction, usually extreme cases of whole family being unsociable. However the emotional ‘knee jerk’ side of me thinks, how about allowing those who continue to justify & excuse their actions, being able to adopt a looter (& their) families, they could be evicted & move in with their adoptee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Personally I don’t think wholesale evictions will work, I do believe certain families who are problematic, deserve eviction, usually extreme cases of whole family being unsociable. However the emotional ‘knee jerk’ side of me thinks, how about allowing those who continue to justify & excuse their actions, being able to adopt a looter (& their) families, they could be evicted & move in with their adoptee. Who is trying to justify and condone their actions? I haven't heard anybody try to do that. Trying to understand why it happened is a completely different thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Chequers has lots of room, let them move into there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbow2411 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Single mum of two kids under 5 sent down for 6 months for wearing a pair of shorts She loses her liberty, her kids, and it seems her home. Totally disproportionate and wrong. Like you say it is hard to fathom what can be achieved by a sentence like that. Did I miss something? sent to prison for wearing shorts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arguendo Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Who is trying to justify and condone their actions? I haven't heard anybody try to do that. Trying to understand why it happened is a completely different thing. There’s been a vast number on other threads, who in some way or another have attempted to justify or explain their actions, whether that is through implying that boredom, unemployment, lack of opportunity or misunderstood are reasons behind their actions. Some have even inferred that the bankers, & MP’s expenses played a part in fuelling their desire to ‘protest’, when in reality that’s BS, The only understanding people need to know, is that those that were looting, thieving, burning & mugging are merely an element of youth & young adults who have no respect for the values of society, they believe everything should be handed to them on a plate, they are and always will be scum, not worth the paper their benefit cheques are printed on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just_words Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Did I miss something? sent to prison for wearing shorts http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/13/manchester-police-sorry-looter-sentence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just_words Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I've seen this clip a number of times, but I don't remember noticing the guy walking into a lamp post: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024396/London-riots-2011-looters-court-Primary-school-worker-postman-dad-boy-11.html It's at the bottom... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.