IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Yet again the law is being an ***!
Alfred Einstein
post Oct 24 2009, 08:51 AM
Post #21


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 20-October 09
Member No.: 425



QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 24 2009, 09:44 AM) *
Because of the filth this bloke downloaded, there is a victim somewhere being filmed!


Yeah yeah yeah. I know all that. Buy a quarter of hash and you're quite possibly supporting the same thing. Should people be imprisoned for that as well?

Yup. Dirty old bugger without a doubt. Deserves the humiliation. Sticking the guy in prison, however, would be totally pointless other than to make "outraged of Newbury" feel better about his/herself.

Good decision by the judge to apply a bit of common sense.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Oct 24 2009, 09:42 AM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Alfred Einstein @ Oct 24 2009, 09:51 AM) *
Yeah yeah yeah. I know all that. Buy a quarter of hash and you're quite possibly supporting the same thing. Should people be imprisoned for that as well?

1 It could be your little daughter on the Internet.
2 I don't buy that muck either and those that do are helping to submit countries to deprivation.

QUOTE (Alfred Einstein @ Oct 24 2009, 09:51 AM) *
Good decision by the judge to apply a bit of common sense.

The cynical side of feels it is more likely an out of touch judge, or a mutual member of the same lodge, than the application of common sense.

See you latter troll-of-the-day. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Oct 24 2009, 10:39 AM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 24 2009, 10:42 AM) *
See you latter troll-of-the-day. wink.gif

Why be offensive and call him a troll just for putting the other side of the argument? I thought this was supposed to be a forum for (intelligent) debate. Or should someone be censored for having an opinion that's different from yours?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Oct 24 2009, 10:57 AM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (JeffG @ Oct 24 2009, 11:39 AM) *
Why be offensive and call him a troll just for putting the other side of the argument? I thought this was supposed to be a forum for (intelligent) debate. Or should someone be censored for having an opinion that's different from yours?



I agree. We are all entitled to our opinion without being insulted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Oct 24 2009, 11:13 AM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (JeffG @ Oct 24 2009, 11:39 AM) *
Why be offensive and call him a troll just for putting the other side of the argument? I thought this was supposed to be a forum for (intelligent) debate. Or should someone be censored for having an opinion that's different from yours?

Who said anything about censure? Where did I say he shouldn't post? angry.gif

I just said I think he's a troll. His behaviour was disrespectful and clearly designed to inflame, I never said anything about he shouldn't be entitled to state his opinion. angry.gif

But spare a thought, for those people who's and sons and daughters have been victims of those that post these vulgar pictures and the people that visit these sites (paying for it mind) encouraging more! How offensive is that!!! angry.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alfred Einstein
post Oct 24 2009, 11:15 AM
Post #26


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 20-October 09
Member No.: 425



QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 24 2009, 10:42 AM) *
1 It could be your little daughter on the Internet.


Sure. Could be. An evil trade run by evil people - people who couldn't give a toss one way or the other what happens to Colin Flett of Baydon. These are the people for whom prison sentences would be appropriate.

What the guy did is wrong. He's been shamed by by. He's been totally humiliated by it. But he hasn't actually done anything to anyone. He hasn't directly harmed children, and he's now, rightly, on a sex offenders list.

I think some perspective is needed here. There's a difference between downloading pictures and actually going out and molesting children. Is there an indication that he will ever molest children? No more than suggesting anyone who downloads pornography is a rapist, surely?

It's all well and good ranting and raving and getting on a moral high-horse about this, but some perspective is needed surely? The guy downloading this stuff may well need watching, as he will now be, but the people uploading the stuff are where resources need to be directed.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Oct 24 2009, 11:30 AM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Alfred Einstein @ Oct 24 2009, 12:15 PM) *
It's all well and good ranting and raving and getting on a moral high-horse about this, but some perspective is needed surely? The guy downloading this stuff may well need watching, as he will now be, but the people uploading the stuff are where resources need to be directed.


If people didn't download it, people wouldn't upload it (for cash)!

This isn't about moral-high grounding, I'm no saint, but what this bloke did is the thin end of the wedge and for me child pornography is the pits.

The other thing I'd say is, coming bursting on to a forum flippantly describing a paedophile as simply a dirt old man, isn't going to win votes, not that I suggest you were, but you could have put it more sensitively than you did. It is a very emotive subject...

...that and calling someone a troll, which, it seems to JeffG, is even worse! rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Bill1_*
post Oct 24 2009, 11:53 AM
Post #28





Guests






QUOTE (Alfred Einstein @ Oct 24 2009, 09:26 AM) *
Well I'm clearly not as clever as my smarter relative, because I'm sure the heading of that article says he was "making" child porn, yet as far as I can see there's nothing in the rest of the piece to substantiate that.

In which case, he just downloaded images. A rather sordid thing to be doing I have to admit, but on its own surely not worthy of a custodial sentence. Plus it was mainly low level stuff.

Yup. A bit of a dirty old sod without a doubt, but hardly worth building a new prison for is it? It's not as if he's been outside the school gates waving his todger at the pre-teens after all.



Not yet he isn't!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Oct 24 2009, 06:10 PM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Interesting debate - which seems to centre on the idea that this has to stop or the offender will do worse, far worse - the thin end of the wedge...umm...might be worth looking at the smaller end of some other wedges whilst we are at it. Drunken behaviour Saturdays nights in town, Anti Social behaviour and so on, need I go further?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Oct 24 2009, 06:42 PM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 24 2009, 12:13 PM) *
Who said anything about censure?

(Just spotted this.) Nobody. I said "censored" not "censured" which are two entirely different words.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Alfred Einstein
post Oct 24 2009, 09:13 PM
Post #31


Member
**

Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 20-October 09
Member No.: 425



QUOTE (Bill1 @ Oct 24 2009, 12:53 PM) *
Not yet he isn't!


Which is why he isn't in prison.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Oct 25 2009, 08:40 AM
Post #32


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (JeffG @ Oct 24 2009, 06:42 PM) *
(Just spotted this.) Nobody. I said "censored" not "censured" which are two entirely different words.

I wonder which one you meant! It looks like you and I used the wrong one! wink.gif

QUOTE (Alfred Einstein @ Oct 24 2009, 09:13 PM) *
Which is why he isn't in prison.

Meanwhile, yours and our children are being photographed in pornographic pictures and if that's not bad enough, making money from it. angry.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Oct 25 2009, 09:27 AM
Post #33


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



Hopefully, to conclude this off-topic discussion:
QUOTE (Iommi @ Oct 25 2009, 08:40 AM) *
I wonder which one you meant! It looks like you and I used the wrong one! wink.gif

No - I used the one I meant to use. A troll is someone who posts something just for the sake of winding someone else up, not to add to the discussion, therefore by calling him a troll, you were saying he shouldn't have posted in the first place (= censorship). That's what I understood you to mean wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th April 2024 - 06:53 AM