Renzatic on 12/12/2009 at 22:35
This isn't a quote from any of the above links, rather a comment I came across while reading the most recent:
Quote:
A deeply disappointing and partisan post. Guns are possessed for one reason and on reason only - to kill things. Mr Clarke carried this lethal weapon through Guildford with ammo. through Guildford, which is not so far from Hungerford, against all sense posing a considerable and mortal threat to the public. he deserves to be charged.
This man here? He's an absolute flat out no doubt about it grade A certified fucking moron. Apparently intent has nothing to do with anything in his narrowly defined world. It's all about "he's carrying a gun. What are guns used for? Killing people. He's guilty". Nevermind the fact he was carrying the damn thing to the police to turn it in. It doesn't matter. He had a gun. End of story. If most British people are so scared of firearms that they've trained themselves to think as such, it's no wonder the jury found him guilty.
Remember people. Intent. A knife is just a tool you use to carve meats and vegetables into divided portions until you intend on stabbing some poor guy in the neck with it. Doesn't mean you should be charged with intent to murder just for possessing one in your backpack while walking down a crowded street.
edit: Aw hell. I missed this:
Quote Posted by CCCToad
I don't know exactly what you guys are all up in arms about. This championing of stupidity is ridiculous.
Yeah, I'll agree the guy acted stupidly. He should've handled the situation with far more grace and care than what he did. Still, the worst he deserved was a good chewing out by an angry red faced cop. Not this nonsense with him being locked up, tried and found guilty for possession, and having 5 years of his life taken from him.
Swiss Mercenary on 12/12/2009 at 22:47
Quote Posted by CCCToad
The government passed a law, and this man violated it by taking the weapon into his possession. There is no excuse for ignorance, and this man deserves his sentence simply for not paying attention to the law.
In Soviet russia, it was illegal to speak or act against the Party. The people sent to the gulags violated that.
There is no excuse for ignorance, and all thirty million of them deserved to die, simply for not paying attention to the law.
And there were plenty of state sycophants like you who saw nothing wrong with that picture.
Do you understand the concept of an unjust law?
SubJeff on 12/12/2009 at 22:55
I think CCC was being sarcastic.
That or he needs to set himself on fire, right now, for the good of humanity.
Renzatic on 12/12/2009 at 22:58
It's so hard to tell when people are being sarcastic on the internet.
rachel on 12/12/2009 at 23:41
Yeah, we should totally have a thread about it to clarify the matter.
Renzatic on 13/12/2009 at 00:17
Eh, no point. Knowing how things usually go around here, at first it'll get bogged down in minutiae (what, pray tell, defines the sarcastic). Then RBJ will get pissed off at someone for saying something dumb, which will in turn Kolya riled up, and things will go weird from page 3 on to 41. At about page 42, RBJ and Kolya start doing that tentative truce pillow talk thing they do, which pretty much marks the death knell of any thread.
TTLG.
SD on 13/12/2009 at 00:24
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Though to be fair no matter how many times the Lib Dems try to revise their tax plans it always ends up pandering to the less well off (read, the majority oh just for votes? noooooo couldn't be) and punishing those that have worked really hard and just made it to "comfortable". An anti-meritocracy, if you will. I shudder to think what they
would do to our laws if they got in.
brrrrrrrrrrNice way to derail your own thread. Taxes, wtf?
I'm sure we're all keen to hear you argue how taxes on unearned wealth, like inheritance tax or mansion tax, are
anti-meritocratic, because they sure as hell seem like the exact opposite from where I'm sitting.
CCCToad on 13/12/2009 at 02:09
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I think CCC was being sarcastic.
That or he needs to set himself on fire, right now, for the good of humanity.
I was being sarcastic, at the expense of posters who loudly wail about how ignorant everyone else is. After all, everything bad that happens to other people is a result of how ignorant they are compared to your gloriously enlightened intellect, right?
Seriously, retarded laws exist. Just because something is the law doesn't make it any less retarded, and the fact that something is the law doesn't make it any more just. A lot of people who study law seem to forget that it isn't just about whether a law is on the books, but whether that law
should be on the books(or enforced the way it is).
My opinion is that mandated sentences suck. Normally, a judge can look at the case and weigh the offense against intent, but it seems the politicians screwed this one up.
D'Juhn Keep on 13/12/2009 at 03:50
Quote:
The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.
In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.
"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.
"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."
I feel sorry for him getting dicked by the letter of the law but he kind of is the dumbest guy alive for a) disturbing something probably used in a crime and b) PULLING A GUN OUT IN A POLICE STATION.
The alternate universe him who rang the police to report the gun who then came round to take care of it is probably doing fine
