Planetarion Forums

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 19:38

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3041826.stm

Id be all in favour of this guy getting

A: Diplomatic immunity
B: Found "Not Guilty"
C: Showing up at the graveside and pissing on the coffin.

Perhaps im being too harsh.

sword · 3 Jul 2003, 19:43

He certainly wasn't very diplomatic on this occasion.

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 19:45

Quote:

Originally posted by sword
He certainly wasn't very diplomatic on this occasion.

LOLPLDBMAOROFFLETOMATO!

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 19:48

If the muggers had actually killed or raped the mans son, yes.

I think this should be labelled excessive violence.

I'd rather see him dropped out of the plane halfway the (London-Bogota!?) Trans-Atlantic line.

acropolis · 3 Jul 2003, 19:54

Quote:

The prosecution says it was a deliberate thrust intended to cause serious harm.

lol

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 19:55

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
I'd rather see him dropped out of the plane halfway the (London-Bogota!?) Trans-Atlantic line.

And that wouldn't be excessive violence?

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 20:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
And that wouldn't be excessive violence?

It indeed is quite extreme but it was just the first semi-original way to kill the man that came to mind. Stabbing or shooting him to death would be just as good.
Diplomats, in my opinion, should at all times maintain self control. He has a model function and should behave as such.

He's a disgrace to his trade.

queball · 3 Jul 2003, 20:17

It was almost certainly a drug related killing. The lawyers, and the BBC, are covering it up.

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 20:19

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
It indeed is quite extreme but it was just the first semi-original way to kill the man that came to mind. Stabbing or shooting him to death would be just as good.
Diplomats, in my opinion, should at all times maintain self control. He has a model function and should behave as such.

He's a disgrace to his trade.

Ever read "Killing Pablo" by Mark Bowden (guy who wrote BlackHawk Down) ?

Trust me . chasing him and stabbing him to death is the action of a more Moderate columbian diplomat.

Car Bomb anyone?

Nodrog · 3 Jul 2003, 20:20

I bet he gets a lesser sentence than tony martin.

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 20:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Ever read "Killing Pablo" by Mark Bowden (guy who wrote BlackHawk Down) ?

Trust me . chasing him and stabbing him to death is the action of a more Moderate columbian diplomat.

Car Bomb anyone?

The film Blackhawk Down isn't exactly what I'd call good advertisement for his writing skills. Is it about Pablo Escobar? I thought he was sitting out his sentence in the U.S.?

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 20:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
I bet he gets a lesser sentence than tony martin.

Seconded.

And he will serve it in a Colombian Prison ... well , actually , he will be let out on appeal in Colombia, cos its not like he killed a Colombian national.

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 20:27

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
The film Blackhawk Down isn't exactly what I'd call good advertisement for his writing skills. Is it about Pablo Escobar? I thought he was sitting out his sentence in the U.S.?

Err , no

Read the Book , read the story of how Escobar was hunted down like a Dog , whilst living in luxury and shagging 14yr olds.

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 20:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Kurashima
Err , no

Read the Book , read the story of how Escobar was hunted down like a Dog , whilst living in luxury and shagging 14yr olds.

I normally don't read crime stories. I might look for it next time I'm in the bookshop. It'd better be juicy/decadent though.

roadrunner_0 · 3 Jul 2003, 20:36

yeah, also, actually read the book to black hawk down, as it is much better than the film, but the book killing pablo is fantastic also

also, and on topic, big up to the diplomat! you show the ****ney scum!

Kurashima · 3 Jul 2003, 20:42

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
I normally don't read crime stories. I might look for it next time I'm in the bookshop. It'd better be juicy/decadent though.

Very Juicy
Very Decadent
Very Violent
Very Character Driven , despite first impressions.

It shows that the methods used to hunt him down and bring him to justice were just as bad , if not worse than the methods he used to put himself there.

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 20:48

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
It indeed is quite extreme but it was just the first semi-original way to kill the man that came to mind. Stabbing or shooting him to death would be just as good.

Surely the officials who then killed him would need to be hunted down and killed, and then officials who killed them...ad infinitum.

I don't see why he's a diplomat comes into it. Some kid attacked his son, so he went round the guys house and sorted him out. It wasn't cowardly and the other bloke "started it" by mugging his son.

The bottom line is : don't go round mugging people.

Nodrog · 3 Jul 2003, 20:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks

I don't see why he's a diplomat comes into it. Some kid attacked his son, so he went round the guys house and sorted him out. It wasn't cowardly and the other bloke "started it" by mugging his son.

The bottom line is : don't go round mugging people.

Are you serious or is this a strawman attack on anti-gun control people?

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 20:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Are you serious or is this a strawman attack on anti-gun control people?

I'm serious. Yeah, the guy over-reacted a little. If I was the judge I'd give him a few hours anger management and some community service.

Of course, this guy is probably a rightist scum who deserves to be short for other reasons, but not for this.

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 21:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Surely the officials who then killed him would need to be hunted down and killed, and then officials who killed them...ad infinitum.

I don't see why he's a diplomat comes into it. Some kid attacked his son, so he went round the guys house and sorted him out. It wasn't cowardly and the other bloke "started it" by mugging his son.

The bottom line is : don't go round mugging people.

I personally think that we'd be better of a society if we were to filter out agressive components without having to bear the costs of housing and feeding them.

I know though that trials are often based incomplete and/or arguable evidence and therefore, there will always remain a chance that innocent men will be convicted. As there currently are no reliable ways of reviving the dead, I accept that we can't kill them and will always defend this policy.

I'm afraid I'm a bit dualistic on this topic.

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 21:17

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
I personally think that we'd be better of a society if we were to filter out agressive components without having to bear the costs of housing and feeding them.

Mugging is agressive is it not? Also, I'm advocating letting the guy go. Why would we be paying for him?

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Mugging is agressive is it not? Also, I'm advocating letting the guy go. Why would we be paying for him?

Mugging indeed is agressive yes but it arbitrarily is not as serious a crime as murder or rape.

I have little against letting people sit out their jail time in their native countries as long as the expelling country has reasonable certainty of the sentencees being incarcerated the time they were convicted for.

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 21:31

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
MI have little against letting people sit out their jail time in their native countries as long as the expelling country has reasonable certainty of the sentencees being incarcerated the time they were convicted for.

When I say "let him go" though, I meant let him go scot free, i.e. the CPS dropping the case, etc.

Nodrog · 3 Jul 2003, 21:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I'm serious. Yeah, the guy over-reacted a little. If I was the judge I'd give him a few hours anger management and some community service.

Of course, this guy is probably a rightist scum who deserves to be short for other reasons, but not for this.

Yeah society would work pretty well if people were allowed to track down those who they perceive had wronged them and murder them hay what did you just about my mum?

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 21:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
When I say "let him go" though, I meant let him go scot free, i.e. the CPS dropping the case, etc.

No matter whether planned, sudden rage inspired or out of self defense, the case should be investigated and the man should be trialled for the deed he committed.

I think the judiciary system justifies it's own existance by trialling any "supposedly" commited crime.

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 21:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Yeah society would work pretty well if people were allowed to track down those who they perceive had wronged them and murder them hay what did you just about my mum?

Yeah, because slander is the same as assault isn't it.

Although, thinking about it you're right. I mean, if some guy comes into my house and I can shoot him Tony Martin style, I better not - since then society will collapse with people taking the law into their own hands and the like!

People already do track each other down for percevied wrongs when they are able. These things rarely hit the news as they're not usually this dramatic (or involving foriegn diplomats). Today at work we served a notice to evict a particularly troublesome tenant (a woman). She got into an argument and assaulted someone. Thirty men then came to her house with metal bars to beat someone up or something after this. Almost none of these people will face formal criminal proceedings.

This is in one of the more affluent London boroughs. OMG society must be about to collapse.

Nodrog · 3 Jul 2003, 21:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Yeah, because slander is the same as assault isn't it

Because people wouldnt ever lie about what the other person done, and it wouldnt be easier to do so when the other person is dead and cant defend himself.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks

Although, thinking about it you're right. I mean, if some guy comes into my house and I can shoot him Tony Martin style, I better not - since then society will collapse with people taking the law into their own hands and the like!

Retroactive vigalantism != self defence at the instant of crime.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks

People already do track each other down for percevied wrongs when they are able. These things rarely hit the news as they're not usually this dramatic (or involving foriegn diplomats).

And legalising it certainly wouldnt make the problem worse! Mobs are well known for their capactiy to think and behave in a rational manner, and giving them legal sanction certainly wouldnt cause any injustice within society.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
[b]
This is in one of the more affluent London boroughs. OMG society must [be about to collapse. /B]

Doesnt london have one of the highest crime rates in the UK?

W · 3 Jul 2003, 22:04

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
I personally think that we'd be better of a society if we were to filter out agressive components without having to bear the costs of housing and feeding them.

I know though that trials are often based incomplete and/or arguable evidence and therefore, there will always remain a chance that innocent men will be convicted. As there currently are no reliable ways of reviving the dead, I accept that we can't kill them and will always defend this policy.

I'm afraid I'm a bit dualistic on this topic.

There's currently no way of giving someone back years of his life either.

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 22:08

Quote:

Originally posted by W
There's currently no way of giving someone back years of his life either.

No, but I trust our scientists to come up with something to solve that problem eventually.

JonnyBGood · 3 Jul 2003, 22:11

One more dead mugger. I'd pretend I care but it'd probably be really hollow and vacuous so I won't.

PS As a theoretical point I'm slightly undecided between abolishing all rights for those who directly impinge on the rights of others, abolishing the exact rights they infringed upon in totality (or as far as they did), or some sort of normal prison sentence type thing.

roadrunner_0 · 3 Jul 2003, 22:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Doesnt london have one of the highest crime rates in the UK?

yes, even if you allow for the higher population, it is also the most violent city in the country

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 22:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Because people wouldnt ever lie about what the other person done, and it wouldnt be easier to do so when the other person is dead and cant defend himself.

Well, obviously I'm taking this story at face value. If I actually was the judge I'd presumably have the evidence at hand. If this story isn't true (e.g. the son wasn't mugged) then obviously it's irrelevent.

I think murder suspects already do lie quite a bit, so it's not like the police haven't thought of that one. People would still be brought to trial, but they'd be able to offer that as a defence. If I raped someones sister, I'd fully expect them to come and try and kill me.

Even if these things were "legal" (which isn't what I'm saying in the strictest sense), I don't forsee them becoming a massive problem suddenly. Violence in society isn't constrained mainly by the law anyway. It's constrained by people not actually wanting to go round killing each other. If it did somehow lead to some massive uprising in mob killings (unlikely) we could always remove that "law" pretty quickly. I'm just in favour of removing the state monopoly on violence where applicable.

And London probably does have fairly high crime, but the London Borough of Bromley certainly has one of the lowest in London. There aren't even that many black people!

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 22:21

which "applications" of violence do you consider to be acceptable?

Vaio · 3 Jul 2003, 22:23

I thought this was a post about Montoya's overtaking manouver on Schumacher

Vaio

Vaio · 3 Jul 2003, 22:25

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
which "applications" of violence do you consider to be acceptable?

The ones involving Bobby Davro

Vaio

Dante Hicks · 3 Jul 2003, 22:26

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
which "applications" of violence do you consider to be acceptable?

Retribution (in a sense) & self-defence. Depends what you mean by violence though. Some people consider hunting animals as violence. I don't.

mpr0733 · 3 Jul 2003, 22:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Retribution (in a sense) & self-defence. Depends what you mean by violence though. Some people consider hunting animals as violence. I don't.

Isn't retribution the practice that causes family feuds and such? I'd rather smother those at the first given opportunity.