MrSmith Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 I think the answer to this lies in the attitude you show to people who have committed suicide I don't show any attitude to them; I respect their decision to take their life, I do think they could do it in a les selfish way than jumping in front of a train or bus which inevitably involves other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sausage Dog Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 I don't show any attitude to them; I respect their decision to take their life, I do think they could do it in a les selfish way than jumping in front of a train or bus which inevitably involves other people. I agree there are less "selfish" ways, but do you really think that people in this position are thinking rationally? To agree with clarkson's comments, as you did, about disruption to train journeys being more important than human tragedy (not only that of the suicide victim, but also that suffered by the train driver) is what is an appalling attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Smith Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 It was a joke, taken out of context to be fair. Not that I would usually defend Clarkson but this time its been spinned out of all proportion. As I said, if he`d stopped at "having the strikers shot", that would have been rather unsavoury, but, for Clarkson, not a sacking offence. But to bring in their families, and the particularly unsettling thought that the strikers "should be executed in front of their families", well sorry, but he`s a sick sick man, and should be sacked. If he isn`t sacked for this, what would it take for him to be sacked ? I have to say I think there`s a significant chance he may survive, because, wrongly, the BBC may regard those of us who are outraged enough to complain, as being politically motivated. Well I`m not politically motivated, I`m not a striker, I don`t even work for the public services, I run my own business and pay loads of tax, and I still say, sack Clarkson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 I agree there are less "selfish" ways, but do you really think that people in this position are thinking rationally? To agree with clarkson's comments, as you did, about disruption to train journeys being more important than human tragedy (not only that of the suicide victim, but also that suffered by the train driver) is what is an appalling attitude. I've only known two suicide victims and they both appeared to be thinking rationally, both left notes and one even left the money he had borrowed off a friend. Both ended their lives without involving anyone else. Clearly if the train driver was in shock the right thing to do would be to stop the train and replace him, but if he didn't suffer shock and felt he could continue the journey why would that be a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Mr. Clarkson has an Xmas-targeted DVD to market, so of course he laps-up publicity. That's exactly why he said something outrageous. By fulminating and foaming at the mouth, his detractors play into his hands! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Mr. Clarkson has an Xmas-targeted DVD to market, so of course he laps-up publicity. That's exactly why he said something outrageous. By fulminating and foaming at the mouth, his detractors play into his hands! I won't be buying it I generally find him a little tame with his comments and usually a tad boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sausage Dog Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Mr. Clarkson has an Xmas-targeted DVD to market, so of course he laps-up publicity. That's exactly why he said something outrageous. By fulminating and foaming at the mouth, his detractors play into his hands! The words nail, hit and head come to mind. People like Clarkson live by that , the old saying: "there's only one thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about". He's probably better off being ignored, so that what I'm going to do. Bye bye Clarkson thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 Yes , i thought it was funny. anyone with a sense of humour would see it for what it was .................... A JOKE Is that a FACT. So you define a "sense of humour" as giggling at anything as long as it's construed as a "joke"? Or are you saying that because you "thought it was funny" did a hammy hamster we should all follow suit? Putting the political bullwaste aside I can honestly say I found it unfunny...that may have to do with Clarkson himself, as I find him irritating in the same way i find Celebrity get me out of this or Messed up factor. For the minority of embittered men with Cojones issues that found him funny? Well every minority needs a spokesperson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squiggs Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 This bloke says it all better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted December 3, 2011 Share Posted December 3, 2011 This bloke says it all better This is what I mean, I find him boring, but I don’t think he should stop doing what he does because many people probably find him funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now