Jump to content

Human Rights


Crouchie's Lawyer
 Share

Recommended Posts

I apparantly met him at Burnley away one year, but was only informed of this afterward.

 

This post is irrelevant to the thread, but I feel is an interesting point.

 

It was a very interesting point. I think Durley may have met more people from the site than anyone else. It might be worth you starting a thread, perhaps entitled, "Who has met Durley" that I could then contribute to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems clear that Paedophiles can not be rehabilitated so their illness is terminal, however, unlike most terminal illness' the end for these people does not come in months or a couple of years so is not the final stage, therefore I believe they have a mental illness that requires them to remain in a controlled environment for the rest of their lives, not in the community on a list that can still allow them to infect others, if a law is passed that allows those with an incurable illness to have assisted deaths then the authorities should assist with the death of all peodophiles within months.

 

You really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

Plenty of paedophiles are treated and able to live a normal life without 'infecting' others. It is a mental illness, and could be just a phase in a persons life. Declaring them as terminally ill is just ridiculous. Someone dying of cancer is terminally ill. I totally agree that it is a hideous crime to commit and therefore totally support and agree with the law that is in place at the moment. Like in all crimes people occasionally get away with it, which shows our justice system in a very groggy light.

 

I know a lot of people who have worked treating paedophiles, drug addicts, and various other criminals and if you label paedophiles as mentally ill, you might as well lock everyone up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

Plenty of paedophiles are treated and able to live a normal life without 'infecting' others. It is a mental illness, and could be just a phase in a persons life. Declaring them as terminally ill is just ridiculous. Someone dying of cancer is terminally ill. I totally agree that it is a hideous crime to commit and therefore totally support and agree with the law that is in place at the moment. Like in all crimes people occasionally get away with it, which shows our justice system in a very groggy light.

 

I know a lot of people who have worked treating paedophiles, drug addicts, and various other criminals and if you label paedophiles as mentally ill, you might as well lock everyone up.

 

 

They are mentally ill, surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to say it, but you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

Plenty of paedophiles are treated and able to live a normal life without being able to 'infect' others..

 

What do you consider 'plenty' ?? every documentary I have seen or articles I have read, other than that highlighted by BTF, suggest they can not be cured and will commit further offences, just a question, do you consider Glitter to be one of these plenty ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you consider 'plenty' ?? every documentary I have seen or articles I have read, other than that highlighted by BTF, suggest they can not be cured and will commit further offences, just a question, do you consider Glitter to be one of these plenty ?

 

Well I think you'd be surprised just how many paedophiles there are out there. Perhaps not necessarily ones that abuse children, but look at it on the internet or what not. Lots of them are cured from counselling or psychotherapy. Plenty of them don't make it to the media. There are some who own up to it and seek counselling and mental support off their own accord. It's very easy to tar them all with the same brush, quite rightly so too. What they do is hideous and as morally wrong as possible. Still doesn't mean we can argue the point to have them all killed as they're terminally ill though.

 

I'm dead against it - but I know some people feel when children are born and have mental issues they should be killed at birth. I know some families who have children who are wheelchair bound for all their lives. Some have such huge spazms that they break their legs and arms occasionally. Imagine the terrible pain and awful life they must lead. I'd certainly rather be dead. That's another mental issue. Perhaps while we're dealing with mentally ill people we should just kill them all. Just then where do you draw the line? Scudds would certainly be one of the first to go.

 

It's a can of worms. I'm pretty happy with how the law deals with the few in this country though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this talk of mental illness has got me thinking.

 

Obviously with things like Down Syndrome, there is clearly an error with the brain. However, people classing Serial Killers and Paedophiles as mentally ill? How can you be sure its an illness and not just a wrong preference?

 

The brain is so complicated that I dont think Doctors fully understand how it works and quite often diagnose things wrong. OCD being a prime example. 25 years ago, you wouldnt dream of taking your kids to the doctors because he/she was naughty. They would get a smack and learn from it. Respect would be re-instilled and the kid would more often than not behave.

 

Today, you take the kid to the doctors and the doctor diagnoses the kid with OCD and prescribes them with drugs!

 

I personally dont think paedophiles are mentally ill. They are just doing something wrong. Very wrong. If you slice open their brain and discover they have slightly more of one kind of chemical, that doesnt necessarily mean that chemical must cause you to think of children in inapropriate ways. Everyone is different, because I have a different finger print to the next man, it doesnt mean that my kind of fingerprint causes me to kill people.

 

I just think as humans, because we know so little about the human brain (we only use a small amount of it), it's very disturbing how doctors can claim to diagnose mental illnesses willy nilly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I_N_S I wish I had time to answer your post but I'm off out.

 

But I do have to tell you that Downs Syndrome is not a mental illness at all. It is caused by a chromosome imbalance (the child has an additional X chromosome I think but I haven't got time to check that out).

 

:rolleyes:

 

I'd have thought if your brain was effected by your illness it would be classed as a mental illness?

 

For the record people with Down Syndrome and usually really nice, genuine people. It goes to show how far this thread has come from it's original purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

 

I'd have thought if your brain was effected by your illness it would be classed as a mental illness?

 

For the record people with Down Syndrome and usually really nice, genuine people. It goes to show how far this thread has come from it's original purpose.

 

The original purpose was misinturpreted (sp?) somewhat, however, I am big enough to admit, I dont understand all things HR, however some of the replies directed at me have been a little harsh. I think this is because they mis understood what I meant. I was not saying abolish the HRA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today, you take the kid to the doctors and the doctor diagnoses the kid with OCD and prescribes them with drugs!

 

Do you mean ADD or ADHD or are we really talking about kids being naughty because they wash their hands a lot or have scrupulously tidy sock drawers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of interesting points on this thread, with some light hearted jokes along the way. It makes me think that maybe The Lounge and Muppet area should be blended into one. To cross the divide to discuss things with the same people that you were previously being a lounger or muppet with seems nothing more than a waste of time. Less rules and more debating please. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some families who have children who are wheelchair bound for all their lives. Some have such huge spazms that they break their legs and arms occasionally. Imagine the terrible pain and awful life they must lead.

 

They dont break bones they cut tendons,big difference.

 

Lots of them are cured from counselling or psychotherapy. Plenty of them don't make it to the media. There are some who own up to it and seek counselling and mental support off their own accord.

 

From what you have also said regards peadophiles I have never read such rubbish on the subject,could you tell me where you got your information from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of interesting points on this thread, with some light hearted jokes along the way. It makes me think that maybe The Lounge and Muppet area should be blended into one. To cross the divide to discuss things with the same people that you were previously being a lounger or muppet with seems nothing more than a waste of time. Less rules and more debating please. Just my opinion.

you mean...like it used to be.....:eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

 

I'd have thought if your brain was effected by your illness it would be classed as a mental illness?

 

For the record people with Down Syndrome and usually really nice, genuine people. It goes to show how far this thread has come from it's original purpose.

 

Downs Syndrome might result in learning difficulties or a mental HANDICAP. That's not the same thing as a mental ILLNESS. Mental illness covers a myriad of disorders. OCD has been mentioned; bipolar disorder; anorexia etc. etc.

 

In the same way as someone who has, say, cancer has a physical (medical) ILLNESS whereas someone who has lost a limb in an accident has a physical HANDICAP.

 

But I second your second point. I used to teach dance to children with Downs Syndrome. They were great and so affectionate. Unfortunately, some people take advantage of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to something mentioned earlier in this thread, there were some posters suggesting that various forms of surveillance (e.g. id cards and cctv) were fine as long as you had done nothing wrong.

 

In this case, such people would, presumably, welcome a government proposal to install GPS tracking devices in their (and everyone else's) cars to monitor their whereabouts and speed. After all, if you're not speeding (i.e. breaking the law) you have nothing to worry about. Do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to something mentioned earlier in this thread, there were some posters suggesting that various forms of surveillance (e.g. id cards and cctv) were fine as long as you had done nothing wrong.

 

In this case, such people would, presumably, welcome a government proposal to install GPS tracking devices in their (and everyone else's) cars to monitor their whereabouts and speed. After all, if you're not speeding (i.e. breaking the law) you have nothing to worry about. Do you?

 

A black box thingy that is only opened and the data used in the case of serious crashes or crimes is a good idea. I would rather it was held by an individual body rather than the police though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to something mentioned earlier in this thread, there were some posters suggesting that various forms of surveillance (e.g. id cards and cctv) were fine as long as you had done nothing wrong.

 

In this case, such people would, presumably, welcome a government proposal to install GPS tracking devices in their (and everyone else's) cars to monitor their whereabouts and speed. After all, if you're not speeding (i.e. breaking the law) you have nothing to worry about. Do you?

 

I think we should all be chipped like dogs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dark Sotonic Mills
Violent crimes are up 22% (twenty two per cent) on this time last year.

 

bbc link.

 

That is just ridiculous.

 

Not true I'm afraid. The Police have reclassified some crimes so that they are included in the more serious category now. The level overall has not changed.

 

The Home Office has admitted that some police forces have been undercounting some of the most serious violent crimes in England and Wales.

Officials said some crimes that should have been classed as grievous bodily harm were recorded as a lesser assault.

As a result, overall violent crime remains down compared with last year - but the official total of most serious violent crime has gone up by 22%.

Policing Minister Vernon Coaker said crime figures could still be trusted.

The overall number of crimes recorded by police in England and Wales fell 6%.

Some 17 forces were asked to clarify figures earlier this year after telling officials there may have been a mix-up, but ministers concede they do not know how long the problem has been going on.

The Home Office will not say which police forces have been misclassifying the incidents of grievous bodily harm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying that not only is it now costing me more to feed my family and heat my house, but a standard £10 punch to the head will now cost me £12.20.

 

 

No, before you would only get beaten up Monday to Friday, but now you will get beaten up on Saturday as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not true I'm afraid. The Police have reclassified some crimes so that they are included in the more serious category now. The level overall has not changed.

 

That is quite interesting. What crime used to be considered a jolly jape that is now considered a bit nasty, other than baiting Jade Goody, obviously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to something mentioned earlier in this thread, there were some posters suggesting that various forms of surveillance (e.g. id cards and cctv) were fine as long as you had done nothing wrong.

 

In this case, such people would, presumably, welcome a government proposal to install GPS tracking devices in their (and everyone else's) cars to monitor their whereabouts and speed. After all, if you're not speeding (i.e. breaking the law) you have nothing to worry about. Do you?

 

No. I welcomed ID cards and CCTV to aid combatting terror attacks, not to catch the petty theif stealing 30pence worth of sweets or a driver doing 37 in a 30 mph. I would not welcome CCTV or ID cards if they were used to any other reason but the afformentioned.

 

Coincidenctly I do not agree with speeding camera's as they are not 'safety devices' but merely money raising devices. Targetting an easy market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a very interesting point. I think Durley may have met more people from the site than anyone else. It might be worth you starting a thread, perhaps entitled, "Who has met Durley" that I could then contribute to?

 

Everyone want to me me.

 

Stu wishes he was me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I welcomed ID cards and CCTV to aid combatting terror attacks, not to catch the petty theif stealing 30pence worth of sweets or a driver doing 37 in a 30 mph. I would not welcome CCTV or ID cards if they were used to any other reason but the afformentioned.

 

Coincidenctly I do not agree with speeding camera's as they are not 'safety devices' but merely money raising devices. Targetting an easy market.

 

Rigggght. So, we'll install all these CCTV cameras and institute id cards for the sole purpose of catching terrorists. No other reasons? None whatsoever?

 

Oh, and if we shoot the wrong man by mistake, let's just make sure we loose or change the records. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7668551.stm

 

I'm afraid you'll find that such surveillance will be used for whatever purposes the government deems fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CCTV for major crimes is IMO ok, its when it gets down to silly small time crimes that it is possibly a waste.

 

If a garuntee could not be given that it would only be used for major crimes then I would be against it.

 

I dont really see what the biggy is with ID cards, I mean we all (well most of us) have passports FFS. I know they would be a little more complexed then the passport, however, there is not really a great deal of difference when you think about it is there? I bet the likes of Ponty has a passport!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dark Sotonic Mills
CCTV to be used for major crimes...say terrorism, assault, robbery etc is all perfectyly fine...when they use them as a tax vehicle such as speed cameras and looking who drops litter then that is too far..

 

We have more CCTV in this country than in any other. It is so easy, and cheap, to use it as evidence of any sort of wrong-doing be it littering or assault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have more CCTV in this country than in any other. It is so easy, and cheap, to use it as evidence of any sort of wrong-doing be it littering or assault.

im not fussed about CCTV in the city/town centres....

 

the speed cameras are the ones that do my head in..

 

soon we will have average speed cameras at the start and end of every motorway junction....

 

I like the sounds of swindon council....they are going to stop them being used in the way they are in their area..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

im not fussed about CCTV in the city/town centres....

 

the speed cameras are the ones that do my head in..

 

soon we will have average speed cameras at the start and end of every motorway junction....

 

I like the sounds of swindon council....they are going to stop them being used in the way they are in their area..

 

I dare say Swindon are losing them due to nobody being able to pick up enough speed before they have to negotiate another ****ing roundabout!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...