EPTUK Politics Mega-thread - Page 300
| Forum Index > General Forum |
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
 | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22072 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:35 SoSexy wrote: Either you are 10 years old or you are an adult who believes the world is made of gummy bears and cotton candy. Following your example, I really don't know what to reply to someone who believes that, in the current historical situation, an individual already on a terrorist watch list who hands out similar fliers poses no problem. Or he is someone who believes that freedoms are important and that being on a watch list you have no control over should not allow you to be imprisoned indefinitely for arbitrary reasons. So you want this person to be arrested for hate speech. Fine. Lets even say you get a conviction for X years. How do you stop him from getting into a car after his sentence and driving into a bunch of people? Do you think people like this should be imprisoned for life? Should they be executed? How exactly do you see your stronger hate speech stance change anything. | ||
KwarK
United States43534 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:39 Shield wrote: Is it confirmed that the attacker is muslim? Before it's discussed as a topic, it has to be clear. Odds are pretty good it will be. This style of attack usually is. If it had been a political figure or a police station or an army base then maybe Provos but car into knife, that's Islamic terrorism style. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22072 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:41 KwarK wrote: Odds are pretty good it will be. This style of attack usually is. If it had been a political figure or a police station or an army base then maybe Provos but car into knife, that's Islamic terrorism style. My first guess would actually be 'crazy Remain voter'. Could easily just be a copy-cat. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
In any case there have been sufficient terrorist attacks, both foiled and successful, for the discussion to be warranted. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:41 KwarK wrote: Odds are pretty good it will be. This style of attack usually is. If it had been a political figure or a police station or an army base then maybe Provos but car into knife, that's Islamic terrorism style. If that's the case, then it's yet another proof that the west has failed with mass immigration. The point of immigration is to integrate people with a specific country. How do muslims integrate with the UK when the UK gives them halal food, places to prey, almost unlimited freedom of speech, islamic clothes such as hijab, etc? They just feel like it's the Middle East. You live in two parallel countries - your idea of the UK and their idea of islamic UK. Both aren't compatible even if you think so. That's my opinion as someone who has been in the west for long enough to see how much muslims get. I'll give you a counter-example - Bulgaria has wonderful muslims, but they are of Turkish descent. They live happily with Christian neighbours and even celebrate Easter together. The west should aim for a result like this at the very least. Otherwise, what's the point? "We're better than them" is a left wing propaganda with no action in mind. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9768 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:51 SoSexy wrote: I ask for harsher measures on watch list individuals. You want me to write the procedure that police should use point by point? I do not know that - but I know that my request is far from irrational, due to the age we live in. The problem with these harsher measures is that they would necessarily include much more bureaucracy around the entire process of putting someone on the watch list in the first place, unless you want the security services (who are already known for targeting peaceful protesters) to be given the power to limit anyone's freedom of speech just because they choose to. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43534 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:51 SoSexy wrote: I ask for harsher measures on watch list individuals. You want me to write the procedure that police should use point by point? I do not know that - but I know that my request is far from irrational, due to the age we live in. Okay, let's scrap the police procedure. We don't need to specifically name the law he was breaking by handing out leaflets and we can probably not worry about convicting him, we'll just have a secret trial without a jury. I won't ask you to come up with the specifics for that, it'd obviously be too much to ask for you to explain which law he had actually broken. How is it we stop the leaflet guy from ever getting in a position that could harm another person? Never driving a car. Never in a position to push someone into traffic. Never working in a kitchen. Never allowed near sharp objects. Or blunt objects for that matter. Can you at least give us an idea of that? Once we've established that the police are allowed to stop these people, how are we stopping them? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22072 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:51 SoSexy wrote: I ask for harsher measures on watch list individuals. You want me to write the procedure that police should use point by point? I do not know that - but I know that my request is far from irrational, due to the age we live in. How would you prevent someone on the watch list from getting into a car and driven into people without taking his rights away because he has not been charged with a crime. We are asking you this because just saying "we should have harsher measures" is useless. | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10137 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:51 SoSexy wrote: If you don't provide information where, how, why and what measures you would prefer to use as an effective deterrent to these kind of attacks specifically, yes, it's irrational.I ask for harsher measures on watch list individuals. You want me to write the procedure that police should use point by point? I do not know that - but I know that my request is far from irrational, due to the age we live in. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12385 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:56 Plansix wrote: Why would people on a watch list receive harsher punishments? Harsher punishment proven to not lower the rate of crimes of any sort, so I doubt they are the magical silver bullet to home grown terrorism. The goal isn't to lower the rate, the goal is to make people like SoSexy feel safe. It's basically a superstition. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43534 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:58 Godwrath wrote: If you don't provide information where, how, why and what measures you would prefer to use as an effective deterrent to these kind of attacks, yes, it's irrational. They're suicide attacks, deterrents don't work. The kind of measures that would stop them would be things like blinding, quadruple amputations, life imprisonment, exile into orbit, severing of the spine or plain old fashioned hanging. That kind of thing. I'm sure SoSexy can come up with a few of his own suggestions for what to do with all these pesky leaflet threats. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22072 Posts
On March 23 2017 06:07 Shield wrote: I think we can assume that whatever solution you have, they'll find a way to work around it. It's like maphackers in games. You patch the game, then they find another way. It's a game of rules. It sucks, but we can do our best to stop terrorists at least. We shouldn't stop. We certainly should stop at some point. Putting every human into a stasis until they inevitably decay makes us all really safe. But I doubt you would advocate for it. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43534 Posts
On March 23 2017 06:07 Shield wrote: I think we can assume that whatever solution you have, they'll find a way to work around it. It's like maphackers in games. You patch the game, then they find another way. It's a game of rules, and if they know them inside out, they'll probably be able to still do it. It sucks, but we can do our best to stop terrorists at least. We shouldn't stop. The problem being that some people want to take the entire server offline to stop hackers from winning and if you object will try to argue that you're helping hackers by stopping them. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 23 2017 05:58 Nebuchad wrote: The goal isn't to lower the rate, the goal is to make people like SoSexy feel safe. It's basically a superstition. This is why I always doubt people when they say “It isn’t an irrational concern” followed by a completely irrational request based on magical thinking. | ||
| ||
