Sometimes I'm ashamed to be British...

[Cleeecooo]

You misread my comment, I said most, for example, my parents met and married young, they've only ever slept with eachother, thus I met my girlfriend (now fiance) when I was 16, I'm 24 now and due to be married in 2013, and I've only ever slept with her. Thus by parents ideals/morals rubbed off on me.

Part 2 - My dad is very intolerant of gays (I say it that way because the word homophobic makes it sound like he's afraid of them, which he's not)

Thus, I grew up slightly intolerant of gay people, until I met loads of them and became friends, even lived with a gay guy at uni and realised that, as long as they're not trying to arse rape me (which based on the way I look, I'm quite safe) I have no problem with them lol.

My point - SOME of your parents ideals and morals may rub of on you

I can see where you're coming from i'm trying to say is that whilst they can rub off on you, they can also be easily changed. For example, the gay thing, you changed your opinion on that. I bet you had you slept with your gf and then grown to resent her, you wouldn't hesitate to sleep with another person (male or famale ) and what i'm trying to say is that although at an early stage, parent's views and morals may rub off on a kid, as they grow up and become independant, they'll decide on a set of their own morals. If they're the same as their parents' then it could be a coincidence

 

[Cleeecooo]

Possibly, she didn't have her child with her. I can't post a link due to the bad language.

think there was a thread or a link in this thread.

Looks like a different woman, but not sure. Is it about speaking the correct language?

 

[Ahleckz]

Oh there we go, the other great myth, 'it's a Glasgow problem' How about Neil Lennon being attacked on National TV in Edinburgh, and an Edinburgh Jury come out and say not guilty of assault, nevermind the bigoted attachment.

The CPS pushed the religious element, that was what the case hung on. It was a daft strategy by the CPS as they could have easily got an assault conviction but because they couldn't prove that there was a secterian element attached to it the jury were unable to find him guilty.

 

[Ahleckz]

Apparently there is another video of her being an obnoxious **** doing the rounds.

Is it this one, TANK?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3968897/Rail-racist-No2.html

 

[JUMPURS]

The CPS pushed the religious element, that was what the case hung on. It was a daft strategy by the CPS as they could have easily got an assault conviction but because they couldn't prove that there was a secterian element attached to it the jury were unable to find him guilty.

That is incorrect because they removed the sectarian element from the breach of the peace, the same could have been done for the assault charge, it wasn't.

 

[Ahleckz]

That is incorrect because they removed the sectarian element from the breach of the peace, the same could have been done for the assault charge, it wasn't.

Quite. It's an odd set of circumstances, and we won't know why the jury didn't remove the secterian element from the assault charge. I suppose if you really wanted, you could try and claim that the jury were anti Catholic as well, though I don't imagine you'd get it to stick.
At least it was a not proven verdict, rather than a not guilty one.

 

[JUMPURS]

Quite. It's an odd set of circumstances, and we won't know why the jury didn't remove the secterian element from the assault charge. I suppose if you really wanted, you could try and claim that the jury were anti Catholic as well, though I don't imagine you'd get it to stick.
At least it was a not proven verdict, rather than a not guilty one.

It highlights a problem in Scottish society.

Not proven is an abomination and should be banned.

 

[spudbynight]

http://www.crawley.gov.uk/stellent/groups/public/documents/report/int010698.pdf

Crawley has the highest teenage pregancy rate in the country (as well as a whole host of other problems). I've been there and it is a pretty crappy place if I'm honest

What's my point? You can't blame every problem this country has on immigration. But somehow DD will find a way...

Crawley - you will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

 

[Biohazard]

Still waiting on 30% btw

Good for you. I'm not your trick dog, I'll find it when I find it. Although another 15% from people adopting nationallity is not outrageous, particularly considering the intra-uk migration and wide Scottish dispora.

Oh there we go, the other great myth, 'it's a Glasgow problem' How about Neil Lennon being attacked on National TV in Edinburgh, and an Edinburgh Jury come out and say not guilty of assault, nevermind the bigoted attachment.

You have issues. I never said it was Glasgow's problem, but that it is far more accute there. The majority of sectarian crimes take place on the West Coast.

The verdict is a strange one but they decided it was not proven, they failed to convict him of a hate incited assault. Why a normal assault charge was not presented I have no idea. That was for the jury to decide. I don't agree myself and was saddened by the return, but I don't think it is in anyway indicative of institutional racism as seems to be the insinuation. I think it was poor instruction from the SCPS but it isn't the first or last time a court will return a strange or bizzare result. Perhaps 'not proven' needs to be re-considered due to the pitfals in that sort of decision and the lasting effect it can have.

And saying it is al great is going to break that cycle huh?

Yes, and it can be done.

What else do you do? Slide into negativity and leave it alone and allow it to worsen?

a 'vested interest' yeah, my vested interest is making Scotland a better country, so shoot me.

I find this strange given your hyperbolic stance, what do you propose?

 

[Ahleckz]

It highlights a problem in Scottish society.

Not proven is an abomination and should be banned.

I'll come back in March with an answer to that. It's my dissertation topic.

 

[Biohazard]

It highlights a problem in Scottish society.

15 people uncertain of a crime highlight a sectarian problem in Scottish society?

I think the man jumping out of a football stand does that itself, but the problem is no where near as widespread ingrained and permanent as you imply.

Not proven is an abomination and should be banned.

Perhaps, but it still has uses.

 

[JUMPURS]

I'll come back in March with an answer to that. It's my dissertation topic.

Good luck with that one lol

 

[JUMPURS]

15 people uncertain of a crime highlight a sectarian problem in Scottish society?

I think the man jumping out of a football stand does that itself, but the problem is no where near as widespread ingrained and permanent as you imply.

15 people not able to decide if someone got assaulted, when a couple of million people watched happen on TV, does show a widespread ingrained issue as i imply. That's taking aside weather or not the motivation for the crime was sectarian or not.

But lets look at it this way, an Irish Catholic was assaulted live on TV, and 15 people in Edinburgh, were we all get on great with everyone, wouldn't convict of assault.

Perhaps, but it still has uses.

Name one.

 

[JUMPURS]

Good for you. I'm not your trick dog, I'll find it when I find it. Although another 15% from people adopting nationallity is not outrageous, particularly considering the intra-uk migration and wide Scottish dispora.

You are the one making the claim that it was 30% of people living in Scotland were not born here. Two people have asked you for proof, you have failed to provide said proof. Instead you found proof saying 85% of people identify themselves as Scottish

You have issues. I never said it was Glasgow's problem, but that it is far more accute there. The majority of sectarian crimes take place on the West Coast.

The verdict is a strange one but they decided it was not proven, they failed to convict him of a hate incited assault. Why a normal assault charge was not presented I have no idea. That was for the jury to decide. I don't agree myself and was saddened by the return, but I don't think it is in anyway indicative of institutional racism as seems to be the insinuation. I think it was poor instruction from the SCPS but it isn't the first or last time a court will return a strange or bizzare result. Perhaps 'not proven' needs to be re-considered due to the pitfals in that sort of decision and the lasting effect it can have.

Hate to tell you this, but the metropolitan area of Glasgow alone makes up half of our population. Then you add in the rest of 'the west coast' and you soon start to see a pretty big percentage of the population is included in what is only 'a west cost problem'

As i have already said, the Jury could have have removed the 'hate part' of the charge like the did with the BoP. They seemed to understand it well enough for that.

Yes, and it can be done.

What else do you do? Slide into negativity and leave it alone and allow it to worsen?

So hang on, by thinking that there isn't a problem, is the way to help the problem??

I find this strange given your hyperbolic stance, what do you propose?

The first step to recovery is admintting you have a problem. It seems many in Scotland do not want to admit such a problem exists, or claim it is a 'Football thing' therefore it can't be tackled

 

[mithrandir]

Not sure if its posted already but just saw another clip of a muppet on a London to Manchester train.

 

[Biohazard]

15 people not able to decide if someone got assaulted, when a couple of million people watched happen on TV, does show a widespread ingrained issue as i imply. That's taking aside weather or not the motivation for the crime was sectarian or not.

So you sitting at home watching knew that it was a sectarian crime? Not just a crime?

Why the charge wasn't brought forward again once struck off or just the sectarian element wasn't either isn't clear but I suspect poor direction.

The third verdict in no way equates to a racist Scottish society. You just can't make that assertion in anything that resembles absolute terms.

But lets look at it this way, an Irish Catholic was assaulted live on TV, and 15 people in Edinburgh, were we all get on great with everyone, wouldn't convict of assault.

They didn't dismiss it either. That's the thing with the third verdict. I don't think you can in anyway relate this to an anti-catholic stance.

Edinburgh does get on great with everybody by in large, it's population double's once a year for that very fact.

Name one.

Plenty situations that I'm sure you could think of, it's double jeopardy that needs to go. That would then make the Scottish verdict far more viable which the removal would possible cause problems with the makeup of our juries and overlapping processes.

 

[Biohazard]

You are the one making the claim that it was 30% of people living in Scotland were not born here. Two people have asked you for proof, you have failed to provide said proof. Instead you found proof saying 85% of people identify themselves as Scottish

You're repeating yourself, and the longer you sit doing it the less time I've got to trawl through everything I've read in the last few months.

Hate to tell you this, but the metropolitan area of Glasgow alone makes up half of our population. Then you add in the rest of 'the west coast' and you soon start to see a pretty big percentage of the population is included in what is only 'a west cost problem'

As i have already said, the Jury could have have removed the 'hate part' of the charge like the did with the BoP. They seemed to understand it well enough for that.

And it's still a minority there, so really what is your problem?

So hang on, by thinking that there isn't a problem, is the way to help the problem??

Strawman argument.

I've asked you for a suggestion to resolve the problem, you seem to be unable to do so.

The first step to recovery is admintting you have a problem. It seems many in Scotland do not want to admit such a problem exists, or claim it is a 'Football thing' therefore it can't be tackled

Strawman argument.

 

[JUMPURS]

So you sitting at home watching knew that it was a sectarian crime? Not just a crime?

Why the charge wasn't brought forward again once struck off or just the sectarian element wasn't either isn't clear but I suspect poor direction.

The third verdict in no way equates to a racist Scottish society. You just can't make that assertion in anything that resembles absolute terms.

As i have already said, twice before, the Jury could remove any sectarian add ons they wanted, the Jury knew they could do this, as they done it with the breach of the peace

They didn't dismiss it either. That's the thing with the third verdict. I don't think you can in anyway relate this to an anti-catholic stance.

Edinburgh does get on great with everybody by in large, it's population double's once a year for that very fact.

So is it anti Irish? Is it anti 'west coats??

Plenty situations that I'm sure you could think of, it's double jeopardy that needs to go. That would then make the Scottish verdict far more viable which the removal would possible cause problems with the makeup of our juries and overlapping processes.

Plenty of situations when it is good? Name one if there are so many?

 

[JUMPURS]

You're repeating yourself, and the longer you sit doing it the less time I've got to trawl through everything I've read in the last few months.

Everything you have posted?

And it's still a minority there, so really what is your problem?

What kind of proof do you have that it is a minority? You dont even live in this side of the country.

Strawman argument.

I've asked you for a suggestion to resolve the problem, you seem to be unable to do so.

It isn't a strawman, and i have already said, if folk started admitting to a problem it would be a big step in the right direction. Also enforcing some of the laws we already have without the need to bring new ones in

Strawman argument.

It's not a straw man, it is my answer to you wanting a 'suggestion to resolve the issue' Sheesh

 

[Biohazard]

You are the one making the claim that it was 30% of people living in Scotland were not born here. Two people have asked you for proof, you have failed to provide said proof. Instead you found proof saying 85% of people identify themselves as Scottish

http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/stats/population-estimates/ms0410tab-1.pdf

http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/stats/population-estimates/ms0410tab-2.pdf

Do you care to apologise for your dreadful behavour and attitude?