Southport Stabbing (3 Viewers)

[shmmeee]

Sorry should have clarified as it’s not implicit
He was talking about the terrorist risk to the country
So it’s the country that is more vulnerable to attack if we expand the definition of terrorism which in my opinion should be people who inflict terror on other people

That’s not what terrorism is though. It’s specifically violence with a political end in mind. Which is why this attack wasn’t terrorism but ironically the riots in response to try and force government to change immigration policy was technically.

This is the problem with terrorism as a crime IMO. It’s creating a false dichotomy between acts of violence. The parents of these kids are no more or less devastated if the guy did it because he was nuts or because he hated the UKs Middle East policy. It basically becomes “be extra harsh to violent people who are against the government”.

This constant need to “do something” when we refuse to properly fund services just ends up with more mandatory reporting more paperwork and bigger “watchlists” and no way of improving our ability to stop this stuff. Just overworked people drowning in cases.

 

---

[Sky Blue Pete]

@Sky Blue Pete

What is the difference between “an eye for an eye” and capital punishment?

How much detail would you like?
man eye for an eye is commonly held to be a step towards limiting escalation by Old Testament theologians as common practice was
I pinch you you punch me
I stab you you kill me
My family kill you and your brothers
Your family kill my family and some of my town

you get the point

Jesus says in the New Testament

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also

good article on it here and it’s the same principle really

Matthew 5:39 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye...'"

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39 RSV).

www.unity.org

so it’s about who I and who we are and the nation and society we want to be a part of

For me too when someone’s brain hasn’t fully matured (whether that’s right from wrong) or understanding the nature of eternity or consequence I think we should err our quite natural human inclination to want reciprocity of treatment. Many disagree

I struggle with someone like the hungerford killer or Tim mcveigh or if this fucker was nearer 30 than 17.

Then my reasoning would be more murder is wrong period why would it therefore be ok for the state to take someone’s life?

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

That’s not what terrorism is though. It’s specifically violence with a political end in mind. Which is why this attack wasn’t terrorism but ironically the riots in response to try and force government to change immigration policy was technically.

This is the problem with terrorism as a crime IMO. It’s creating a false dichotomy between acts of violence. The parents of these kids are no more or less devastated if the guy did it because he was nuts or because he hated the UKs Middle East policy. It basically becomes “be extra harsh to violent people who are against the government”.

This constant need to “do something” when we refuse to properly fund services just ends up with more mandatory reporting more paperwork and bigger “watchlists” and no way of improving our ability to stop this stuff. Just overworked people drowning in cases.

I agree but it’s why tice Lowe and Farage can seemingly get common sense when those who have to deal with the consequences get drowned out when they say but ……

 

[shmmeee]

I agree but it’s why tice Lowe and Farage can seemingly get common sense when those who have to deal with the consequences get drowned out when they say but ……

Populists are always going to exploit people’s understandable anger with easy answers. We used to have a media that didn’t assist them in their nonsense…

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Populists are always going to exploit people’s understandable anger with easy answers. We used to have a media that didn’t assist them in their nonsense…

You and I are in the minority
I thought with 14 and 17 year olds there wouldn’t be a debate but times they are a changing

 

[SBT]

Populists are always going to exploit people’s understandable anger with easy answers. We used to have a media that didn’t assist them in their nonsense…

Did we?

 

[shmmeee]

Did we?

There was a time when the BBC wouldn’t just uncritically platform conspiracy theorists yeah. I remember the debate around Nick Griffin on QT, or that MPs spouting nonsense would be ignored or ridiculed rather than given their own show.

I’m a big believer in the idea that lack of gatekeepers has lead to a degradation of the public debate. Say what you want about the Telegraph or the Guardian or the BBC but they were generally staffed by journalists with some kind of ethical code. Just in the time I’ve been listening to Radio4 the quality of journalism has degraded massively. To the point where the entire reason I enjoyed it (serious level headed policy discussion) seems to have been removed entirely and replaced with gossip and a rush for a quick sound bite headline.

Maybe I’m just old and misremembering but it certainly feels like there was a shift like everything with social media around 2012-2015 where all these standards just dropped and it’s clickbait as far as the eye can see.

 

[MalcSB]

How much detail would you like?
man eye for an eye is commonly held to be a step towards limiting escalation by Old Testament theologians as common practice was
I pinch you you punch me
I stab you you kill me
My family kill you and your brothers
Your family kill my family and some of my town

you get the point

Jesus says in the New Testament

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also

good article on it here and it’s the same principle really

Matthew 5:39 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye...'"

“You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:38-39 RSV).

www.unity.org

so it’s about who I and who we are and the nation and society we want to be a part of

For me too when someone’s brain hasn’t fully matured (whether that’s right from wrong) or understanding the nature of eternity or consequence I think we should err our quite natural human inclination to want reciprocity of treatment. Many disagree

I struggle with someone like the hungerford killer or Tim mcveigh or if this fucker was nearer 30 than 17.

Then my reasoning would be more murder is wrong period why would it therefore be ok for the state to take someone’s life?

Had to read that a few times but I see the de-escalation argument.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Pretty awful

BBC – Sign in