Evil Inky Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 No winder dirs so much crime noo. Da whole point o prison in da first place should be da removal o foks rights, an a miserable existance as punishment fur dir crimes so ta mak dem (an idders wha might comtemplate crime) tink ageen. da waye it is noo, prison is much mair pleasant dan some foks current existence. Why wirk hard tae survive and better yoursell on da streets if you can just murder someane, spend a few years getting square meals, watchin TV an playin pool, dan sue fur a fine muckle lump sum at da end o it. It makes you wonder why the Birmingham Six made such a fuss about being imprisoned for a crime they didn't commit - apparently they should have just sat back and enjoyed the luxury of prison life. Or perhaps being stuck in a cell for 23 hours a day with a murderer and a bucket of poo isn't quite as nice as you make it out to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner72 Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Weel if ir a muderer yoursell you winna worry. As fur da bucket o poo, i'm only in me 30's yet i mind kertin oot wir bucket tae da midden every morneen. Mair aften if dir wis a lok o fok alang da hoose. Fok cerrys on noo as if its some kind o devastatin torture! Whit do you tink maks da totties grow! (edit - come tae tink o it, does dis mean i can sue da government fur a fortune? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evil Inky Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Weel if ir a muderer yoursell you winna worry.I'll think you'll find the Birmingham Six weren't actually guilty of anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutton Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Droilker, it is a simple set of rules to protect the individual (see the link somewhere above to read the rules). Britain has been signed up to those rules since 1950. quote] Yes Britain has been signed up to the International Convention, but it is the Human Rights Act 1998 which has been misinterpreted by courts against the interests of the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachy Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 All the human rights act does is make the European convention on human rights part of UK law. So, as I said, if we stuck to the rules we signed up to there'd be no problem. If the government breaks its own laws it is not setting a very good example! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner72 Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Weel if ir a muderer yoursell you winna worry.I'll think you'll find the Birmingham Six weren't actually guilty of anything. i tink we might o crossed wires here - da birmingham 6 wir indeed innocent, but its da guilty fok i'm spikin aboot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Styles Posted January 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Im for real democracy, laws should be fluid and just depend on the majorities rule as they see fit, having some ridged rule is un democratic and not progressive, let the majority rule as they see fit. After all rules can be used and abused, common sense cant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriebryan Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 ^ Indeed Styles. Let's bring back mob rule, lynching and knee jerk justice. Make up the laws as we go along, I say. That's true progression These rigid laws which we've developed over centuries of reasoned thought and debate are rubbish and patently don't work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now