Faaaark!

"Mad Harry? Yeah, he went into the construction game; he's holding up a
flyover in Brent Cross."
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a
I demand nothing of you except that you amuse me.

Folding@Home Team UKRM
http://vspx27.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/main.py?qtype=teampage&teamnum=47957

 

Andy Bonwick said...

You're probably right. I still get a huge kick out of driving stuff like
Mini Cooper Ss and E-Types, they float my boat because they are still
competent enough given the era they were built in. A good 1964/65 1071
or 1275 S will still do pretty well down a twisty B road against
something a bit more modern. I don't get the same feeling when I ride
production 'sports' bikes made around the same time though, I just get
frustrated at the gutless, foul handling, underbraked piles of shit.

 

I don't intend to speak for Champ, but as a member of the BHaLC in
good standing...
when personally threatened, 1 would have no compunction against
responding with Violence[1] to defend my property and person -
possibly extreme Or even excessive violence. So far that puts me level
With the vigilantes. Where I differ is that 1 Would not want to have
anything to do With Vengance Or any Violent measures /after/ the
event. I believe that such measures are undesirable in a civilized
society[2] and ultimately counter-productive.

1 realise that those affected by the Sorts of behaviour under Scrutiny
may well- and not unnaturally. feel different. Bat that is why Laws
should be framed and executed with a cool head. I think it's clear
that people's responses are intemporate, to say the least.

it's possible that I'd feel differently if l'd been the victim Of
sustained crime but I don't think that actually negates my point. if
I'm to say that other people shouldn't exact vengance, then neither
should 1, no matter how 1 felt at the time.

[1] Whether I'id actually do a good job of it is another matter.
[2] the sort i want to live in, anyway.

 

Higgins not @ Work scribbled on the back of a napkin:

Who are you to fight prejudice and tabloids with facts, hmm?

 

Much as I like lozzo personally, I agree with this.

Okay, but now look at what's happened: you've broken the law too. So
what if he wants to take the law in his own hands, to atone for what
you've done to him? Is that okay? And is it okay for him to dish out a
disproportionate punishment for you breaking his hands?

 

He is a victim of crime, too. Someone broke his hands with a hammer.

 

"All women become like their mothers: that's their tragedy.
No man does; that's his"

 

What a fucking moron.

 

Accept it: it's true. Risk of detection is the greatest deterrent.

 

*cough*

 

You probably wouldn't notice for a few weeks, to be honest.

<pictures scene: Ace in garage, smoking cigarette, drinking wine>

<Ace scratching head>

<thinks>

"last time I dropped it, was it on the left, or the right..."

 

I was reading about my MG the other day, and apparently it corners
better [0] than a 2005 Mustang.


[0] There was a measure: "turn rate". Whatever that is.

 

http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca/aerodynamics1/Lift/Page14.html

 

I think, if I may say so, there are two reasons for this.

The first is that, if you're identified with a point of view
held by a 'bloc' of people, you may get, fairly or unfairly,
lumbered with an assumption that you support everything ever
advocated by any member of that group.

(This is why I don't ever let on, in UKRM or at work, which
political party I'm a member of- because I don't want to be
called upon, or assumed, to support and justify every action or
utterance made by any member of that party. And I know, from
experience at a previous workplace, that that is what tends to
happen.)

In your case, you're identified as spokesman for the "Bleeding
Heart" tendency, so people do tend to load onto you the full
gamut of that point of view. And, since you're proudly wearing
what's generally considered a derogatory label, that effect is
intensified.

Fair point.

But- and here's the second reason- as far as I recall, you state
what you're *against*- corporal punishment, capital punishment,
imprisonment, vigilante percussive reasoning- but you don't tend
to state what you're *for*. That leaves a vacuum, which gets
populated (see 1 above) with 'let them off', 'slap on the
wrists', 'send them on safari', whatever.

It might help raise the level of debate if you were to say what
you think *should* be done with these people, as opposed to what
you think *shouldn't*.

--
<8P Wizard
Suzuki GS550 "I like that. Nicely shite" - TOG
BMW 520i (RIP- Ebay item 4601147727)
Toyota Nondescript 1.3 Mobility Appliance (on loan)
ANORAK#17b BOMB#19 BOTAFOT#138 BREast#5 COFF#24
COSOC#8 DFV#11 STG#1
Remove location from email address to reply

 

Wizard emerged from their own little world to say

Why?

It's very easy to make a case to say that, "when this option was employed
it did not work" as there is likely a body of evidence to draw upon.

It's not so easy to come up with workable long term solutions. For a start,
any new policy should be based on evidence. It should be tested with pilot
projects and be properly funded. Unfortunately, the 5 year cycle of our
system of governance does not lend itself to this process. Instead, we have
a socio-political system that is based on short-termism where old ideas are
rehashed with a spin to appease media barons and con the voters.

 

Because if Champ said what he was in favour of, then the debate
could be in terms of what he supports, not in terms of
misunderstandings of what he supports.

Depends what you mean by "did not work", of course. Working or
not working isn't a binary thing.

Agreed. But if the only idea you have is that Options A B and C
are no good, and you don't have at least one alternative idea to
compare, then it's going to be even harder.

Before being implemented, yes. But this isn't the Home Office or
the House of Commons. It's only a newsgroup. Things would be
pretty quiet if we constrained ourselves to only posting if we
had fully-evaluated pilot studies behind us.

Oh, absolutely. "What will the Evening Standard's headline be
tonight if we do this?" Relying on that for inspiration isn't
leadership, that's for sure.

--
<8P Wizard
Suzuki GS550 "I like that. Nicely shite" - TOG
BMW 520i (RIP- Ebay item 4601147727)
Toyota Nondescript 1.3 Mobility Appliance (on loan)
ANORAK#17b BOMB#19 BOTAFOT#138 BREast#5 COFF#24
COSOC#8 DFV#11 STG#1
Remove location from email address to reply

 

Wizard emerged from their own little world to say

I still ask, why?

I think it is quite reasonable for someone to state that they disagree with
a point of view expressed in the NG. It's quite reasonable to ask them why
they disagree. I think it is not reasonable to expect or demand that
someone who disagrees with you provide some sort of alternative. It's also
unreasonable to attach meaning to someone's words in one context based on
what they have said in another.

I thoroughly disapprove of some of the reactionary stuff that has been
posted here in the last few days e.g. capital punishment, corporal
punishment and vigilanteism.

Personally, whilst I might express my disapproval I wouldn't enter into a
debate with someone who proposed any of these things. I doubt we would find
common ground and presenting them with a reasoned argument for addressing
underlying social factors and rehabilitation would be futile.

 

Because Champ wrote

and those are my suggestions as to why that might be the case.

I'm not expecting or demanding anything. I'm suggesting that, if
Champ were to expand on what he's in favour of, his POV would be
better understood and the putting of words in his mouth might be
reduced.

I'm also interested in the subject matter, and, while I don't
think I'm likely to agree with him, I'm interested to understand
what he thinks and why he thinks it. I'm more likely to
understand his POV if he explains it. At the moment I've got a
pretty good idea of what he's against, but I'm in the dark as to
what he favours.

Sounds like you're prejudging the outcome of the debate in
advance. Mined ewe, you could well be right.

--
<8P Wizard
Suzuki GS550 "I like that. Nicely shite" - TOG
BMW 520i (RIP- Ebay item 4601147727)
Toyota Nondescript 1.3 Mobility Appliance (on loan)
ANORAK#17b BOMB#19 BOTAFOT#138 BREast#5 COFF#24
COSOC#8 DFV#11 STG#1
Remove location from email address to reply

 

Wizard emerged from their own little world to say

I know I'm right. We're dealing with UKRM's version(s) of Adam Smith,
Ghengis Khan, Judge Jeffries and the Marquis of Queensberry.

 

Interesting mental image.

--

jeremy
'01 Triumph Sprint ST in green
_______________________________________
jeremy0505 at gmail.com