Woolwich serious incident

Xordium said:
One could but one shouldn't because it goes into very dangerous territory because then you have to define what is a "person" in quite specific and concrete terms than would exclude quite a few people and quite a few groups.
Click to expand...

A few lurking around GD would be excluded for a start, as I guess some form of intelligence might be a requisite.

Fus Ro Dah said:
What the hell is wrong with you? The guy beheaded a soldier in public... and you want to protect him? You obviously aren't British :mad:
Click to expand...

What on earth are you going on about, it's got nothing to do with protecting the accused, the prison guards are there to do a job, and in that remit there is no mention of them being judge & jury and meeting out whatever punishment to 'bad' people they feel like.

So if they have broken any rules then they should be suitably punished.

As much as the devolved denizens around here like to bay for blood, I for one am glad we don't have capital punishment and a system that at least tries to watch the watchers to stop abuses of power.

And if you want to change that, then go out and vote for the party who wants to bring in the death penalty and carte blanche for all police, prison warders etc to be able to beat up whoever they like whenever they like...or is that just the people you don't like? Hmm, not sure how we would word that one...

As a side note, I don't think they actually did behead him did they? If you look back at what was reported, it came from some eyewitnesses saying ' it looked like they tried to behead him', which I suppose when you are flailing machetes around, loping off extremities is an easy side effect. The point I suppose is that to me it is irrelevant, they stabbed him to death in the middle of the street and should be prosecuted to full extent of the law (and no, that thankfully doesn't include beatings, torture or execution) it's just the media can easily whip people up into a bigger frenzy by playing the muslim/soldier card and juicing up the details.

I wonder how many more people have been stabbed to death in London alone since this event, that hardly makes the national news.

edit: too slow...answered above already
 
Mr Jack said:
It is by doing this that we demonstrate how much better we are than people like Adebolajo.
Click to expand...

And also let people like Adebolajo walk all over you day to day because "It's not British to say bad things to other people". If the British population stood up for themselves and said something or dealt with Chavs or other people who wreck other people's lives there wouldn't be such major problems. People who sit back and say "I'm better than them because I just let them walk all over me" is why the UK is in such a state today with so much anti social behaviour.
 
Xordium said:
Some people would argue that when you commit an atrocity like this chap did you waive your human rights. It is to those I would address the point. I accept I could have phrased that better - let me try again.

Unfortunately when you champion human rights you have to start the fight championing the cause of those who do not respect those rights for other people.

Does that make more sense?
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, human rights must exist for all to be worth a damn and that does mean they must exist for those who would seek to deny them to others. That you have to "grant" rights to people who don't care for them when applied to others is an unfortunate but inevitable side-effect of having them in the first place and we should never seek to work to the lowest common denominator here - it's much better to try to raise standards for everyone and lead by example than to take a punitive approach by following the lead of people who we should never attempt to emulate due to their lack of care and respect for others.

Put simply if human rights aren't universal then they're simply rights for people you agree with. It's a much more powerful message to say to someone "you don't like how we live our life or the freedoms we extend to all but even when you attack us we'll stick to our principles and extend the same courtesies to you because they're worth more than temporary retribution" than it is to say "you wronged us so we'll do the same to you.

Fus Ro Dah said:
What the hell is wrong with you? The guy beheaded a soldier in public... and you want to protect him? You obviously aren't British :mad:
Click to expand...

I'm British and I'd like it investigated as well. Prison officers are not there to pass judgement on prisoners or to dish out their own retribution. We've got a legal system for a reason - if you start to take measures outside that then you devalue the whole system and undermine fundamental principles that support the tolerance our society is built on.

//edit I will however say that if your definition of Britishness is one that means we should never hold ourselves to account then it's not one I recognise or indeed want any part of.
 
Why give any reason to fuel ideologies you don't agree with? It then fuels our caveman ideology to beat people down (I'm not saying justice should not be served here) thus leading to their ideology to retaliate - see where this is going? For me, it's not about "being better" but allowing people to live.
 
Mr Jack said:
Born and raised, actually.

Yes, I want to maintain all that is best about Britain: fair play, justice, and so on. It's not this particular scumwad I want to protect: it's the principles and standards of British justice. His punishment needs to be decided by the courts not delivered by thuggish prison officers. A prison officer who batters a prisoner is not fit to do their job and should be removed from their post before they decide to batter the wrong person.

It is by doing this that we demonstrate how much better we are than people like Adebolajo.
Click to expand...


I also agree. If the only way to beat terrorists is to behave like them, what's the point of winning? Looking into the Abyss, etc.
 
Fus Ro Dah said:
What the hell is wrong with you? The guy beheaded a soldier in public... and you want to protect him? You obviously aren't British :mad:
Click to expand...

What if it was in private? What if it wasn't a beheading? Is there a threshold where this becomes okay?

A proper judge and jury will think about this for a very log time before coming to a decision (and they wouldn't be able to choose capital punishment).

Article 39 of the Magna Carta (something all Brits should be proud of):

"Nullus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur, aut desseisetur de libero tenemento, vel libertatibus, vel liberis consuetudinibus suis, sut utlagetur, aut exuletur, aut aliquo modo destruatur, nec super eum ibimus, nec super eum mittemus, nisi per legale judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terrae."

"No free man shall be captured, and or imprisoned, or disseised of his freehold, and or of his liberties, or of his free customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or in any way destroyed, nor will we proceed against him by force or proceed against him by arms, but by the lawful judgement of his peers, and or by the law of the land."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Officers should have helped and took it up a notch, scum. Can't wait until this backwards country lets him sue the public for £20k, only country where you get rewarded for murder. I'm pretty sure the Queen has enough power to order his death? Why doesn't she? :mad:

On the bright side, I see a shank in his future. :)
 
Omaeka said:
Officers should have helped and took it up a notch, scum. Can't wait until this backwards country lets him sue the public for £20k, only country where you get rewarded for murder. I'm pretty sure the Queen has enough power to order his death? Why doesn't she? :mad:

On the bright side, I see a shank in his future. :)
Click to expand...

I hope you're joking... Of course the Queen doesn't have power to order his death. All she does it bring money into the country she's a tourist attraction she has 0 power everything she does is for publicity.

We can not order death upon someone because **** would hit the fan if we did, we'd get a spanking by not only the EU but the UN. The last use of capital punishment was (iirc) 40 odd years ago, it will not happen.

Edit: I'm sorry but I don't get why people want him dead, yes he killed a British man, however he's British himself, I know that justifies nothing, what he did was wrong, it was awful! However what justice is served from him being killed? I'm sorry but it doesn't matter why someone is killed however killing a man for killing a man makes the person who ordered that killing just as ****ing bad!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom