|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 14, 2024 15:42:11 GMT
If someone doesn't receive benefits from government they can continue with their lives. They can continue to live with their partner, or on their own, as they prefer. They can continue to work or carry out their preferred leisure activities. They can get up when they like, go to bed when they like, eat what they like when they like. Their is no tyrannical restriction, ordered by government. This does seem a very odd thing to say, and is certainly incorrect at least in many cases. A severely disabled person who cannot work and who doesn't receive benefits from the government certainly can't continue with their lives unless they are fortunate enough to have someone else to provide for them. How can they continue to live without being able to buy food, electricity etc? And they certainly won't be in a position to eat what they like (unless it is eg dust or soil) nor go do bed when they like (they will be homeless) nor take part in any leisure activities unless they are free and able to be undertaken by a disabled person.
Presumably you would have them eat cake and stop moaning? Government is free to discriminate in favour of a group, or groups, if this doesn't negatively impact another group. In the case of equality legislation and resulting lengthier sentences the discrimination in favour of a group, or groups, can result in inequitable outcomes for others. Government is free to manipulate society as it wishes but it should maintain equity in law for all.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 15:47:16 GMT
Criminal offences being made more serious by aggravating factors, is not a new concept.
Aggravated burglary dates back to the Theft Act 1968
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 14, 2024 15:53:54 GMT
Criminal offences being made more serious by aggravating factors, is not a new concept. Aggravated burglary dates back to the Theft Act 1968 Rog What factors aggravate burglary, can they result in injustices in sentencing, as is the case with cases related to the equality act?
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Apr 14, 2024 15:59:40 GMT
Criminal offences being made more serious by aggravating factors, is not a new concept. Aggravated burglary dates back to the Theft Act 1968 Rog After the Homicide Act 1956 severely restricted categories of crimes for which a death sentence could be passed, the murder of a Police or prison officer in the course of their duty was one category which could (and did) result in a death sentence.
|
|
|
Post by brummieboy on Apr 14, 2024 16:07:18 GMT
The carrying of a weapon, which can be a specific weapon such as a knife or baseball bat, or a non specific weapon such as a bottle used as a club, or broken as a knife. It is incumbent on prosecutors to prove that such a charge is allied to intent to threaten the victim of a burglary. Sentences are quoted as maximum, so can be varied as to the perceived severity by the judge.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 16:08:24 GMT
Criminal offences being made more serious by aggravating factors, is not a new concept. Aggravated burglary dates back to the Theft Act 1968 Rog What factors aggravate burglary, can they result in injustices in sentencing, as is the case with cases related to the equality act? I see no injustices. I've already explained aggravated burglary. Rog
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 16:13:55 GMT
(1)A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he commits any burglary and at the time has with him any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence, or any explosive; and for this purpose— (a)“firearm” includes an airgun or air pistol, and “imitation firearm” means anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether capable of being discharged or not; and (b)“weapon of offence” means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use; and (c)“explosive” means any article manufactured for the purpose of producing a practical effect by explosion, or intended by the person having it with him for that purpose. (2)A person guilty of aggravated burglary shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for life.
Section 10 Theft Act 1968.
No need to prove any intent to use etc. just commit burglary whilst armed with a weapon and the offence is aggravated and you jump from 10 years imprisonment to life.
It was introduced to protect victims who confront a burglar ... hopefully the deterrent effect stopped weapons being carried.
As I said the idea of aggravating factors is not new.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 14, 2024 16:15:45 GMT
(1)A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he commits any burglary and at the time has with him any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence, or any explosive; and for this purpose— (a)“firearm” includes an airgun or air pistol, and “imitation firearm” means anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether capable of being discharged or not; and (b)“weapon of offence” means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use; and (c)“explosive” means any article manufactured for the purpose of producing a practical effect by explosion, or intended by the person having it with him for that purpose. (2)A person guilty of aggravated burglary shall on conviction on indictment be liable to imprisonment for life. Section 10 Theft Act 1968. No need to prove any intent to use etc. just commit burglary whilst armed with a weapon and the offence is aggravated and you jump from 10 years imprisonment to life. It was introduced to protect victims who confront a burglar ... hopefully the deterrent effect stopped weapons being carried. As I said the idea of aggravating factors is not new. Rog I can't see any injustice there. The same justice for all. No discrimination.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 16:17:09 GMT
Then we agree ... hussar 😁
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 14, 2024 16:26:51 GMT
That's two things we've agreed on. I feel drunk
|
|
|
Post by Tony Dunkley on Apr 14, 2024 18:10:27 GMT
What a horrendous story emerging from Australia. A 40 year old guy randomly attacking folks in a shopping mall with a knife. A nine month old baby under going surgery and it's Mother amongst the dead. Takes ones breath away. Rog Why am I not surprised that a topic about a knife wielding psychopath is posted by dogless, or Alice, as he's more aptly known, . . when he himself spends inordinate amounts of time every day in the on-line trolling of the Thunderboat forum with his on-line internet stalking buddy, . . who just happens to be knife wielding psychopath, . . by the name of Vince ' Mr Stabby' Coventon. I see that another of the knife wielding psychopath's close circle, Clinton Cunt, is now engrossed in a pointless conversation with Alice, . . talk about synchronicity !
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 19:24:54 GMT
When the news first broke of the attack Jane and I were discussing how we thought / feared we may react in such circumstances and what the best reaction may be.
Some years ago (2017) whilst in London, we visited the Shard and consequently wandered around Borough Market ... fabulous busy, vibrant place full of terrific food from around the world. We loved the place.
Very soon after the terrible three man terrorist attack took place there, with eight dead and forty plus injured I seem to recall.
Terrifying and chaotic to be caught up in, and impossible to know how you'd react and indeed what's best to do ?
Rog
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Apr 14, 2024 19:53:29 GMT
When the news first broke of the attack Jane and I were discussing how we thought / feared we may react in such circumstances and what the best reaction may be. Some years ago (2017) whilst in London, we visited the Shard and consequently wandered around Borough Market ... fabulous busy, vibrant place full of terrific food from around the world. We loved the place. Very soon after the terrible three man terrorist attack took place there, with eight dead and forty plus injured I seem to recall. Terrifying and chaotic to be caught up in, and impossible to know how you'd react and indeed what's best to do ? Rog As you say, I think it's impossible to know. I'd like to think I'd have a go, by whatever means are necessary but, who knows. It would just be instinct, difficult to predict.
|
|
|
Post by dogless on Apr 14, 2024 19:58:00 GMT
The confusion creates its own difficulties ... nobody knows what's going off.
Horrible to be caught up in.
Rog
|
|
|
Post by fi on Apr 14, 2024 19:58:38 GMT
Run, hide and keep quiet (helping others to do the same) is the best thing to do. Unless you really think you can take the attacker out.
|
|