PDA

View Full Version : Can someone active at 'Poly please answer me a question?


Spartak
10-05-2005, 20:43:39
Is THIS (http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133074) thread going to scar me if I open it. Its entitled "Why does Britain arrest woman defending her home against pillagers?" and I'm struggling to draw up the courage to open it.

Cruddy
10-05-2005, 20:46:25
Depends what you mean by scar. It's got Ned in it if that's what you mean.

EDIT: None of the pillocks even know it was a school teacher taking out an airgun and laying down the law.

Spartak
10-05-2005, 20:50:32
Originally posted by Cruddy
Depends what you mean by scar. - As in upsetting my liberal sensibilities. It's got Ned in it if that's what you mean. I feared as much :nervous:

EDIT: None of the pillocks even know it was a school teacher taking out an airgun and laying down the law. Quite right. That's Dubya's job not the courts!

Vincent
10-05-2005, 22:21:09
poly bitch

Lazarus and the Gimp
10-05-2005, 22:40:59
Synopsis.

Kids put washing-up liquid on woman's car. Women fires air pistol at kids, and gets jailed (released on appeal, though the verdict is not overturned). Incidentally, woman did not phone police as they did not respond to her earlier 999 call about fish missing from her garden pond. Certain US posters feel she should have been entitled to shoot the kids if she felt so inclined.

The Mad Monk
10-05-2005, 23:14:50
Damnstraightkillemall.

Diss
10-05-2005, 23:22:54
I feel people who vandalize on your property should be shot in the balls and have it be legal.

Though if it's a person without balls, they should be allowed to do whatever they want (I've never seen a girl vandalize anyways)

MOBIUS
11-05-2005, 00:27:14
Some student cunt put a dent into the bonnet of my car last night - they certainly would've copped a piece of vigilante justice had I caught them do it!:shoot:

It amazes me just how many of these 'supposedly intelligent' students should have been put down at birth...:rolleyes:

Luckily the damage is minimal and almost unnoticeable after I pushed the dent back out.:mad:

Dyl Ulenspiegel
11-05-2005, 09:01:01
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Women fires air pistol at kids

Twat.

Whatever happened to real weapons? :(

Funko
11-05-2005, 10:37:12
Actually they are trying to ban air guns here apparently, some kid in Scotland got shot with one and died.

MRT144
11-05-2005, 11:52:13
i like vandalising property. its art

MOBIUS
11-05-2005, 12:05:43
Well if you vandalised my property, I'd vandalise your face!

MOBIUS
11-05-2005, 12:06:57
In fact you could substitute for the twats that vandalised my car!:shoot:

Oerdin
11-05-2005, 14:16:45
It's classic Nedaverse in that thread. He is convinced the police in Britain don't give a damn and that everyone must carry guns to shoot teenagers who put soap on someone's windshield.

The man is just in his own little world.

Spartak
11-05-2005, 14:28:51
I'm glad I haven't opened that thread then.

MDA
11-05-2005, 14:40:50
Someone parked their SUV in the apartment complex carwash all weekend, and someone else soaped every square inch of their windows.

So who gets shot in the balls in that case?

Gary
11-05-2005, 16:08:04
Originally posted by Oerdin
It's classic Nedaverse in that thread. He is convinced the police in Britain don't give a damn and that everyone must carry guns to shoot teenagers who put soap on someone's windshield.Ah : got it "right on the button" then. :)

Gary
11-05-2005, 16:09:12
Originally posted by MDA
So who gets shot in the balls in that case? Anyone daft enough to admit guilt, plus the inconsiderate parker too. ;)

MDA
11-05-2005, 16:43:27
I thought so. Its win-win.

Window soaping was a pretty measured response. Its a pain in the ass, not really damaging, and still makes a point. I've filed that idea away for future use.

Funko
11-05-2005, 17:07:31
Big fat own goal to the whole thread

"Re: Poly. Is THIS thread going to scar me if I open it."

Yes.

Sir Penguin
12-05-2005, 00:00:44
Originally posted by MOBIUS
It amazes me just how many of these 'supposedly intelligent' students should have been put down at birth...:rolleyes:
You need to play more D&D. There's a difference between Intelligence and Wisdom. :)

SP

Oerdin
12-05-2005, 00:10:55
Geek forum!

Cruddy
12-05-2005, 00:47:23
Originally posted by Funko
Big fat own goal to the whole thread

"Re: Poly. Is THIS thread going to scar me if I open it."

Yes.

Do you seriously think you can keep anyone from lurking at 'poly because it's not cool in your eyes?

Overestimate yourself you do.

MOBIUS
12-05-2005, 01:14:22
Yoda forum!

Greg W
12-05-2005, 01:47:31
Originally posted by Cruddy
Do you seriously think you can keep anyone from lurking at 'poly because it's not cool in your eyes?

Overestimate yourself you do. Do you seriously think you can keep people poking fun at the twats on Poly just because it's cool in your eyes?

Overestimate yourself you do.

Oerdin
12-05-2005, 02:36:32
To be fair there are lots of people at poly who are reasonably well adjusted. Then there's the Fezs and the Neds.

Cruddy
12-05-2005, 03:06:16
Originally posted by Greg W
[B]Do you seriously think you can keep people poking fun at the twats on Poly just because it's cool in your eyes?


Cool in my eyes? I called them a bunch of pillocks for a reason stated.

notyoueither
12-05-2005, 06:50:43
I think the problem is imprisoning the woman for firing an airgun into the ground while the vandals go scot free.

That is fucked up.

I approve of legislation such as Britain has, but I also think prosecutors and the courts should have some common sense.

notyoueither
12-05-2005, 06:51:59
Ned is right to laugh at the fucked up decisions that led to the woman being imprisoned.

Lazarus and the Gimp
12-05-2005, 08:11:51
Originally posted by notyoueither
I think the problem is imprisoning the woman for firing an airgun into the ground while the vandals go scot free.

That is fucked up.

I approve of legislation such as Britain has, but I also think prosecutors and the courts should have some common sense.

Just out of interest, NYE, what are the usual criminal penalties faced by kids putting washing-up liquid on a car round your way?

notyoueither
12-05-2005, 08:51:40
I suppose criminal mischief would carry some sanction.

notyoueither
12-05-2005, 08:53:03
It would be unlikely to put someone in prison, but so would firing an airgun into the ground.

Your point?

*End Is Forever*
12-05-2005, 09:05:19
Originally posted by MOBIUS
Some student cunt put a dent into the bonnet of my car last night - they certainly would've copped a piece of vigilante justice had I caught them do it!:shoot:

It amazes me just how many of these 'supposedly intelligent' students should have been put down at birth...:rolleyes:

Luckily the damage is minimal and almost unnoticeable after I pushed the dent back out.:mad:

Bet they all voted LibDem. ;)

Funko
12-05-2005, 09:23:50
Originally posted by Cruddy
Do you seriously think you can keep anyone from lurking at 'poly because it's not cool in your eyes?

Overestimate yourself you do.

Er... I post there relatively regularly. What's your point? :beer:

Diss
12-05-2005, 09:50:49
poly should be banned

Funko
12-05-2005, 09:51:19
Exactly!

mr.G
12-05-2005, 09:55:34
polyadelphous sounds boring

zmama
12-05-2005, 11:19:02
polyandry sounds interesting

Spartak@work
12-05-2005, 11:20:25
Dion't you eman polyandy?

mr.G
12-05-2005, 11:20:39
polybear sounds funny

Funko
12-05-2005, 11:21:59
Spartak is drunk at work.

Tizzy
12-05-2005, 11:22:18
Originally posted by Spartak@work
Dion't you eman polyandy?

That sounds many things but interesting isn't one of them

Spartak@work
12-05-2005, 11:22:35
:hmm: No chance.

mr.G
12-05-2005, 11:23:17
Originally posted by Funko
Spartak is drunk at work. my boss will be so disappointed if i was drunk.

Funko
12-05-2005, 11:23:52
So what, he'd never tell you off, too much of a wuss.

mr.G
12-05-2005, 11:24:58
Yaaaay he is a bit afraid of me, I'll punch him on the nose.

Tizzy
12-05-2005, 11:25:01
Originally posted by mr.G
my boss will be so disappointed if i was drunk.

My boss would be disappointed if I wasn't

Funko
12-05-2005, 11:31:12
Originally posted by mr.G
Yaaaay he is a bit afraid of me, I'll punch him on the nose.

Can you take a picture if that happens?

mr.G
12-05-2005, 11:55:33
yep, tomorrow after the dog hunt.

Funko
12-05-2005, 12:31:28
YAY! :beer:

Lazarus and the Gimp
12-05-2005, 12:50:03
Originally posted by notyoueither
It would be unlikely to put someone in prison, but so would firing an airgun into the ground.

Your point?

I'm trying to establish whether you genuinely think we should be sending the police and criminal courts after kids who put washing up liquid on cars, or whether you're just trying to establish some sort of point of principle to soothe your troubled soul.

And simply firing an airgun into the ground would not create any kind of criminal sanction here either.

However, firing into the ground in someone's direction and with the intent of scaring/threatening them is a very clear-cut case of Assault.

notyoueither
12-05-2005, 19:18:50
Assault can be justified when protecting your property. I think it boils down to whether what she did was reasonable. If she wasn't excessive then she shouldn't have been imprisoned.

Lazarus and the Gimp
12-05-2005, 19:37:47
And there you have it. At appeal, her sentence was reduced to a 12 month conditional discharge, whilst still retaining the guilty verdict.

Gary
12-05-2005, 19:54:57
Whilst I can understand the objection to what she did, seems to me that if society makes such inadequate measures to stop and teach the bad guys then it has to accept that it is responsible for pushing the good guys beyond endurance.

There's something perverse about allowing that and then coming down hard on the initial victim when they decide they can't see any option but to take matters into their own hands.

Concentration shouldn't be on punishing those who reacted by threatening their persecutors, but on preventing those anti social individuals from behaving as they do in the first place.

Lazarus and the Gimp
12-05-2005, 20:04:45
Have you ever broken the law, Gary?

MDA
12-05-2005, 20:36:56
So she got a stern warning. Fair enough.

Chris
12-05-2005, 20:51:42
A Howard Stern warning?

Japher
12-05-2005, 20:56:21
Do it agian and you have to take of all your clothes!

notyoueither
13-05-2005, 01:45:59
Originally posted by MDA
So she got a stern warning. Fair enough.

I think she actually served part of her sentence in prison before being freed.

Greg W
13-05-2005, 03:53:57
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Have you ever broken the law, Gary? I doubt that there's a single person alive (over the age of, say, 10) who has never broken the law.

Oerdin
13-05-2005, 07:35:42
There is bound to be some mormon some where.

Diss
13-05-2005, 08:01:32
I'm sure they have broken laws without realizing it.

Lazarus and the Gimp
13-05-2005, 09:17:28
Originally posted by Greg W
I doubt that there's a single person alive (over the age of, say, 10) who has never broken the law.

Exactly. Sometimes people need reminding of that fact when they're howling for the full weight of the law to slam down on average juvenile pranks.

Criminals are always "them", not "us".

notyoueither
13-05-2005, 18:25:12
The point is what was done to the woman, not the kids.

Lazarus and the Gimp
13-05-2005, 21:54:24
Which point? Do you think a conditional discharge was excessive?

Gary
13-05-2005, 22:01:00
Have you ever broken the law, Gary?

Hasn't everyone ? Not any serious one though. I believe I have a decent moral framework that I try to live within.

notyoueither
14-05-2005, 02:40:47
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Which point? Do you think a conditional discharge was excessive?

One point would be when she was prosecuted for this in the first place.

Then the point where she was imprisoned for it.

The fact that someone higher up the judicial food chain grabbed some sense and set her free is good, but she shouldn't have been in prison in the first place.

That would be the point.

Lazarus and the Gimp
14-05-2005, 09:21:18
In this country we prosecute people who assault others with air-pistols. The only circumstances in which we wouldn't would be if it was self-defence, and this wasn't self-defence.

So the first point is entirely consistent under our law. If it's legal to assault people with air-pistols in Canada, then she wouldn't be prosecuted there. That's up to your jurisdiction.

The second point was agreed by the Court of Appeal. Sometimes sentences get reduced at appeal. These things happen.

notyoueither
14-05-2005, 10:30:47
You prosecute people who assault earth worms with air-pistols? I'm sure she would cop to the murder of a few bugs.

What part of protecting property do you not understand?

Your opinion of your law is amusing, and that humour was shared by a good many Britons, not to mention the rest of the world.

Hense ned's thread.

Lazarus and the Gimp
14-05-2005, 11:07:31
My opinion of the law, seeing as I'm an LLB specialising in criminal law, carries a bit more weight, however. Your error (a common one) is that you're confusing assault with battery. The assault was on the kids- in wilfully intending to create the fear of attack in them, she was assaulting them.

My opinion of the law was also supported by the police, the CPS, the jury, the prosecuting judge and the court of appeal. So feel free to be amused, because you're still wrong.

As for "which part of protecting property don't you understand"? Which part of English criminal law do you understand? Under our law, you can't fire airguns at people to protect property. You can to protect lives, but not property.

notyoueither
14-05-2005, 20:15:26
The appeals judge agrees with you? He thought she deserved time in prison?

Your degree is a nice thing, Laz, but the letter of the law is not the point. The point is that prosecuting that woman was silly. I assume discretion is part of your system. I assume you don't have a bunch of robots running your justice system.

Lazarus and the Gimp
14-05-2005, 20:43:41
Originally posted by notyoueither
The appeals judge agrees with you? He thought she deserved time in prison?


You have this thread here, plus the one on Poly. Feel free to quote any post I've made in either one which says I think she should have been jailed. If you can find one, I'll send you a shiny penny in the post, because I don't think she should have been jailed. That's just another flawed assumption on your part.

However I do think she should have been prosecuted, and so did the Court of Appeal- they reduced the sentence, but upheld the guilty verdict. Quite rightly too. I'd say the 12 month conditional discharge she got was about right, though personally I'd have chosen probation coupled with psychological counselling.

Discretion certainly is part of the system. In this case they chose to prosecute. Given the recent spate of deaths caused by air weapons in Britain, I'm glad to see they did.

notyoueither
14-05-2005, 20:59:41
Yes I did assume you were in favour of her spending time in prison, since none of your posts have said that anything went wrong in this case. My reading is that you thought everything was peaches.

The really funny thing is that the Guardian mentions she was convicted of affray and possessing a firearm.

It is funny to me that she spent 5 weeks in prison for causing a distrubance while protecting her property, and that a pellet pistol fired into the ground while doing so counted as a firearms offence serious enough to bother with.

It boils down to being seen as an example of a case where British justice went silly.

Spartak
14-05-2005, 21:09:56
:rolleyes: No it boiled down to a case where a magistrate got the conviction right but overdid the punishment and that court of appeal did what its there for, which was to correct the sentence to something more appropriate.

Remember, sentences can go up as well as down...

Lazarus and the Gimp
14-05-2005, 21:13:14
Like so many other transatlantics happening on the odd Guardian article, you're not getting the full picture. If I read news of one more kid killed with an air-rifle pellet I'll puke blood. This is why the courts are coming down hard on them. I have no problem with this.

Air weapons are still legal here, but threaten people with them and you can expect to be arrested unless it's self-defence. Not property defence- we have different weightings on values here.

notyoueither
15-05-2005, 09:09:32
Well, we could go 'round and 'round indefinitely, but there wouldn't be much point.

However, I am curious. Have there been many deaths by pellet gun?

Lazarus and the Gimp
15-05-2005, 09:26:09
There's been a few this year. Here's the most recent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/4527211.stm

There was another a few weeks back, some would-be sniper was taking pot-shots at fire-fighters, and a ricochet killed a toddler.

Greg W
15-05-2005, 09:26:21
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
If I read news of one more kid killed with an air-rifle pellet I'll puke blood.I'd imagine so, reading that.