- Apr 16, 2016
Well said Neil, I totally agree. The reason so many come here is that no other country would put up with their unreasonable behavior.
Oooooh - me & the missus had an argument about that yesterday. She told me off for putting the milk in before I'd poured the boiling water in.And tomorrows rant headlines
will be concerned with do you put milk in first or after pouring tea ?
Far too much common sense there auld lad, you’d never make an mp, but you’d get my vote all day long, and twice on sunday???I have had it with keeping thoughts to myself, of having to tiptoe around the issues and be careful what I say. Political Correctness seems to be another way of saying “Lets not talk about the real issues”, “Let's not have an honest, open and frank discussion as adults where we can say what we are feeling without rancour, anger or judgement”. So I am going to speak my mind. If that makes me a bad person, if that leads to me being castigated and categorised than so be it. But before anyone judges me let me say I don't think I am alone with the thoughts I express.
Shamima Begum. To me this case represents all that is wrong with British society, or at least the PC brigade part of it. Also what is wrong with those who seek to change or denigrate my country.
I find it ironic that people like her don't like this country to the extent of actually leaving and engaging with a stated enemy of it. But when things go pear shaped she suddenly wants to live here and avail herself of British Justice. Why do people who hate Britain suddenly find that they want to use our our justice system (+ healthcare, education etc.) and not that of the countries they love?
On that theme why do immigrants into this, a traditionally Christian country, want to change it to suit their beliefs. If you want to live in a country that is based on another religion then go and live there. Don't try and change ours. You are guests, welcome to become part of British society and culture with its history and values. You are welcome to follow your own religion, we are a tolerant nation. But accept that we are what we are, what our history has made us. We have created a land of peace and prosperity following our values, not yours. If this land is attractive to you then understand why it is so and be grateful.
Black Lives Matter. Of course they do, all lives matter. Racism is wrong. Slavery was wrong. But we cannot change history.
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
There is one certain way to reduce if not eradicate racism and that is for the black community, and others, to fully integrate into society. Forget the Uncle Tom mentality. Integrating does not mean being subservient or joining the enemy but does mean that all races should be represented in enough numbers to remove any chance of institutional racism. Join the police, join the armed forces, the fire brigade and any other organisation where ethnic minorities are under represented.
Of course this means education has to be valued. We know as fact that, generally, Asian kids do better at school than white kids and that black kids do worst of all. I cannot believe that this is an inherently racially based result. I cannot believe that Asian kids are more intelligent than white and both more than black. No more so than rich kids being more intelligent than kids born into a less wealthy background. Yet when the equality laws were first introduced educational requirements had to be removed from job adverts because such a hurdle was seen as biased against black kids. In this way we have officially acknowledged that black kids are less intelligent. If the BLM and equality movements are serious then they should be asking for educational qualifications to be reinstated. Then they need to tell their communities that they need to step up and show that they are as intelligent as any other race. That education is to be valued, not despised, that a lack of education is not a badge of honour. Role models need to extol the virtues and benefits of gaining a good education.
Slavery was wrong. But as I say we cannot remove it from our world history. Let us not forget that to some degree slavery was enabled by black Africans selling other black Africans to slave traders. It is easy to point the finger at the white slave trader. But somewhat uncomfortable to acknowledge the part played by black Africans.
So what do we do to put things right? One outrageous proposal might be to reverse the slave trade and give free passage back to Africa to any descendant of a slave who wants it. Let them voluntarily go where, without the slave trade, they may have been born. Does racism exist where everyone is of the same skin colour?
I rather suspect there will be few takers of such an offer. An acid test? Slavery was wrong. But it has enabled millions of descendants to be born and raised in a free, prosperous nation, be it US or UK, where by the sweat of your own brow you can achieve your potential. Where you have a judicial system that is the envy of many billions of people around the world and healthcare second to none. The enforced sacrifices made by the original slaves has meant that their descendants enjoy a lifestyle that may be unattainable in their “home” nation.
Knife and gun crime. Yet another stabbing report, this one from the Thorpe Park amusement park has my blood boiling. It is about time we stopped being nice and introduced sentences that are a real deterrent to carrying offensive weapons. How attractive would it be if carrying a knife capable of inflicting severe injury or death brought you a minimum sentence of ten years (served, not shortened for good behaviour). If using the knife got you locked up for twenty five years.
Similar if not more severe for firearms.
And drug dealers (possession with intent to supply). Death penalty as in Singapore? 25 years minimum?
If you do not want to be treated aggressively when arrested by the police then accept that arrest without becoming violent. Violent resistance means the police have to use extreme measures to subdue you. I have no sympathy for anyone injured while resisting arrest. Neither should the courts, politicians or the rest of society.
And as for Human Rights, these, apart from the very basics, have been surrendered by an individual as soon as they cross the line into criminality. If you chose to harm society (humanity) by your actions then you have no right to expect that your individual rights overbear the rights of humanity to a peaceful and safe life.
Personally, I think California have it balanced fairly well. 3 strikes and its whole life without parole whilst working to earn your keep, too.
So you think a person given a life sentence because his third crime was stealing food from a shop because he was hungry is a fair sentence. The food cost less than 10 dollars.
In most states of America the 3 strikes and you're out is only for felony offences and mainly ones with violence. In California they adapted the law to include misdemeanors like shoplifting.
Sentencing as a deterrent.
My opinions on this subject are driven in part by what I know of Singapore. In most years in Singapore there are no homicides committed using a gun. I believe that is because of the use of sentencing as a deterrent.
To understand this I think you need to look first of all at the punishment for murder and whether it acts as a deterrent. Many years ago I heard the following argument given by a guy called Adrian Love on Capital radio as to why the death sentence for murder is not a deterrent. He said murders can generally be split into three categories.
First is the pre-planned murder. As part of the planning the murderer will generally think they can do it in a way so as to avoid suspicion and or detection. Hence the punishment does not enter the equation as the murderer thinks they will not be caught.
Second is the terrorist. Terrorists see themselves as martyrs for the cause and are generally prepared to suffer death either at the time or as a punishment. Hence the death penalty would not prevent such murders.
Third is the crime of passion, that is carried out in a moment, when the red mist descends, when anger takes over and no thought is given to the consequences.
I personally would add a fourth and that is murder committed by someone not of sound mind, insane or mad if you like. This may be as a result of mental illness or caused by ingesting a mind altering substance.
In none of these categories would the death sentence be a deterrent.
Singapore though have looked one step prior to the murder and, in applying very strong sentences, including capital punishment, to actions that could lead to murder have eradicated if not murder itself certainly murder and other crimes using guns.
If you make the sentence for carrying the means to murder or serious injury (and I mean the common such as guns and knives) severe enough as in Singapore then you will remove that threat. These sentences apply to accomplices and thus in a way becomes self policing.
No doubt people will still carry out murders. But with intelligent use of sentencing the threat of being shot, the threat of being stabbed in an amusement park or hospital can be reduced.
Finally, Singapore have had the same party in power for over 50 years. As explained to me by a tour guide last year "Because they do what they promise to do". How often have we wished that of our major political parties?